United States terminates IEEPA-based tariffs following supreme court decision

All US tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) terminated at 12:00 am eastern time on February 24, 2026.¹ The action follows the Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump on February 20, 2026, which found that IEEPA does not grant the president authority to impose tariffs.²

Though the IEEPA-based tariffs have been ruled unlawful, the Supreme Court remanded decisions on how to handle refunds of previously paid tariffs to the lower courts.  Further developments are likely in the next few weeks.

The Trump administration’s 2025 IEEPA tariffs challenged in court

The Supreme Court appeal consolidated a series of cases challenging the IEEPA tariffs filed in the first half of 2025 in several different courts by US businesses and governments. Collectively, the cases specifically address the so-called IEEPA “Trafficking Tariffs” on Canada, Mexico, and China, as well as the IEEPA “Reciprocal Tariffs” affecting nearly all US trading partners. Following the decisions in the lower courts, the Trump Administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which received briefs in September and October 2025 and held oral arguments in November 2025.³

The Supreme Court’s opinion

Relying on the US Constitution and the statutory text of IEEPA, the majority of the Supreme Court justices held that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs in any instance.  As the Court reaffirmed, the US Constitution grants Congress alone the power to impose taxes or tariffs and that the President has no inherent authority to impose tariffs during peacetime, concluding that the President’s imposition of IEEPA-based tariffs must rely exclusively on a delegation of tariff power from Congress.  

Next, the Court analyzed the text of IEEPA and determined that Congress did not in fact delegate its tariff authority to the President through IEEPA.  The Court held that while IEEPA does authorize the President to “regulate ... importation,” the word “regulate” does not encompass the power to impose tariffs or taxes, as “the ‘power to regulate commerce’ is ‘entirely distinct from the right to levy taxes.’”

The Supreme Court remand and next steps for refunds

The Supreme Court did not address the process for affected importers to receive refunds for past payments of unlawful tariffs, leaving this issue to the discretion of the lower courts. The case is now remanded to the lower courts to determine next steps for refunds.  On remand, the Court of International Trade (CIT), is expected to lead the refund process.  The CIT has previously indicated that it has “the explicit power to order reliquidation and refunds where the government has unlawfully exacted duties.”⁴ 

Tariff orders affected by the ruling 

By its ruling, the Supreme Court has made it illegal for the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue collecting tariffs under IEEPA.  As a practical matter, to carry out this obligation, President Trump issued an executive order on February 20, 2026 terminating all tariffs previously imposed by his administration under IEEPA-based authorities as soon as practicable.⁵ CBP followed up on February 22 with guidance stating that it will halt collection of all tariffs imposed pursuant to IEEPA for goods entered for consumption or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:00 am eastern time on February 24, 2026.

Although the plaintiffs in Learning Resources only challenged the IEEPA reciprocal tariffs and the fentanyl-trafficking related tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico, the Trump administration opted to terminate all IEEPA-based tariffs in the February 20 executive order.  As a result, all tariff authorities established pursuant to the below executive orders are now revoked:  

• China trafficking tariff: The 10% (previously 20%) Trafficking Tariff on all imports from China, issued in Executive Order 14195 of February 1, 2025, as amended.⁶
• Canada trafficking tariff: The 35% (or 10% on certain energy, mineral, and fertilizer products) Trafficking Tariff on all imports from Canada that do not qualify for preferential treatment under the United States – Canada – Mexico Agreement (USMCA), issued in Executive Order 14193 of February 1, 2025, as amended.⁷
• Mexico trafficking tariff: The 25% (or 10% on certain fertilizer products) Trafficking Tariff on all imports from Mexico that do not qualify for preferential treatment under the USMCA, issued in Executive Order 14194 of February 1, 2025, as amended.⁸
• Global reciprocal tariffs: The Reciprocal Tariffs, which have a minimum rate of 10% and range as high as 41%, imposed on nearly all countries and most products that are not instead covered by Section 232 tariffs or are otherwise exempted, issued in Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025, as amended.⁹
• Brazil additional tariff: The 40% additional IEEPA tariff on most imports from Brazil, issued in Executive Order 14323 of July 30, 2025.¹⁰
• India (Russia Oil) additional tariff: The 25% additional IEEPA tariff imposed on most imports from India, additive with the Reciprocal Tariff, which was in effect from August 27, 2025 to February 7, 2026, issued in Executive Order 14329 of August 6, 2025, as amended (i.e., the Russia “Secondary Tariff” Order).¹¹
• “Secondary Tariff” orders: President Trump has issued Executive Orders to create systems to impose IEEPA-based tariffs on countries trading oil and certain other products with Cuba,¹² Venezuela,¹³ Russia, and Iran,¹⁴ though no tariffs were in effect under any of these systems at the time of the Supreme Court decision.

