The Supreme Court heard arguments this month on the legality of Trump’s “reciprocal” and “trafficking” tariffs, with conservative justices delivering a bruising to the administration.
“Can’t get this power back,” one justice reportedly quipped during the session, highlighting concerns over the IEEPA’s scope – a law silent on tariffs that no prior president invoked for such purposes.
When pressed on what happens if the court strikes down the tariffs, Trump was characteristically pragmatic.
“Then I’d have to do something else,” he replied, leaving the door open to alternatives like tax credits – a nod to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s recent comments on CBS’s Face the Nation, where he suggested the rebate “could come in many forms and probably a tax credit.”
Congressional Hurdles and Income Cap Debates
Congressional buy-in is another towering hurdle.
The checks would require legislative approval, and several Republicans have voiced reservations, urging Trump to prioritize slashing the ballooning federal deficit instead.
Bessent, appearing on Fox & Friends last week, floated an income cap to target aid: “Well, there are a lot of options here that the president’s talking about a $2,000 rebate and those — that would be for families making less than, say, $100,000.”
He quickly walked it back, adding, “it’s in discussion” and “we haven’t” finalized it. Trump himself has echoed the exclusion of “high income people” without pinning down a threshold.
Economists remain divided on the plan’s merits.
Critics, including voices at Forbes, have dismissed the math as “not believable,” pointing out that Trump’s claims of “trillions” in tariff windfalls far outstrip actual collections.
A $2,000 payout limited to those under $100,000 in income could cost around $300 billion, per Tax Foundation estimates – a figure that balloons to $464 billion if modeled after COVID-era stimulus, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
On the flip side, a new study from the San Francisco Federal Reserve offers unexpected ammunition for tariff proponents: An analysis of 150 years of U.S. tariff history concluded that such policies actually correlate with lower inflation, countering fears of price hikes.
“Tariffs lead to lower inflation,” the study found, potentially bolstering Trump’s case as he eyes the 2026 midterms.
Public Hopes Hinge on Court and Congress
If the court rules against the IEEPA tariffs, refunds could complicate matters further, though the mechanics remain murky.
For now, the administration presses ahead, betting that public appetite – and perhaps a favorable ruling – will turn the tide.
As one X user put it in a viral post echoing the poll: “Of course we do” favor the checks, adding a skeptical emoji for good measure.
Trump’s tariff gambit, once a signature of his first term, now doubles as a political lifeline.
Whether it delivers holiday cheer deferred or devolves into courtroom drama, one thing’s clear: Americans are watching closely, checks in hand – metaphorically, at least.
Related:
