How will the Supreme Court's tariff ruling affect the plastics industry?

“President Trump loves tariffs, and he will find a way to do what he needs to do,” Harbour said. "I view this as a bit of a temporary hiccup that will be readjusted. There were a lot of people celebrating on Friday, and I just thought to myself, ‘I'm not sure I'd be celebrating right now, because all this does is create even more uncertainty.’ ” 

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

However, within hours, an outraged Trump announced Section 232 and 301 tariffs remain in place, and that he would impose additional tariffs under Section 122 — temporary duties that can be levied at a maximum rate of 15 percent for a maximum duration of 150 days. 

While he signed an executive order on Feb. 20 imposing the 10 percent rate for the new Section 122 tariffs, as of Feb. 23, he had not signed off on the 15 percent rate. 

Industry reacts to tariff ruling 

The news of the court’s ruling and the new tariffs drew mixed reactions, with some industry groups hailing the possibility of the end of tariffs that have underscored a year of volatility. On the morning of Feb. 23, as Harbour spoke with Plastics Machinery & Manufacturing,the Dow Jones Industrial Average started the day with a slight climb before dropping more than 800 points.

Harbour, who provides consulting services to both mold makers and plastics processing plants, noted it’s been a tough year overall for manufacturers. 

“It’s more incredible uncertainty in a time when everybody is out trying to grow their business and gain their market shares back. And it's been slow across the board, and things are hopefully starting to turn a bit in ’26,” she said.

However, in a statement released Feb. 23, LS Mtron President Paul Caprio seemed unfazed. Supporters of tariffs over the past year have lauded them as tools to blunt the cost advantages of foreign manufacturing in favor of domestic manufacturing, while opponents have decried higher costs on materials, components and equipment sourced from overseas. 

LS Mtron — which has headquarters in Duluth, Ga., and sells injection molding machines made by its South Korean parent company, LG Corp. — is growing its footprint both in the U.S. and abroad.

Tariffs, Caprio said, “can create some delays in purchase orders if someone does not need to order a machine, but if someone needs to have a machine, they will order it. ... I see this year’s business being very stable and if anything increasing over 2025.” 

A Feb. 20 statement from Kip Eideberg, senior VP of government and industry relations for the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM), cheered the Supreme Court’s decision. 

“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.” 

Meanwhile, MEMA, the Vehicle Suppliers Association, said on the day of the ruling it 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.”

Effect on plastics processors 

Asked about tariffs in PMM’s annual survey, conducted last fall, and in an online poll last May, most processors that responded were sour on the policy. However, on Feb. 20, the Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS) offered a measured response to the court ruling.

“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 its Feb. 20 statement. 

In a Feb. 23 report titled “U.S. Economy Expanded in 2025 Amid Tariffs and Mixed Manufacturing Signals,” Perc Pineda, chief economist for PLASTICS, noted that growth over 2025 is estimated at 2.2 percent, but he said, “It is possible that weaker year-over-year growth this year reflects the impact of higher tariffs imposed by the United States. Trade data, however, suggest that the effect of tariffs on industrial equipment imports has been uneven. ...”

But only 7 percent of processors who responded to PMM’s 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 this year because of U.S. trade policy.

Machinery OEMs told PMMin late 2025 that tariffs had both positive and negative effects on their businesses, 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 was mostly exhausted.

Pineda pointed to the Section 232 tariffs, levied on aluminum and steel, as playing a role in machinery sales. 

“One might expect that 50 percent tariffs — specifically Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, and on derivative products as defined by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security — would reduce imports. Yet trade data show that industrial machinery imports actually rose 2.2 percent from 2024 to 2025. 

“On aggregate, tariffs did not prevent imports from entering the U.S.,” he wrote. 

Tariff volatility has also affected 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, Harbor told PMM late last year. 

Can tariffs help the industry? 

One consistent proponent of tariffs has been Reshoring Initiative founder and President Harry Moser, who has been on a mission since 2010 to bring jobs back to the U.S. Though he champions devaluing the dollar to make American goods and labor more competitive, he has supported tariffs as a strategy to give the U.S. an edge.

How much that strategy has worked is a subject of some debate.

“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,” Moser said. “Unfortunately, [Trump is] fighting for survival on the affordability issue, and tariffs unquestionably do raise prices a little bit.” 

He acknowledged that inflation, along with Trump’s mercurial approach to tariffs and his failure to work with Congress to implement them, had hurt the policy’s performance and public perceptions about it.

While the goal is to draw jobs to the U.S., Harbour said she hasn’t seen it happening.

“We are seeing some small pockets of parts moving here, but by no means has the spigot turned open and we're having this flood of reshoring. Plus, who's going to do the work?” she asked, as the industry continues to struggle to find skilled workers. 

In the PLASTICS report released on Feb. 23, Pineda alluded to some of the challenges.

“While the goal is to strengthen U.S. domestic manufacturing, it would be unrealistic to expect rapid results — especially given the longstanding decline in domestic manufacturing over many years — and more so if higher tariffs are used as the primary tool,” he wrote. 

Over a year marked by tariff news, the gap between the value of goods imported into the U.S. and American products sold to other countries widened by 2.1 percent compared to 2024, hitting roughly $1.2 trillion, according to U.S. Census figures. 

What’s ahead on the tariff front? 

Whatever their reactions to tariffs, manufacturers had better get used to them. Harbour said she thinks they’re here to stay — at least for the foreseeable future.

With tariffs now a major economic reality across the supply chain, shops have to accept both the costs of the tariffs — as well as the costs of understanding them — as part of the price of doing business.

She said she believes the biggest burden is borne by smaller shops, which during prior presidential administrations had little reason to think about tariffs. 

Fictiv, a global manufacturing and supply chain company, and Misumi Global, a leading global supplier of mechanical components and manufacturing services, noted in their “State of Manufacturing & Supply Chain Report,” a survey of over 300 senior supply chain and manufacturing leaders, that 77 percent of respondents said trade compliance requirements are too complex to manage without external expertise. 

“All that uncertainty and trying to figure out is creating transactional waste, making me unproductive in my business. So, even if I'm a $30 million molder, I need somebody who is just spending their life understanding this and understanding what we're paying and doing the research and reading and so on and so on and so on,” Harbour said. 

She advised that businesses continue to do their homework. While IEEPA is out, companies will have to prepare for what’s next — including the new Section 122 tariffs, set to go into effect Feb. 24. 

“It's transactional waste, but we can't ignore it,” she said.