Status of the customs de minimis suspension 

On August 29, 2025, President Trump suspended customs de minimis entry, eliminating duty-free entry into the United States for shipments valued at $800 or less, and applying the IEEPA tariffs, along with all other applicable tariffs to low value shipments.  The de minimis suspension order was based on IEEPA and tied to the IEEPA fentanyl-trafficking and reciprocal tariff executive orders. To keep the de minimis suspension in effect after the termination of the IEEPA fentanyl-trafficking and reciprocal tariff executive orders, President Trump issued a new On August 29, 2025, President Trump suspended customs de minimis entry, eliminating duty-free entry into the United States for shipments valued at $800 or less, and applying the IEEPA tariffs, along with all other applicable tariffs to low value shipments.  The de minimis suspension order was based on IEEPA and tied to the IEEPA fentanyl-trafficking and reciprocal tariff executive orders.  To keep the de minimis suspension in effect after the termination of the IEEPA fentanyl-trafficking and reciprocal tariff executive orders, President Trump issued a new executive order on February 20, 2026 that changes the legal basis for the suspension.¹⁵ The new order maintains the original de minimis suspension without modification, according to guidance circulated by CBP.¹⁶

Tariffs not based on IEEPA are unaffected 

Tariffs imposed by the Trump administration under other tariff authorities are unaffected, including the Section 301 tariffs on imports from China and Nicaragua and the global Section 232 tariffs on imports of steel and steel derivatives; aluminum and aluminum derivatives; passenger vehicles, light trucks, and parts; copper and copper derivative products; timber, lumber, and wood products; trucks, buses, and truck parts; and a small set of advanced semiconductors. 

Status of the Agreements on Reciprocal Trade

Most of the tariff commitments made by the Trump administration in the Agreements on Reciprocal Trade (ARTs) specifically pertain to tariffs imposed pursuant to the April 2 IEEPA tariff order, as amended.  For example, the US-Cambodia ART states that “the United States shall not apply the additional ad valorem rate of duty applicable to those goods as provided for in Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025” (describing the additional product-specific tariff exceptions President Trump would grant) and that “the additional ad valorem rate of duty provided for in Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025, as amended, shall be no higher than 19 percent” (describing the arrangement to impose a 19% IEEPA reciprocal tariff on imports from Cambodia).¹⁷

Similar language regarding the IEEPA tariffs appears in all ARTs concluded to date, though a few of the agreements (such as the preliminary agreements with the EU, Korea, and Japan) also include provisions that set a tariff ceiling on goods subject to certain Section 232 investigations. Following the Supreme Court decision and President Trump’s order to revoke all IEEPA-based tariffs, the IEEPA tariff rate ceilings and product specific exceptions described in the ARTs will provide no benefit.

The legal foundation for the ARTs is now uncertain, raising the possibility of renegotiations, modifications, or lapses in these agreements. It is unclear whether individual trade partners will seek to renegotiate their ARTs or leave them unchanged. The new Section 301 investigations proposed by USTR are likely intended to maintain the Trump administration’s leverage in the negotiations, thereby pressuring countries to adhere to the ARTs.¹⁸ President Trump has also threatened further tariff increases if countries attempt to delay negotiations.

_{1 CSMS # 67834313 - Ending Collection of International Emergency Economic Powers Act Duties, February 22, 2026.
2 Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 24-1287.
3 See the Supreme Court docket at Learning Resources, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al.
4 AGS Co. Automotive Sols. v. U.S. Customs & Border Prot., Consol. Court No. 25-00255, Slip Op. 25-154 (Ct. Int’l Trade December 15, 2025).
5 Executive Order 14389 of February 20, 2026: “Ending Certain Tariff Actions,” 91 FR 9437.
6 Executive Order 14195 of February 1, 2025: “Imposing Duties To Address the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People's Republic of China,” 90 FR 9121.
7 Executive Order 14193 of February 1, 2025: “Imposing Duties To Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border,” 90 FR 9113.
8 Executive Order 14194 of February 1, 2025: “Imposing Duties To Address the Situation at Our Southern Border,” 90 FR 9117
9 Executive Order 14257 of April 2, 2025: “Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff To Rectify Trade Practices That Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits,” 90 FR 15041.
10 Executive Order 14323 of July 30, 2025: “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Brazil,” 90 FR 37739.
11 See Executive Order 14329 of August 6, 2025: “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation,” 90 FR 38701; as amended by Executive Order 14384 of February 6, 2026: “Modifying Duties To Address Threats to the United States by the Government of the Russian Federation,” 91 FR 6501. 
12 Executive Order 14380 of January 29, 2026: “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Cuba,” 91 FR 5085. 
13 Executive Order 14245 of March 24, 2025: “Imposing Tariffs on Countries Importing Venezuelan Oil,” 90 FR 13829.
14 Executive Order 14382 of February 6, 2026: “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Iran,” 91 FR 6493. 
15 Executive Order 14388 of February 20, 2026: “Continuing the Suspension of Duty-Free De Minimis Treatment for All Countries,” 91 FR 9433. 
16 CSMS # 67845486 - Continuing the Suspension of Duty-Free De Minimis Treatment for All Countries, February 23, 2026.
17 Agreement Between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Cambodia on Reciprocal Trade, October 26, 2025.
18 See USTR’s press release at, “Ambassador Greer Issues Statement on Supreme Court IEEPA Decision,” USTR, February 20, 2026.}

For further information regarding this report or international trade matters, please contact any of the partners or senior attorneys listed below from White & Case’s Global International Trade Practice.

_{White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.}

_{This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.}

_{© 2026 White & Case LLP}