The US Court of International Trade on Wednesday struck down President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
The court ruled IEEPA did not give the president the authority to impose certain tariffs.
This affects the "fentanyl" tariffs imposed by the White House on Canada, Mexico, China since Trump returned to the White House. These tariffs were brought in to curb smuggling of the narcotic into the US.
It also affects the so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs announced on 2 April, including the universal 10% baseline tariff on all imports to the US.
However, the ruling does not affect the Trump administration's 25% "sectoral" tariffs on steel and aluminium imports and also his 25% additional tariffs on cars and car part imports, as these were implemented under a different legal justification.
A US federal appeals court decided on Thursday night that Trump's global tariffs can temporarily stay in place while it considers the White House's appeal against the trade court's judgement – but the future of the President's tariff agenda remains in the balance.
How much impact could this have on US trade?
Data from US Customs shows the amount of revenue collected in the 2025 financial year to date (ie between 1 October 2024 and 30 April) under various tariffs.
The data gives an approximate sense of the proportion of tariffs struck down and unaffected by the trade court's ruling.
It shows the tariffs imposed under IEEPA on China, Mexico and Canada in relation to the fentanyl smuggling had brought in $11.8bn (£8.7bn) since February 2025.
The 10% reciprocal tariffs – also justified under IEEPA – implemented in April had brought in $1.2bn (£890m).
On the other side of the ledger, the tariffs on metals and car parts – which are unaffected by this ruling – brought in around $3.3bn (£2.4bn), based on rounded figures.
And the biggest source of tariff revenue for the US in the period was from tariffs imposed on China dating back to Trump's first term in office, which raised $23.4bn (£17.3bn). These are also not affected by the court ruling, as they were not justified by IEEPA.
