A coalition of US states sued Trump in response to the 10 percent tariffs. “Having lost the battle over IEEPA, the President is now eliminating a different statute: Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, 19 USC § 2132, which is another statute that has never been used to impose tariffs. In fact, it has never been used,” the states’ lawsuit says.
The New York Times article states that the Trump administration “has also launched investigations into the trade practices of dozens of other countries” under another provision of the Trade Act, and that these “investigations are expected to result in tariffs similar to those that were struck down by the Supreme Court.”
Trade group sees problem in refund system
There is a separate dispute over who should get a refund in cases where surety bonds were issued for imports but the importer or broker failed to pay the tariff. A trade group representing surety and insurance professionals told the court Friday that its members have paid CBP millions of dollars “on entries where importers (or their brokers) have failed to pay estimated or liquidated tariffs issued under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.”
“Customs did not include (or even mention) sureties in its development of CAPE and its reporting to this Court, despite the fact that limiting refunds to importers and brokers would essentially result in IEEPA tariff refunds being issued to importers rather than to sureties who actually paid IEEPA tariffs directly to Customs,” the International Trade Surety Association filed in court.
The group said it “advised Customs of the need to include sureties in phase one of CAPE. While Customs has acknowledged our concerns, they have not indicated to us that the omissions will be corrected, nor has Customs mentioned sureties or this issue in their submissions to the court.”
<a href