Trump Announces 10% Global Tariffs Hours After Supreme Court Ruled Against Him

Just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s global reciprocal tariffs as illegal in a 6-3 ruling, the president announced a new 10% global tariff for 150 days.

President Trump is justifying his new temporary tariffs on the basis Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which empowers the executive branch to impose import duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on countries with which the United States has “large and serious” trade balance and payment disparities.

After the 150 days, continued tariffs would require congressional approval. However, during those 150 days, there are very few limits.

The Trump administration will also be investigating other options under Section 232 and Section 301, which can enable the president to deploy higher, longer-term tariffs in cases of national security and economic emergencies.

Trump has long complained that some countries have taken advantage of the U.S. under prior administrations and treated the country “really badly for years.” Trump positions tariffs as a means of righting this perceived wrong.

However, as economists have demonstrated time and again, tariffs are paid by importers and American companies, who then, almost invariably, pass their increased costs directly to consumers. Large groups of affected companies were among the plaintiffs who filed the lawsuits against the Trump administration that the Supreme Court ruled on today in the first place.

As for how the tariff revenues collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) may be refunded, the president said today that the situation will likely be litigated “for the next two years,” meaning that the companies that were successful in their Supreme Court case are unlikely to receive any immediate remedy.

If businesses are actually refunded for the illegal tariffs, it is not a stretch to imagine these new 10% tariffs being used to pay, at least in part. However, that is speculation at this point, as the matter is destined to be a protracted, complicated legal battle.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the refund situation is “in dispute.”

“My sense is that could be dragged out for weeks, months, years,” Bessent said.

Trump said today he is “ashamed” of the justices who ruled against his tariff policy, including two he himself appointed to the Supreme Court.

Vice President J.D. Vance weighed in on the Supreme Court ruling as well, alleging that “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple. And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American industries and supply chain resiliency.”

As for how this will affect photographers, any who were hoping to see camera and lens prices immediately decrease to pre-tariff levels in response to today’s Supreme Court ruling will likely be disappointed. The new 10% global tariff is less than the 15% that Japan had most recently been paying, but is still a sizable duty for camera companies and retailers to pay when importing goods from Japan.

The situation looks relatively better when considering goods from other countries, like China, who had been subject to higher tariffs under the president’s IEEPA tariff policy. While U.S. tariffs against China varied wildly throughout 2025, they had recently been at 34% for many imports.

President Trump said today that sometimes countries will face “very reasonable” tariffs, while other countries will face higher ones. It is not yet possible to know which countries fall into which category, but historically, U.S.-Japan relations have been generally pretty good.

As has been the case with the president’s use of tariffs since “Liberation Day” last April, it is not clear what will actually happen, who will be left holding the bill, and whether Congress would approve longer-term global reciprocal tariffs. This uncertainty is routinely cited by business owners as one of the most challenging aspects of the Trump administration’s economic policy. It is very difficult for companies, both big and small, to operate in the U.S. with little idea what to expect week to week and month to month. Clearly, the uncertainty is not going away just because the Supreme Court ruled against the president.

Image credits: Header photo licensed via Depositphotos.com.