Trade Rep Greer says tariff policy ‘hasn’t changed’ despite SCOTUS ruling

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer outlined Sunday how the Trump administration’s tariff policy will continue, despite Friday’s Supreme Court ruling blocking most of the president’s signature economic policy.

“The legal tool to implement it, that might change, but the policy hasn’t changed,” Greer told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz. “And so, we’re aiming for continuity. There’s a 15% tariff now. It’s roughly equivalent to the types of tariffs that we had in place under IEEPA.”

The Supreme Court ruling specifically blocked President Donald Trump’s implementation of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which accounted for 70% of all tariffs the administration had imposed globally. In the 6-3 opinion, the Supreme Court said the emergency law, which does not mention tariffs or duties, did not give the president the authority to impose import taxes. While there are other laws the executive branch can use to impose tariffs, those options are more limited or cumbersome to implement than the sweeping authority the president argued he had under IEEPA.

Trump says he has signed order for new global 15% tariff after ‘deeply disappointing’ Supreme Court ruling

While acknowledging the president is more constrained now, Greer insisted the White House still has “durable tools” to do tariffs.

“We found ways to really reconstruct what we’re doing. Now, it doesn’t have the same flexibility that the president had under the previous authority that he was using, but he gives us very durable tools,” Greer said. “It allows us to do investigations, implement tariffs where needed, and provides a lot of leverage and a lot of protection for American industry.”

Trump is using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose the new global tariff rate of 15%. That rate is lower than the rates on some of the country’s largest trading partners under IEEPA, but it is higher than the base global tariff rate of 10% implemented under the law, which will make rates higher for many countries.

But this tariff can only be imposed at a rate of up to 15% for up to 150 days before Trump will need congressional authorization to extend them.

Greer pointed to other methods of imposing tariffs after that expiration, including investigating trading partners for violations of trade rights or threats to national security under Sections 301 and 232, respectively.

“I think we all found out during the pandemic that even things like textiles, people thought, this isn’t a big deal, but we have to have personal protective equipment for our hospitals, we have to have uniforms for our military,” Greer said.

Supreme Court invalidates most of Trump’s tariffs

That doesn’t necessarily mean the White House is going to make a national security argument around textile imports, Greer added, but he said there are “things that people might think are ho-hum commodities [that] actually become quite strategic when it comes to national security.”

“Whether it’s, you know, lumber for housing or cars and the factories and the ecosystem that go along with them for transportation, these are the types of things we need to have a strong economy, to have a strong industrial base, to prepare us for times of war,” Greer said.

Asked by Raddatz if he had already initiated any investigations, Greer said there were ongoing Section 301 investigations into Brazil and China, with more likely on the way.

“We expect to be initiating investigations related to things like industrial excess capacity,” Greer said. “This will cover a lot of these countries in Asia that have overcapacity. They make more than they can consume, and they crush prices throughout the world.”

Majority of Americans disapprove of how Trump is handling tariffs: ABC/Post/Ipsos poll

The Supreme Court’s majority opinion did not directly address the possibility of tariff refunds. Trump’s IEEPA tariffs brought in an estimated $142 billion in revenue last year, according to the Yale Budget Lab, and hundreds of businesses have called for tariff refunds following the decision. Greer said refunds will not be issued unless a court orders them.

“The Court of International Trade, which is a district level U.S. court, my expectation is that they’ll have to step in and give some direction on how they want that to be done,” Greer said. “We just need to have guidance from the court.”

In an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll released Friday and conducted before the Supreme Court’s decision, 64% disapproved of how the president was handling tariffs on imported goods.