Maryland Officials Request Tariff Reimbursement from Trump

Maryland officials are calling on President Donald Trump to reimburse the state $4 billion in tariffs after the Supreme Court ruled against the global tariffs he implemented through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

In a joint letter, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, State Auditor Brooke E. Lierman, and State Treasurer Derek E. Davis emphasized Maryland’s status as “a state built on trade, innovation, and hard work.”

The letter referenced estimates from the U.S. Joint Economic Committee, which suggested that the tariff measures from the Trump Administration cost U.S. consumers about $1,744 per household. With Maryland’s approximate 2.4 million households, it is estimated that businesses and consumers in the state faced around $4 billion in direct and indirect costs linked to these tariffs.

Officials pointed out that when the tariffs were put in place, Maryland businesses had to adapt quickly. Companies paying tariffs on essential goods incurred costs at the border, while those depending on imported materials faced increased expenses. Ultimately, these costs trickled down to consumers, leading to higher prices for families already struggling with rising living costs.

The letter continued by highlighting the significant financial impact on the state. Citing the Joint Economic Commission’s data again, it noted the estimated $4 billion burden on Maryland households and businesses during the time these “unconstitutional measures” were active.

Moore and the others remarked that the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision reinforced that “the tariffs were imposed without constitutional authority.”

“The authority to impose taxes and tariffs lies with Congress, not the executive branch,” the letter specified. “This fundamental principle was disregarded when your administration unilaterally enacted widespread tariffs using the IEEPA.”

Moore indicated that they are formally urging the Trump administration to refund the tariff revenues the state believes were unlawfully collected from Maryland’s businesses and consumers.

According to a report by John Carney from Breitbart News, Chief Justice John Roberts stated in the majority opinion that President Trump “overstepped his authority by invoking emergency powers that imposed obligations on almost all countries.”

This ruling represents the first clear rejection of one of Trump’s policies during his second term. While courts have often allowed him broad executive powers, the majority of justices concluded that he exceeded those limits by imposing extensive tariffs without congressional approval.

Trump initially imposed tariffs in two phases. In February 2025, he instituted a 25% tariff on most imports from Canada and Mexico, as well as a 10% tariff on products from China due to issues related to fentanyl trafficking. Then in April, during an event termed “Liberation Day,” he announced a customary 10% tariff on imports from nearly all nations, applying even steeper tariffs on those deemed trade violators.

In declaring fentanyl-related overdose deaths and a persistent trade deficit as a national emergency, Trump aimed to adjust trade policy through the IEEPA, which Congress established in 1977 for presidents to manage foreign crises.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of the dissenting judges, suggested that there could still be avenues for future tariffs.

“Although I strongly disagree with today’s ruling, it might not significantly restrict the president’s capacity to enforce tariffs moving forward,” he noted, explaining that several federal laws could empower the president to impose tariffs under different justification, even if additional steps beyond the emergency law might be needed.

Later, Trump shared that he had signed a proclamation for a “global” 10% tariff on all countries, asserting his authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump mentioned that the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on tariffs “could return hundreds of billions of dollars to countries and businesses” that were impacted financially due to U.S. actions.