Tariff ruling creates uncertainty for Long Island businesses, consumers

Businesses and consumers on Long Island shouldn’t expect to see immediate price reductions after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned some of the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on imported goods.

The 6-3 decision by the nation’s highest court has created “a quagmire” with many unanswered questions, said Thomas A. Cook, managing director of Blue Tiger International Trade Consultants in East Moriches.

“This isn’t over," he said.

Cook and others told Newsday the court’s decision only impacts the tariffs imposed by Trump using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. The court said the president exceeded his authority.

Trump has championed tariffs for decades, accusing foreign countries of dumping cheap products into the U.S. market which has led to the closure of U.S. factories. He also has used tariffs has a negotiating tool to get countries to acquiesce to U.S. foreign policy.

But Cook said the future of tariffs depends on how foreign countries respond to the high court’s ruling, particularly those that changed their taxes on U.S. exports based on Trump’s taxes on imports to this country.

In addition, U.S. companies theoretically are owed refunds of the tariffs they paid but the court deferred to Court of International Trade to determine whether refunds should be paid and what the amount should be.

“The federal government, the Treasury Department will fight any attempt to force paying refunds,” Cook said in an interview on Friday.

Still, business owners in Nassau and Suffolk counties expressed relief -- and in some cases, joy -- upon learning some tariffs were struck down.

"That's good for us...I'm happy," said Amy Tedesco, owner of Outrageous Boutique in Plainview.

Tedesco said she's had fewer customers for the prom dresses and eveningwear that fill her shop since the Trump administration hiked taxes on products from China. Most prom dresses are made there, and tariffs have increased the average price from $400 a year ago to between $600 and $700, she said.

"It's definitely hurting the sales of the whole entire community of prom because people are turning to buying online and buying cheaper quality now,” Tedesco said. She added that the higher prices have led to less variety of dresses in stores because retailers are buying fewer gowns at wholesale.

Economist John A. Rizzo, a Stony Brook University professor, called the Supreme Court ruling "momentous, but it is still early in the game.”

He predicted that the tariffs impacted by court decision would fall from 16.9%, on average, to 9.1%. But “this is still historically high” compared with tariffs under then-President Joe Biden and Barack Obama, the economist said.

Trade groups, others hail decision

Business trade groups hailed the court decision, with some urging that refunds be issued to businesses.

“Tariffs are nothing more than a tax that ultimately impacts employers, workers, and consumers alike,” said Heather Mulligan, chief executive of the Business Council of New York State. “Our economy is stronger when we pursue free trade with clear but necessary guardrails,” she said in a statement, referring to the U.S., Mexico, Canada Free Trade Agreement, which faces reauthorization later this year.

David French, executive vice president of the National Retail Federation in Washington, said in a statement that the court decision “provides much-needed certainty for U.S. businesses and manufacturers, enabling global supply chains to operate without ambiguity. Clear and consistent trade policy is essential for economic growth, creating jobs and opportunities for American families. We urge the lower court to ensure a seamless process to refund the tariffs to U.S. importers,” he said.

New York Attorney General Letitia James was one of a dozen state attorneys general who argued in an April 2025 lawsuit that the Trump administration violated the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by imposing the tariffs.

"These illegal tariffs caused immense economic chaos, raising costs for families and businesses throughout our country," James said on Friday in response to the court's decision. "The Supreme Court has agreed that this administration has no authority to impose massive new taxes on a whim. This is a critical victory for the rule of law and our economy."

The United States Court of International Trade ruled in favor of the attorneys general in May 2025, while the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed that the Trump administration did not have the authority to impose tariffs under the IEEPA in August.

In addition to James, attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon and Vermont also challenged the Trump administration's tariffs.

Gov. Kathy Hochul applauded the ruling, calling the Trump administration's decision to impose the tariffs "reckless."

"The Supreme Court’s decision is clear," Hochul said. "These tariffs were an unlawful backdoor tax on hardworking families, farmers and small businesses, raising prices on everything from groceries to building materials."

Ed Cox, state Republican Committee chairman, declined to comment for this story.

Check back for updates on this developing story.