US: Only Congress can impose Tariffs; IEEPA use was unlawful?
The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the exclusive power to impose tariffs, as stated in Article I, Section 8, which empowers Congress “to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” and to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations”. However, over time, Congress has delegated some tariff authority to the President through specific statutes, allowing the executive branch to impose or adjust tariffs under certain conditions. Courts have generally upheld these delegations, viewing them as constitutional because the President acts as an agent executing laws passed by Congress rather than making legislation.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), enacted nearly 50 years ago, grants the President broad powers to act during national emergencies, including regulating importation or exportation of property. However, IEEPA does not explicitly authorize the imposition of tariffs, and the word “tariff” or “duty” does not appear in the statute.
Legal experts and courts have argued that using IEEPA to impose tariffs is unlawful because Congress did not clearly delegate tariff authority through this statute. This position is reinforced by the Supreme Court’s major questions doctrine, which requires clear congressional authorization for executive actions of vast economic and political significance, such as imposing broad tariffs.
Recent lawsuits and legal critiques contend that the President’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs bypasses Congress’s constitutional role and detailed tariff statutes, violating the separation of powers and the nondelegation doctrine.
The National Constitutional Law Association (NCLA) and others have sued to stop the administration from imposing emergency tariffs under IEEPA, emphasizing that tariff authority belongs solely to Congress and must be exercised through proper legislative channels.
Congress holds the constitutional power to impose tariffs.
Congress has delegated limited tariff authority to the President through specific statutes, which courts have upheld.
IEEPA does not explicitly authorize tariffs, and its use for this purpose is widely considered unlawful.
The major questions doctrine requires clear congressional authorization for such significant executive actions, which IEEPA lacks.
Legal challenges argue that the President’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs violates constitutional separation of powers and tariff statutes.
Thus, while Congress can delegate tariff authority, the use of IEEPA for imposing tariffs is not legally supported and is considered an unlawful overreach of executive power.
