On Friday, February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued its eagerly awaited decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, President of the United States, No. 24-1287 and consolidated cases. Technically, the Learning Resources appeal was dismissed for procedural reasons. In the companion case, Trump, President of the United States v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., No. 25-250, the decision of the Federal Circuit in favor of V.O.S. Selections invalidating the International Economic Emergency Power Act (IEEPA) tariffs was affirmed by a vote of 6 to 3.
In addition to the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, and joined in by Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, which found that the IEEPA did not authorize President Trump to impose tariff s, there were four concurring opinions and three dissents. That is likely why the court needed 3.5 months to issue a decision.
The opinions are a fascinating look at the jurisprudential views of eight of the nine justices. Only Sotomayor did not write separately, although she joined in the concurrences of Jackson and Kagan. While lawyers and scholars will ponder these eight opinions, condominium and cooperative boards of managers have more practical questions: what will happen to construction and maintenance services pricing and if is there any chance of refunds.
Only some tariffs have been impacted by this decision. These include steel (50%), aluminum (50%), autos and auto parts (25%) copper parts (50%), timber and lumber (10%), cabinets and vanities (25%), upholstered furniture (25%), heavy-duty trucks (25%), buses (10%) and certain semiconductors and chip-making equipment (25%).
In addition, there are also some tariff s on food and other products. These tariffs, under section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act (National Security Tariffs) and section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Unfair Trade Practices Tariffs), are limited as to duration, product or amount. There are reports required from the Secretary of Commerce (National Security Tariff s) or, in the case of the Unfair Trade Practices Tariffs, proof of an overall balance of payments issue from the U.S. Trade Representative.
Specifically, there must be factual justification for the tariffs. National Security Tariffs are limited to specific items that are critical to national security as determined in a study by the Department of Commerce. The National Security Tariffs have no cap and no set duration, but are limited to specifi c products. The Unfair Trade Practices Tariffs are limited to “fundamental international payment problems,” are capped at 15%, and may last only 150 days without action by Congress.
The new tariffs are likely to be challenged, and the Trump administration will have issues in defending the Unfair Trade Practices Tariffs. The United States does not have a balance of payments issue — the payments are nearly equal, such that the requirement of “fundamental international payment problems” may not be present.
Whether Congress will vote by July 24, 2026 to retain the tariffs is yet another question. The National Security Tariffs are likely to be challenged on a product-by-product basis — query whether a cabinet, vanity or upholstered furniture is essential to national security. Likely, the importer community and their attorneys will turn to attacking aspects of the National Security and Unfair Trade Practices Tariffs in court, probably in the Court of International Trade.
Importers will also be seeking refunds of the IEEPA tariffs. These refunds belong to the importer who paid them, unless the importer has, by contract, agreed to refund or rebate them to customers. Unless condominium and cooperative buildings previously negotiated for rebates or refunds, none are likely. The tariffs that remain generally impact construction, so prices for construction materials are likely to remain high.
Coupling that with the labor issues posed by the administration’s policy of seeking deportation of all undocumented workers, labor shortages will continue in construction which will also keep prices higher. (At the start of the current administration, approximately 20% to 25% of the U.S. construction labor force was undocumented.)
For future reference, condominium and cooperative boards should include a clause in contracts requiring refunds of voided tariffs if available. Generally, that will not be the case, but on direct purchases of generators or other major equipment or signifi cant materials, like windows, it may be available.
This column presents a general discussion. This column does not provide legal advice. Please consult your attorney for specific legal advice.
Carol A. Sigmond
Partner
Nossaman LLP
12 East 49th Street, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10017
