Subject: Trump‘s broad 10% tariffs judged illegal
… by US court of international trade. Those are the ‚Section 122‘ tariffs implemented by Trump when his original tariffs got struck down by the USSC:

A United States trade court on Thursday, May 7, ruled against President Donald Trump's newest 10% global tariff, saying it was not justified under the 1970s law cited in its implementation. The US Court of International Trade ruling was 2-1, and applies to the parties who sued the administration.

Trump imposed the temporary duty in February after the Supreme Court struck down a swath of other tariffs. The 10% duty was meant to deal with balance of payments deficits, according to the Trump administration. …

The Administration has appealed so the latest court order is on hold for now.

Meanwhile, the refunds for the original tariffs struck down by the USSC are actually on their way now… towards the JCs / importers who had routinely passed the original cost on to the consumer.

The Trump administration has begun processing refunds for billions of dollars in tariffs that the US Supreme Court struck down in February.
In what is to be the biggest repayment programme in history, companies can apply online for money they were charged under the so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs - plus interest - to be returned.

The US Court of International Trade in March ordered customs officials to refund the more than $160bn (£121bn) the government had collected, putting roughly 330,000 importers in a position to potentially win back some money.

Since the original tariff revenues were spent otherwise, the refunds will be debt- i.e. taxpayer-funded, while JCs will enjoy tidy windfall profits. Consumers OTOH who are also taxpayers will generally have the privilege of paying twice :-).

A very few JCs have agreed to reimburse their clients. All others will hang on to them… unless forced to otherwise:

Federal cases have been filed against Ray-Ban maker EssilorLuxottica and FedEx, while a class-action lawsuit has been filed against Costco in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington..



https://www.lemonde.fr/en/econ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/artic...