Highlights:

• Federal appeals court ruled most of Trump’s tariffs illegal but allowed them to remain until October 14.

• Billions in trade duties may need to be refunded if the Supreme Court upholds the ruling.

• Shipping and logistics professionals maintain caution, with uncertainty dominating business decisions.

President Trump’s trade war suffered a legal setback last week when a federal appeals court ruled that many of his administration’s tariffs were illegal. While the decision does not take immediate effect, as a stay keeps tariffs in place until mid-October, it has intensified uncertainty across U.S. supply chains and raised questions about potential refunds of billions in trade duties collected by the federal government. For logistics and shipping professionals, the immediate impact has been minimal, but the looming Supreme Court appeal has businesses treading carefully.

Shipping Industry Holds Steady

Industry executives report no major operational changes following the ruling. Paul Brashier, vice president of global supply chain at ITS Logistics, said, “Right now, we have not heard anything much or seen any changes.” With tariffs still in force, shippers are largely waiting for the administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court before adjusting forward orders or pricing strategies. Frontloading earlier this year, when imports surged ahead of tariff dates, has already mitigated some immediate disruptions.

Mike Short, president of global forwarding at C.H. Robinson, echoed the cautious stance, noting that many clients are seeking clarity on potential refunds and the timeline for Supreme Court review. Companies are particularly attentive because the ruling touches on reciprocal tariffs affecting most trading partners, as well as drug-related tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China—areas that represent the bulk of duty expenditures for many importers.

Implications for Federal Revenue and Refunds

Tariff revenue remains a significant source of federal funds, totaling $142 billion so far this fiscal year. If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court decision, the federal government may need to refund duties already collected. Experts indicate that the process could be managed automatically through Customs, or require manual action from brokers and importers, depending on the administration’s approach. While blanket refunds could be executed efficiently, a more complex, individual process could burden logistics teams and delay payments to businesses.

Dan Anthony, president of Trade Partnership Worldwide, emphasized that the administrative difficulty depends largely on the government’s chosen method. Felicia Pullam, former executive director at U.S. Customs, added that refunding the tariffs would contribute to the federal deficit but is achievable over time with appropriate resources.

Navigating Uncertainty

The court ruling does not eliminate ongoing tariff volatility. Investigations under Section 232 and other trade mechanisms continue to create risk for sectors ranging from steel and aluminum to pharmaceuticals, aerospace, and critical minerals. Companies are approaching trade decisions with caution, often assuming that tariffs will remain in place until final Supreme Court clarification.

Lowell, a partner at Reed Smith, highlighted the practical mindset among importers: “At a practical level, nothing is new today compared to this time last week. Most of those questions assume the tariffs are here to stay. No one seems to be counting on the courts to save them from tariffs.”

Looking forward, the key considerations for shippers and importers include monitoring Supreme Court decisions, preparing for potential refund processes, and remaining flexible in their supply chain and procurement strategies. While the legal process unfolds, uncertainty remains the defining characteristic of U.S. trade policy, reinforcing the importance of risk management and operational agility.