Tariff uncertainty persists

The tariff fight did not end with the Supreme Court: companies are still facing new duties, new lawsuits, and new planning problems in April 2026. (scotusblog.com) In February, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not let President Donald Trump impose the sweeping tariffs he announced in 2025. The ruling invalidated those emergency tariffs, but it did not settle how refunds would work or what other tariff powers the White House could still use. (scotusblog.com) The administration then turned to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which it used to impose a 10% tariff on most imports effective February 24, 2026. On April 10, judges on the U.S. Court of International Trade pressed government lawyers on whether a trade deficit is enough to justify that law. (usnews.com) Trade lawyers tracking the changes say the Section 122 tariff is now implemented, with a threatened increase to 15% that would run until July 24, 2026. Their tracker also shows that product-specific and country-specific tariff threats are still moving at the same time. (tradecomplianceresourcehub.com) The refund side is still moving too. U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it plans to launch the first phase of its CAPE refund system on April 20 for tariffs struck down by the court, and as of April 9, 56,497 importers had completed the process for electronic refunds totaling $127 billion. (usnews.com) That leaves businesses dealing with both backward-looking and forward-looking costs at once: they are trying to recover old tariff payments while pricing around new ones. SCOTUSblog reported that more than 2,000 refund lawsuits have been filed in the Court of International Trade, including by companies such as FedEx, Costco, L’Oreal, Dyson, and Nissan North America. (scotusblog.com) One clear corporate example came from BRP on April 14. The powersports maker said it was suspending full-year fiscal 2027 guidance after an April 6 amendment to Section 232 tariffs changed the treatment of steel, aluminum, and copper imports into the United States. (news.brp.com) BRP said the change now mainly means a 25% tariff on the total value of imported snowmobiles and most off-road vehicle models, replacing a 50% tariff on applicable metal content only. The company estimated the incremental tariff cost at more than $500 million for the rest of the year before mitigation. (news.brp.com) Investors reacted immediately: MarketWatch reported BRP shares fell 35% on April 15 after the company pulled guidance because of the tariff changes. Chief Executive Officer Denis Le Vot said BRP was operating in a “highly volatile and unpredictable tariff environment.” (marketwatch.com, news.brp.com) The next checkpoint is not a single ruling but a stack of them: the April 20 refund rollout, the pending trade-court challenge to the 10% global tariff, and any further changes to Section 122 or Section 232 duties. For importers, the legal win in February has turned into a spring of overlapping tariff bills, refund claims, and suspended forecasts. (usnews.com, usnews.com, news.brp.com)