The Michigan Retailers Association (MRA) reported on Apr. 6 that the United States Supreme Court ruled against the President’s authority to impose tariffs under emergency powers law, a decision affecting Michigan’s retail community after ten months of economic uncertainty.
The ruling matters because it reaffirms Congress as the sole body with taxation power and brings attention to ongoing instability in American trade policy. The Supreme Court decision came after President Trump had used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in April 2025 to justify new tariffs aimed at reducing reliance on foreign markets, creating what MRA described as a volatile tax environment for businesses.
According to MRA, a May 2025 survey showed that 69% of its members believed these tariffs would negatively affect their business within six to twelve months. The group said small businesses were especially impacted by shifting policies and unpredictable costs. Learning Resources, an educational toy company based in Illinois, was among those affected; facing $14 million in tariffs for 2025, it filed suit against the federal government over IEEPA use.
In February, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Learning Resources. The majority found that “IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs” and reaffirmed that “the Framers gave ‘Congress alone’ the power to impose tariffs during peacetime.” Justice Gorsuch wrote in his concurrence: “All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason… Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of people’s elected representatives.”
A follow-up survey by MRA conducted after this ruling found nearly three-quarters of respondents continued experiencing negative effects from past tariff actions. Over half cited ongoing uncertainty as disruptive. Inventory price increases topped reported impacts; one retailer said: “Tariffs have raised my cost of goods by $50,000 this year.” Other effects included changes in operational expenses (62%), future planning (51.5%), and sales volumes (48.5%). More than four out of five retailers made adjustments such as changing prices or finding new suppliers.
The majority surveyed were small businesses—over 80% single-location stores with fewer than 25 employees—highlighting how policy shifts disproportionately affect smaller operations. While some relief may come from restored congressional control over trade measures, many retailers say uncertainty will persist until Congress clarifies future trade policies.
