US President Donald Trump has announced plans to raise his newly introduced global import tariffs to 15%, escalating his response to a Supreme Court ruling that blocked his earlier trade measures.
On Friday, Trump said he would replace the tariffs overturned by the court with a 10% levy on nearly all imports into the United States. However, a day later, he posted on Truth Social that the rate would be increased to the highest level permitted under a rarely used trade statute.
That law allows the tariffs to remain in force for roughly five months before the administration must seek approval from Congress. While the original 10% levy was scheduled to take effect on Tuesday, 24 February, it is not yet clear whether the higher 15% rate will begin on the same date. The White House has been asked to clarify.
Supreme Court ruling sparks tariff shift
The higher tariff would be imposed under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, a temporary mechanism that caps duties at 15%. The move has raised concerns in countries such as the UK and Australia, which had previously negotiated 10% tariff arrangements with the US.
Trump said the decision followed a review of what he described as a “ridiculous” and “anti-American” ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States.
In a 6–3 decision, the court ruled that Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed sweeping global tariffs last year under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The justices concluded that the statute did not explicitly authorise the use of tariffs.
According to the latest government figures, the US has already collected at least $130bn (£96.4bn) in duties under that law.
Following the ruling, Trump said he was “ashamed” of some justices and labelled those who voted against his policy “fools.”
Economic impact and political fallout
Tariffs remain central to Trump’s economic strategy, which he argues will drive investment and manufacturing back to the US. However, the court’s decision represented a major constraint on presidential authority and a setback for his second-term agenda.
Trump has also said the tariffs are intended to shrink the US trade deficit, but official data released this week showed the deficit widening by 2.1% compared with 2024, reaching about $1.2tn (£890bn).
Reaction to the ruling has been mixed. Drew Greenblatt, owner of Marlin Steel Wire Products in Baltimore, said he was deeply disappointed, arguing the decision undermined opportunities for working-class Americans.
By contrast, John Boyd, a Virginia soybean farmer and founder of the National Black Farmers Association, said the ruling was a clear defeat for the president.
Former UK government trade adviser Allie Renison warned that the situation has made the global trade system more complex, saying businesses now face a fragmented and unpredictable tariff framework.
Exemptions, refunds and global reaction
Under Section 122, most imported goods would face the new 15% tariff, though exemptions are expected for critical minerals, metals and pharmaceuticals. Separate tariffs on steel, aluminium, lumber and automobiles—introduced under different laws—remain unchanged.
A White House official confirmed that countries with existing trade deals, including the UK, would now be subject to the global tariff rather than previously agreed rates. However, Britain’s sector-specific arrangements covering steel, aluminium, pharmaceuticals, autos and aerospace are expected to remain intact.
UK officials said they anticipate the country’s “privileged trading position” with the US will continue. Still, business leaders warned the higher tariffs could harm trade flows, consumers and economic growth.
In Europe, the chair of the European Parliament’s international trade committee said he would push to pause ratification of an EU-US trade deal, citing the uncertainty created by Trump’s announcement.
Refund battle ahead
The Supreme Court ruling has opened the door for companies and consumers to seek refunds for unlawfully collected tariffs, though the court did not rule on how repayments should be handled.
Trump has said refunds would likely require lengthy court battles. Trade groups and businesses have already pledged to pursue reimbursement, while the US Chamber of Commerce called for swift refunds to support small businesses and economic growth.
Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell has demanded details from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on how refunds would be processed. Republican Senator John Kennedy, meanwhile, suggested that issuing refunds could boost the economy ahead of November’s midterm elections.