What happens now with IEEPA tariff revenue, new tariffs?

As farmers and agriculture leaders tried to figure out the impact of the Supreme Court ruling that President Trump does not have tariff power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the North Dakota Agricultural Trade Monitor said the government collected an an estimated $958 million on agricultural inputs between February and October 2025.

Of this total, about $273 million came from agricultural chemicals, $530 million from farm machinery, $110 million from fertilizers, and $44 million from seeds, NDSU said.

Following Friday’s Supreme Court decision, the tariff revenue may have to be repaid, but it is unclear how and to whom the money would be paid. 

Over the weekend President Trump imposed a 15% global tariff that can last for 150 days. 

“The problem now is that the 15% global baseline means genuine relief is narrower than it looks — and for farmers already stretched on affordability, the difference between a clean tariff rollback and a 15% floor is real money on every input purchase this spring,” Wesley Davis, the chief ag economist at Meridian Ag Advisors, said in a LinkedIn post. 

Jacqui Fatka, lead economist for farm supply and biofuels at CoBank, said in a report, “The courts reinforced the power to place tariffs in the hands of Congress, with limited timeframes on the president.”

“As expected, the administration will utilize additional authorities to implement tariffs. The question is whether Congress will relinquish that control as it has narrowly done in multiple votes in the Senate and recently in the House.

“Section 122 tariffs expire after 150 days unless Congress votes to extend the use of this authority. If Congress chooses not to respond, the administration might, in principle, let the tariffs expire, announce a new balance-of-payments crisis and begin the process again.

“The court also failed to rule on requiring paying back the tariffs, which again stops short on delivering lower input costs to farmers faced with ongoing margin pressure and rising input costs,” Fatka said.

Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said, “Fentanyl is a scourge that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly young Americans, and President Trump’s use of IEEPA forced China, Mexico, and Canada to curb the importation of fentanyl and its precursors into the United States.”

“Mexico also took measures to improve border security as a result of President Trump’s IEEPA tariffs. President Trump also used IEEPA to effectively address the trade deficit that skyrocketed by 40% during the Biden administration and furthered the offshoring of American manufacturing and agricultural production while lining the pockets of foreign countries, companies, and workers.

“The Trump administration is committed to continue implementing the president’s trade policy, which was at the core of his campaign and agenda,” Greer said.

Greer said the Trump administration will initiate several investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 that will include seafood, rice and other products as “areas of concern.”

ADDRESSING TRADE DEFICIT

USA Rice was a rare farm group to express displeasure with the Supreme Court decision. 

“USA Rice is disappointed that the Supreme Court struck down the administration’s use of the IEEPA tariffs. We are hopeful that the administration will be able to quickly pivot to reimpose a number of these tariffs to maintain critical leverage held in dozens of completed and active bilateral negotiations aimed at reducing the U.S. trade deficit,” said USA Rice Chair Keith Glover.

“USA Rice supports the Trump administration taking steps to address the trade imbalances hurting domestic industries, while exempting crucial crop inputs. Most alarming, foreign rice imports have doubled in the last decade with a record 1.51 million MT in 2025, displacing more than $1.5 billion in domestic sales. 

“The strategic use of import tariffs to stem the flow of rice imports, especially from global bad actors like Thailand, India, China, Vietnam and Pakistan, whose brazen illegal policies and practices violate international trade rules, would support the U.S. rice farm economy at a critical time and provide an opportunity to recover domestic market share, prevent further consolidation, and expand rice manufacturing facilities and jobs in many rural communities,” Glover explained.

“To effectively achieve this, we urge USTR to initiate a commodity-specific Section 301 investigation — and impose a durable rice-wide tariff, which would limit imports and transshipments, and any other opportunities for countries to reset trade flows and infiltrate the U.S. market,” Glover said.

National Farmers Union President Rob Larew said, “We appreciate the court providing clarity on tariff authority. However, many family farmers and ranchers have already felt the consequences of this tariff agenda.”

“Over the past year, tariffs have raised input costs, disrupted export markets and triggered retaliation against U.S. agricultural goods. In an already fragile farm economy, uncertainty has hit family operations hardest,” Larew said.

“We urge the administration not to pursue similar tariffs under other authorities, and we call on Congress to exercise its oversight role to ensure trade policy supports — not undermines — America’s family farmers and ranchers.” 

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said in a post on X, “Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling against one form of tariff, we are not backing down — not even for a second.”

“We’re doubling down on rebalancing global trade so it finally works for America. That means fair deals that put our farmers and ranchers first: protecting family farms, strengthening rural economies, and ensuring American agriculture leads the world again,” Rollins said.

Rollins noted the increases in exports of tree nuts, ethanol, dairy and corn.