US President Donald Trump has announced plans to impose global import tariffs of 15%, escalating his response to a Supreme Court ruling that invalidated his earlier trade measures.
Speaking on Friday, Trump said his administration would replace the tariffs struck down by the court with a blanket 10% levy on all goods entering the United States.
However, in a post published on Truth Social on Saturday, he said the rate would instead be raised to the maximum permitted under a rarely used trade statute.
The provision allows the tariffs to remain in effect for roughly five months before congressional approval is required.
The original 10% tariffs were scheduled to take effect on Tuesday, 24 February, though it remains unclear whether the higher 15% rate will be implemented on the same date. The White House has been contacted for clarification.
The new 15% levy — introduced under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act — has prompted uncertainty for trading partners including United Kingdom and Australia, both of which had previously negotiated agreements with the US based on a 10% tariff.
Trump said the decision followed a review of the Supreme Court’s “ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday”.
In a 6–3 ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States found that the president had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping global tariffs last year under emergency powers legislation.
According to the latest government data, the US has already collected at least $130bn in tariffs under that law.
Following the ruling, Trump said he was “ashamed of certain members of the court” and described the justices who rejected his policy as “fools”.
The majority included the court’s three liberal justices, Chief Justice John Roberts, and two justices appointed by Trump — Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch.
Three conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito — dissented.
Tariffs remain central to Trump’s economic agenda, which he argues will encourage domestic manufacturing and investment. However, the court’s decision represents a significant constraint on presidential power and a setback for his second-term priorities.
The president has said tariffs are necessary to narrow the trade deficit, yet new figures show the US trade gap widened by 2.1% compared with 2024, reaching about $1.2 trillion.
Drew Greenblatt, owner of Marlin Steel Wire Products, said he was “very disappointed” by the ruling.
“It is a setback for poor people in America that had a chance to climb into the middle class with great manufacturing jobs,” said.
By contrast, John Boyd, founder of the National Black Farmers Association, said: “This is a huge win for me and a big loss for the president.
“I don’t care how you look at it, President Trump lost on this.”
Trade expert Allie Renison of SEC Newgate warned that the outcome could complicate global commerce.
“While it may seem like a good day for free trade, I think trade actually just got a lot messier,” she said.
She added that businesses now face “much more of a patchwork approach” to tariffs.
Under Section 122, most US imports will face a 15% tariff, though exemptions will apply to certain products including critical minerals, metals and pharmaceuticals.
Separate tariffs on steel, aluminium, lumber and automobiles — imposed under different legislation — remain unaffected by the court ruling.
A White House official said on Friday that countries which previously reached trade agreements with the US, including the UK, would now be subject to the global tariff rate.
However, British agreements covering steel, aluminium, pharmaceuticals, autos and aerospace — which account for most UK-US trade — remain unchanged.
The UK government said it expects Britain’s “privileged trading position with the US” to continue, describing the matter as one for Washington to determine.
William Bain of the British Chambers of Commerce warned the response “could be worse for British businesses”.
He said the new tariffs are “bad for trade, bad for US consumers and businesses” and would “weaken global economic growth”.
Speaking before the 15% rate was announced, French President Emmanuel Macron said France would adapt, adding that the “fairest possible rules involve reciprocity, not suffering unilateral decisions”.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned of the “poison” created by prolonged tariff uncertainty.
“The biggest poison for the economies of Europe and the US is this constant uncertainty about tariffs. And this uncertainty must end,” Merz said, adding he would coordinate a joint EU position ahead of a US visit.
The ruling also opens the door for companies and consumers to seek refunds for tariffs deemed unlawful, though the court did not rule on whether repayments must be issued.
Trump said on Friday that refunds would face lengthy legal battles, potentially lasting years, despite trade groups pledging to pursue reimbursement.
Neil Bradley of the US Chamber of Commerce said: “Swift refunds of the impermissible tariffs will be meaningful for the more than 200,000 small business importers in this country and will help support stronger economic growth this year.”
The National Retail Federation also urged the courts to ensure refunds are processed smoothly.
“The refunds will serve as an economic boost and allow companies to reinvest in their operations, their employees and their customers,” it said.
Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell has written to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, seeking details on how refunds would be handled.
“Given this Administration has illegally collected hundreds of billions of dollars from American businesses, that now must be refunded, I am requesting detailed information about how the Administration plans to fairly and expeditiously reimburse the payors of those tariffs,” she wrote.
Republican Senator John Kennedy countered that refund efforts could politically benefit his party.
He said refunds could stimulate the business community and help the economy “roar” ahead of November’s midterm elections.
