FedEx fires the "first shot in tax refund": sues Trump administration to recover illegal tariffs

FedEx fires the "first shot in tax refund": sues Trump administration to recover illegal tariffs

```

FedEx has officially filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, seeking a refund of tariffs imposed by the Trump administration under emergency powers. This is the first major American company to take legal action for compensation since the Supreme Court ruled such sweeping tariff measures illegal.

The company filed the complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade on Monday, explicitly asking the government to return the tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In its complaint, FedEx argued that, according to last week’s Supreme Court decision, the president lacks authority to impose such taxes under emergency powers, and therefore the company seeks a “full refund” of all IEEPA tariffs it paid to the U.S.

This legal action touches a critical sore spot in the current trade dispute. Although the Supreme Court’s opinion struck down a key policy pillar of the Trump presidency, it did not clarify whether the government must return the related tariff revenue. Experts estimate that tariff revenues involved over the past year have risen to at least $160 billion. Currently, cases filed by taxpayers seeking refunds have flooded the Court of International Trade, which is expected to handle the refund process.

Regarding the refund issue, the Trump administration has taken a tough stance. U.S. Treasury Secretary Besent implied that refunds are unlikely to be paid out in the near future, warning the process may face a lengthy legal tug-of-war. Meanwhile, as a countermeasure, Washington has begun implementing a new global tariff policy to replace the IEEPA tariffs that were ruled illegal.

According to the Financial Times, FedEx emphasized in its complaint that this lawsuit is a “necessary action” as a record importer, aimed at protecting company rights. The company stated: “Supporting our customers as they navigate regulatory changes continues to be our top priority.” FedEx cited the Supreme Court’s ruling on IEEPA tariff illegality in seeking the return of all related taxes it paid to the government.

Last week’s Supreme Court decision was a major setback for the White House, as the Court held the president lacked authority to levy tariffs using emergency powers. However, the Supreme Court left the question of handling the vast sums already collected to the lower courts. So far, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the White House have not immediately responded to requests for comment.

Treasury Implies Refunds Are a Long Way Off

Regarding the Supreme Court not ruling on the refund issue, Trump said last Friday this was "crazy." U.S. Treasury Secretary Besent expressed a similar stance, stating at an event in Dallas that refunds were unlikely to be paid soon.

Besent said: “My feeling is, this could drag on for weeks, months, or even years.” He further added: “I have a feeling the American people are not going to see this money.” This indicates the government is prepared for a long fight over the refund issue.

New Tariff Policies Quickly Implemented

Shortly after the Supreme Court ruling, the Trump administration swiftly adjusted its tariff strategy. Trump announced last Friday that a 10% universal tariff would replace the IEEPA tariffs, and later said on Saturday the rate would be raised to 15%.

According to CCTV News, the U.S. White House recently announced it would impose a 10% ad valorem import tariff on goods imported to the U.S. for 150 days, effective at 12:01 am EST February 24. However, the White House has signaled it is preparing a formal order to raise the global tariff rate benchmark to 15%, but the timetable for implementation has not yet been set.

Risk Warning and DisclaimerThe market carries risks, and investments must be made cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account the special investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are appropriate for their particular circumstances. Investing based on this article is at your own risk. ```