Trump administration takes steps to unwind and re-create key tariff authority tied to court fight over “liberation day” tariffs

The Trump administration has taken steps that, in effect, undo a roughly $100 billion tariff program associated with its “liberation day” actions, while simultaneously trying to rebuild a functionally similar tariff regime using other legal authorities, according to CNBC Politics. The move comes as the administration faces ongoing court challenges to the tariff structure it previously imposed.

CNBC reported that the administration’s refund steps are aimed at addressing the legal vulnerability of the tariff authority under which the “liberation day” tariffs were imposed. In the same reporting, the administration is described as seeking to use additional or alternative statutory powers to replicate the practical effect of the earlier tariff framework, rather than relying solely on the initially used authority.

The report said the administration is effectively recreating an approach similar to the tariff regime associated with the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), but through different legal pathways. IEEPA has been central in prior U.S. cases and debates over executive authority to impose economic restrictions tied to national-security or emergency rationales, and CNBC’s reporting indicates the administration is attempting to adjust its legal theory while keeping the policy outcome broadly aligned with its tariff objectives.

Court challenges already pending are expected to continue to shape the timeline and implementation of the administration’s tariff actions. CNBC’s report characterizes the refund and legal-redesign steps as occurring in parallel with litigation risk, rather than as a single, clean retreat from tariffs.

A key practical effect of the refund move, as described by CNBC, is that importers or other affected parties would receive money back for duties tied to the disputed tariff effort, at least to the extent covered by the administration’s actions. The scope and mechanics of refunds can vary depending on implementation details and litigation posture, but the $100 billion figure reflects the scale of the underlying tariff controversy described in the report.

At the same time, the administration’s effort to re-create the tariff framework using alternative authorities would likely shift how future tariff assessments are justified and administered. If the administration succeeds in sustaining the revised authority in court, the tariff outcome could remain in place even if the original IEEPA-based approach faces restrictions or a narrower interpretation by a court.

With both refund and litigation underway, next steps depend on how courts evaluate the revised legal theory and the factual record underlying the tariff rationale. Until courts rule, importers and trade participants may continue to face uncertainty about which tariff schedules apply, whether additional refunds are triggered, and how enforcement decisions are coordinated across agencies involved in customs and trade compliance.