“`html
Former US President Donald Trump has voiced concerns that a Supreme Court decision overturning his tariffs would result in a “complete mess,” signaling his apprehension about the potential ruling.
In a social media post on Monday, Trump emphasized the high stakes of the impending decision, which could be delivered as early as Wednesday, and the complications that would arise if businesses were entitled to refunds.
“It would take many years to figure out what number we are talking about and even, who, when, and where, to pay,” Trump stated.
Trump has repeatedly lamented the legal challenges to his trade strategy in recent months. Opponents of the tariffs argue that Trump exceeded his authority in imposing them.
If the Supreme Court does not uphold his tariffs: “WE’RE SCREWED”, the former President wrote on Truth Social on Monday.
The tariffs, including sweeping levies first announced last April, are being challenged by a coalition of small businesses and US states. They argue that the president overstepped his authority by imposing these additional taxes on imported goods.
Should the Trump administration lose the case, the government could be required to refund billions of dollars in collected revenue.
Tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) have generated over $130 billion, according to the latest data. This represents more than half of all tariff revenue, though a small fraction of the government’s overall revenue.
Refunds would be “almost impossible for our Country to pay,” Trump asserted on Monday.
“Anybody who says that it can be quickly and easily done would be making a false, inaccurate, or totally misunderstood answer to this very large and complex question,” he added.
Prior to the Supreme Court review, two lower courts ruled that Trump lacked the authority to impose global tariffs. Businesses and investors are keenly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision, given its 6-3 conservative majority.
During a hearing in November, a majority of the justices, including several conservatives, expressed doubts over the White House’s justification for the import duties, which the president has claimed are necessary to restore America’s manufacturing base and fix its trade imbalance.
The White House has indicated that officials will explore alternative strategies if the court rules against them, including existing legislation allowing the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days.
Trump has characterized the tariff battle in stark terms, warning that a loss would limit his trade negotiation leverage and endanger national security. He has asserted that a defeat would “weaken” the US and lead to a “financial mess” for years to come.
However, many businesses both in the US and internationally, which have borne the brunt of Trump’s global tariffs, are hoping that the court will deem the levies illegal.
Lawyers representing the challenging states and private groups argue that IEEPA, the 1977 law cited by the Trump administration to impose the tariffs, makes no mention of the word “tariffs.” They maintain that only Congress has the authority to establish taxes under the US Constitution.
Opponents have also questioned whether the issues cited by the White House, particularly the trade deficit, constitute genuine emergencies.
During the November hearing, the justices dedicated relatively little time to the issue of refunds. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, noted that any refund process could become a “complete mess,” a sentiment echoed by Trump.
Some businesses have indicated that while they would attempt to recover funds if the government is compelled to issue refunds, the payments would not compensate for the disruption caused by the Trump administration’s trade policies.
Trump says the new levy is “effective immediately” as anti-government protests in Iran enter a third week.
The US president and his administration have threatened “very strong options” to intervene in Iran, including military action.
The US president has called for interest rates on credit cards to be capped at 10% for one year.
The authorities are responding to protests with a ferocious security crackdown and near total internet shutdown.
Three former heads of the central bank say the probe seeks to undermine the Fed’s independence and “has no place” in the US.
“`