'Horrible and ridiculous': Trump bashes top court order on $159 billion tariff refunds

US President Donald Trump has criticised the US Supreme Court striking down his sweeping trade tariffs once again. Early on Friday, in a post on social network Truth Social -- a platform owned by one of his companies, the US president claimed that the recent ruling favours individuals and companies that "took advantage" of American for decades.

Highlighting how sizeable the amount to be refunded is, at $159 billion, Trump argued that the payout could have been avoided with a small change in wording in the court ruling to add a clause that the US need not repay already collected tariff money.

Describing the court's decision as "horrible and ridiculous", Trump asserted that the US would be richer by the same amount had it not been for the court ruling in its current form. "All they had to do was one little half sentence, 'that the United States does not have to pay back monies that were already paid'," he wrote.

Add Zee Business as a Preferred Source

"Couldn’t they have done that for our Nation?" he lamented.

What's the matter? Why has the Supreme Court ordered Trump 2.0 to refund $159 billion?

This week, a bench at the apex American court ruled 6-3 that certain Trump-era tariffs were unlawfully collected from importers. The majority of judges mandated refunds amounting to $159 billion, including interest, citing procedural flaws in executive authority.

Earlier, in February, the top court had struck down Trump's sweeping tariff against most countries, noting that the president overstepped his powers to impose them. Trump had used the International Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) -- a law that authorises a POTUS to regulate trade -- to impose the now-struck-down tariffs.

The tariffs in question targeted imports of steel, aluminum and Chinese goods into the US.

After the court's February order, Trump started to explore other legal routes to continue with his tariff policy. His administration has since imposed a 10 per cent levy under Section 122 and then raised it to the maximum permissible 15 per cent under the law. It also launched investigations to detect unfair trade practices by several countries, including India.

Trade tariffs have been central to his "America first" policy that seeks to protect American people, businesses and economy from foreign competition.

Trump tariffs and market turmoil

Global markets reacted negatively to the first wave of tariffs, starting April 2025, in the early months of the Trump 2.0 administration. Most financial experts criticised the tariffs, warning of inflationary imbalances and risks of global recession due to the administration's tariff policy.

In India, Dalal Street benchmarks took their biggest intraday hit since the pandemic-triggered sell-off, triggered by a riot across global markets.

Trade talks and beyond

This week, an Indian delegation three-day discussions with its American counterpart in Washington to finalise a US-India trade deal. While earlier discussions suggested a reduced American duty of 18 per cent on Indian goods from a hefty 50 per cent that included a punitive 25 per cent levy over India's oil imports from Russia, a new 10 per cent flat levy requires the pact to be revisited.

After the conclusion of those talks, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer called India a "tough nut to crack".

It remains to be seen how the trade deal takes shape going forward.

FAQs related to the article

Q1 What did the US Supreme Court rule?

In a 6-3 verdict, the court held that certain Trump-era tariffs were unlawfully imposed, ordering refunds of $159 billion including interest.

Q2 Who will receive this $159 billion?

Primarily, American importers will receive these refunds, if paid. These are companies that paid tariffs on goods like steel, aluminium and Chinese imports.

Q3 Were tariffs considered unlawful?

Yes. A majority of judges found that the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not justify the imposition of such levies.

Q4 Will the refunds be paid immediately?

Not necessarily. It is not known immediately as to how or when the US government plans to honour the order.

Q5 What are the implications for global trade and markets?

Uncertainty around US trade policy has already triggered volatility in global markets. Analysts are weighing in the implications of the latest development in the matter.

Q6 Why has Donald Trump criticised the wording of the judgment?

The POTUS argues that a simple clause could have prevented his government from refunding already collected tariffs.