Supreme Court decision to strike down tariffs could ease concerns in plastics industry

By Karen Hanna and Lynne Sherwin

Manufacturing experts offered mixed reactions after the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 struck down most of the tariffs that have amounted to President Trump’s signature economic policy. 

In his majority opinion nullifying tariffs levied without congressional approval under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Supreme Court Justice John Roberts wrote, “The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch.”

In response to the 6-3 decision, Trump announced he would levy a 10 percent global tariff on top of any existing tariffs. He said of the court, “They are just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOS and radical left Democrats." 

The decision does not apply to the ongoing Section 232 investigation, which the Commerce Department launched in September, to determine whether imports of goods including industrial machinery and robots constitute a threat to national security and are subject to additional tariffs.

On Feb. 20, some industry groups expressed relief that many tariffs would be dropped.

A statement from Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) Senior VP of Government and Industry Relations Kip Eideberg said in part: 

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling that the IEEPA tariffs are unlawful is welcome news for equipment manufacturers, which have spent the last year navigating higher input costs and mounting trade uncertainty.”

PLASTICS, which has opposed the tariffs, was measured in its response. 

“Today’s Supreme Court decision underscores the importance of clear, durable trade policy that provides American manufacturers the certainty needed to invest, hire, and grow. 

“While PLASTICS has raised concerns about tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), we support the Administration’s goals of bolstering U.S. manufacturing. A strong domestic manufacturing base depends on predictable trade policy that enhances competitiveness and strengthens supply-chain resilience,” PLASTICS said in a statement. 

While some companies and industry experts have seen tariffs as a strategy to incentivize reshoring, Trump’s mercurial approach, with frequent pronouncements and reversals of levies, has been the source of great uncertainty throughout the year, as machinery manufacturers noted in their responses to Plastics Machinery & Manufacturing’s annual survey, conducted in October 2025.

Some said they were seeing signs of an uptick in business. But the tariffs raised prices on imported equipment, and many types of production machinery are no longer made in the U.S. The tariffs have also pushed new costs onto domestic manufacturers that needed to buy components such as touch screens and sheet metal. 

Only 7 percent of processors who responded to the PMM survey said U.S. trade policy had a positive effect on business in 2025, while 44 percent said it had a negative effect. Twenty-two percent said they would likely spend less on equipment in 2026 because of U.S. trade policy. 

In the immediate aftermath of the court’s decision, MEMA, the Vehicle Suppliers Association, said it still was awaiting more clarity. In a statement, it said, it “respects and welcomes the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs.” 

While Eideberg cited disruptions to supply chains, investment and domestic manufacturing capacity in his opposition to the tariffs, Reshoring Initiative founder and President Harry Moser said he was disappointed by the ruling. 

“I’m displeased and unhappy,” he said.

An advocate of devaluing the dollar to make both domestic labor and goods more competitive internationally, Moser has supported Trump’s tariffs, which he believed would help level the playing field for U.S. companies. 

However, he acknowledged that Trump had hurt his cause by failing to seek Congressional approval. He also said the President’s wild tariff impositions, justifications and retractions had eroded understanding or support of the policies. 

Tariffs failed to put a dent in trade balance — news outlets reported Feb. 19 that the U.S. deficit actually widened in December to $70.3 trillion — but might have been more successful over a longer period. 

Moser believes tariffs can work in the long run. 

“It worked for the country back under Hamilton and Washington, and we're a big enough, strong enough market, that we definitely could have [gotten] away with ... having some little bit of price increase, like a one-time 1 percent price increase. Unfortunately, [Trump is] fighting for survival on the affordability issue, and tariffs unquestionably do raise prices a little bit.” 

But, Moser said, Trump’s execution on the policy created challenges. 

“On that Liberation Day when he had his chart, and he had different numbers, all kinds of crazy numbers and different countries, that made us look crazy and unpredictable, and then he kept changing it every week and so on — if he'd come out and said, it's going to be 15 percent on everybody except 25 percent on China ... people could understand that, there's some logic to that. He likes what he did because he had control. He could be a tough guy and whip every country and tell them to go to hell.” 

Machinery OEMs had told PMM that tariffs had both positive and negative effects on their business in 2025, but their outlooks for the year ahead were colored by uncertainty about what would happen next.

Companies including Wittmann and Absolute Haitian said they had stocked up on machinery inventory in the U.S. ahead of the implementation of tariffs, but that supply is mostly exhausted.

Tariff volatility also affects the mold making industry. While tariffs on molds and tooling from abroad were intended to help U.S.-based builders, for example, duties on raw materials cut into already-tight margins. And even with the additional cost of tariffs, molds made overseas are often still more cost-effective, Laurie Harbor, a partner at consulting firm Wipfli, told PMM in late 2025. 

In responding to the court’s decision, Trump stood by his tariffs. 

On Truth Social, he doubled down on the policy. “Therefore, effective immediately,” he said, “all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged, and we are also initiating several Section 301 and other Investigations to protect our Country from unfair Trading practices.” 

More tariff coverage