Potential Reinstatement of Tariffs

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated to the president on Tuesday that tariffs could be brought back as soon as July. This would mark a quick turnaround for the Trump administration following a Supreme Court decision that invalidated Trump’s IEEPA tariffs earlier this year, pushing the administration to seek alternative trade authorities.

Bessent mentioned some challenges: “We’ve faced setbacks at the Supreme Court regarding our tariff policy,” he noted during an event hosted by the Wall Street Journal. “However, we’re conducting or planning to conduct a Section 301 investigation. So, tariffs could revert to previous levels right around the start of July.” His remarks followed the Supreme Court’s February ruling, which determined that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not permit the imposition of tariffs.

President Trump has characterized these tariffs as “a matter of life or death” for the U.S. economy, highlighting how crucial this issue is to his administration.

Legal Challenges Ahead

Bessent’s statements emerged as the United States had accrued more than $133 billion from IEEPA tariffs by mid-December, a figure that rose to approximately $166 billion by early March 2026, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The administration quickly moved to sustain the tariffs in light of the Supreme Court ruling, utilizing certain provisions from the 1974 U.S. Trade Act to find a new approach for enforcing import fees.

His comments align with a report from Bloomberg, which suggested the Trump administration is considering several trade laws to navigate the high court’s verdict and continue applying pressure through tariffs.

In the long run, the focus appears to be heavily on Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. This section empowers the President and the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to impose “retaliatory import restrictions” against countries deemed to have unfair or discriminatory trade policies toward U.S. companies.

Section 301 allows for investigations into foreign trade practices considered “unfair,” but it also necessitates a formal notice period and public commentary, which can slow down the implementation process.

Since the Supreme Court’s decision, it’s been reported that the Trump administration has initiated over 75 Section 301 investigations—significantly more than the typical number seen annually over the past five decades, according to sources.

Emergency Tariffs Announcement

Moreover, last month, President Trump introduced a blanket 10% tariff globally. This was executed under an emergency provision in trade law, permitting the president to impose import fees of up to 15% for 150 days due to significant balance of payments deficits threatening the dollar’s stability.

This announcement led to a lawsuit from 24 attorneys general, who contended that this move was an illegal attempt to bypass the Supreme Court’s ruling. It also triggered a lengthy legal dispute in the U.S. international trade court, where a three-judge panel is currently deliberating on the legality of the president’s actions.

Attorneys for the challengers argued that endorsing the administration’s interpretation of the law could transform Section 122 into a versatile trade tool.

However, Justice Department attorney Brett Shumate defended the president’s broad authority, stating that Congress has conferred significant discretion to gauge economic conditions. He noted, “In 1974, just as now, trade deficits significantly contributed to the balance of payments deficit.” He added that, even without a fixed currency, balance of payments issues can still emerge.