Supreme Court Ruling Could Mean Tariff Refunds for Businesses

Rep. Sessions calls for Congress to be involved in how refunds are handled.

Published on Mar. 8, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Supreme Court has ruled that a number of tariffs implemented by former President Trump were not legally structured. This could mean around $130 billion in excess tariffs paid by businesses could be eligible for refunds, according to experts. However, Rep. Pete Sessions argues that the judge handling the case has exceeded his authority and that Congress should be consulted on how the refunds are distributed.

Why it matters

The Supreme Court's ruling on the legality of the Trump-era tariffs could have significant financial implications for businesses that paid the tariffs. While consumers may see some indirect economic benefits if the refunds are issued, the primary recipients would be the companies that originally paid the tariffs. This raises questions about the separation of powers between the judicial and legislative branches.

The details

The Supreme Court found that a number of the tariffs implemented by former President Trump were not legally structured. This could make around $130 billion in excess tariffs eligible for refunds, according to economist Dr. Ray Perryman. However, the refunds would go to the companies that originally paid the tariffs, not necessarily the end consumers. Rep. Pete Sessions argues that the judge handling the customs and duties cases has exceeded his authority by indicating he would make refund decisions if the president did not, stating that judges should not be telling Congress what to do.

  • The Supreme Court ruling was issued on March 8, 2026.

The players

Rep. Pete Sessions

A Republican U.S. Representative from Waco, Texas who has called for Congress to be involved in how the tariff refunds are handled.

Dr. Ray Perryman

A Tyler, Texas-based economist who estimates around $130 billion in excess tariffs were paid that could be eligible for refunds.

Judge Richard Eaton

A judge who handles customs and duties cases and has indicated he would make refund decisions if the president did not.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Article three judges rule on what we do. They do not tell us what to do, should not. So I think the judge is well up over his authority.”

— Rep. Pete Sessions, U.S. Representative (KTRE)

“The people who actually paid the tariffs as the goods came into the United States are entitled to refunds. If a manufacturer paid a tariff on something, made something with it, and sold it to you, it's the manufacturer that gets the rebate, even though you may have paid for it ultimately.”

— Dr. Ray Perryman, Economist (KTRE)

What’s next

The Supreme Court is expected to quickly resolve any disputes over the judge's authority to make refund decisions if the president does not. Congress and the president will also need to engage in a dialogue to reach a final determination on how the tariff refunds will be handled.

The takeaway

This Supreme Court ruling highlights the ongoing tensions between the judicial, executive, and legislative branches over trade policy and tariffs. While businesses may be eligible for significant refunds, the process for distributing those funds remains uncertain and could require cooperation between Congress and the president.