During a back and forth with reporters on Thursday in the Oval Office, President Trump recognized that US consumers are “paying something” for tariffs.

“I think that they might be paying something. But when you take the overall impact, the Americans are gaining tremendously,” Trump said.

It was among the first acknowledgments from Trump that US consumers are footing at least some of the bill for his tariff regime, the bulk of which faced scrutiny before the Supreme Court this week.

In a closely watched case, a majority of the justices — both the court’s three liberal-leaning justices, as well as three more conservative ones — offered skeptical questions regarding the president’s authority to impose his most sweeping duties.

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has previously backed Trump in a series of decisions this year. But justices appeared skeptical of the president’s authority, casting doubt over the centerpiece of Trump’s second-term economic agenda.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who was in attendance at Wednesday’s hearing, still said he “came away very, very optimistic.”

If the Supreme Court does not side with Trump, it’s widely expected that the administration will seek out alternative methods to carry out the US’s trade agenda.

Trump, meanwhile, has made clear he considers the case to be of paramount importance to his legacy, even as his administration touts the other legal avenues he could use to impose the duties.

Trump on Tuesday said the case is “literally LIFE OR DEATH for our country.”

Read more: What Trump’s tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet

The US and China reached a trade truce last week. The thaw means China will suspend additional export controls on rare earth metals and end investigations into US chip companies. Meanwhile, the US will pause some of Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs” on China for another year. On Thursday, the US pushed forward on plans to pause punitive measures on China’s shipbuilding industry.

China said on Friday it has designed a new rare earth licensing regime that could help speed up shipments.

The White House has said it will not allow the sale of Nvidia’s latest scaled-down AI chip to China, according to a report in The Information. This guidance would effectively shuts Nvidia out of China.

Trump announced on Thursday that the US and Uzbekistan had reached a trade and economic deal, with Uzbekistan to purchase and invest $35 billion in the next three years and more than $100 billion over the next 10 years in some US sectors.

A spat over an ad featuring the late Ronald Reagan continues between the US and Canada. The Canadian prime minister said recently he apologized to Trump over the ad.

LIVE 25 updates

Jennifer Schonberger

Treasury official warns of ‘pain and hardship’ if SCOTUS rules against Trump’s tariffs

The Trump administration is warning that if the Supreme Court were to dismantle President Trump’s tariffs, it would cause “unnecessary economic pain and hardship,” damaging financial markets and confidence.

“To the extent that the policy would be reversed or watered down, that would damage financial markets,” Counselor to the Treasury Secretary Joe Lavorgna said this week in an interview with Yahoo Finance. “You’ve seen record high equity markets, record low credit spreads. You’ve seen commitments by all different countries and companies to invest in the US.”

“It would damage confidence. The economic system — capitalism — works on confidence,” he added.

While economists acknowledge it could lead to greater uncertainty, they and others say the impact of a ruling against Trump could have other impacts — including positive ones.

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Tariffs take a toll on New York’s Indian food

Indian food and restaurants have become a favourite among New Yorkers, especially traders and executives on Wall Street, outshining their London rivals, but they now face the pain of President Trump’s tariffs.

The duties that Trump imposed on India back in July, due to New Delhi’s purchase of Russian oil has doubled the rate on most exports from the country and Indian restaurants have taken a hit.

Bloomberg News reports:

Read more here. 

Jenny McCall

How new US tariff doubts will play out among trade partners

Businesses paying higher duties due to President Trump’s tariffs, alongside trading partners that have signed trade deals and still in negotiations, will now face months of uncertainty while they wait for a verdict from the Supreme Court, whi heard arguments this week on the legality of Trump’s tariffs.

If the Supreme Court rules against Trump’s tariff agenda, how will this impact global economies?

Bloomberg News reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Swiss finance minister says tariff deal with US depends on Trump

Switzerland’s Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter said on Thursday that they are keen to secure a trade agreement with the US and that talks are ongoing. But the minister acknowledged that much of the final decision lies with President Trump.

Reuters reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Nvidia CEO: No ‘active discussions’ on selling Blackwell chip to China

Jenny McCall

US to block Nvidia’s sale of scaled-down AI chips to China, The Information reports

Reuters reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Trump acknowledges Americans are paying ‘something’ for tariffs

President Trump acknowledged Americans are paying “something” for tariffs during a back-and-forth with reporters on Thursday in the Oval Office.

The US president has imposed tariffs on many US trading partners, from China to Canada. He frequently says that those tariffs are helping to boost the US economy, whereas economists largely agree that they are simply a tax on consumers.

This week, the US Supreme Court met to hear arguments on the legality of Trump’s tariffs and whether the president overstepped his authority. During discussions on Thursday, one reporter noted the comments from Chief Justice John Roberts, who said that tariffs were actually taxes ​paid by Americans.

Reuters reports:

Read more here.

Brett LoGiurato

Supreme Court ruling against tariffs would cause ‘unnecessary pain,’ Bessent adviser says

Joseph LaVorgna, an adviser to US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, joined Yahoo Finance Senior Reporter Jennifer Schonberger to discuss the Trump administration’s arguments and what happens if the court knocks down the tariffs.

Watch below:

Brett LoGiurato

Trump plans one-year pause on port crane duties, China ship fees

Bloomberg reports:

Read more here.

Keith Reid-Cleveland

Supreme Court’s skepticism on Trump tariffs leaves room for uncertainty

Signs suggest that the Supreme Court may be preparing to overturn President Trump’s most sweeping tariffs. Doing so could result in uncertainty across industries, as businesses and countries may expect refunds and will have to adjust accordingly.

Bloomberg reports:

Read more here.

Keith Reid-Cleveland

A Trump Supreme Court tariff defeat would add to trade uncertainty

A growing number of trade attorneys, analysts, and politicians are preparing for President Trump’s tariffs to be struck down by the Supreme Court and any resulting uncertainty. Prevalent theories suggest that, if the tariffs are overturned, the Trump administration would use other trade policy changes to continue its efforts.

Reuters reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Bessent says he is optimistic after Supreme Court hearing on tariffs

Jenny McCall

Will Trump have to refund the money made from tariffs?

The US Supreme Court’s hearing on Wednesday has fueled speculation around President Trump’s tariffs and whether they will remain in place. The question around the legality of Trump’s trade agenda and whether the US president overstepped his authority in imposing them, provoked a tough integration from the Supreme Court Justices.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent left the hearing on Wednesday saying he felt “very optimistic,” in reference to the outcome.

If Trump’s tariffs are struck down, will the US have to refund the money it has made so far from its global trade levies? If a refund were to be made some feel it will be a complete “mess.”

Other experts have said that a rejection of tariffs by the Supreme Court would be a “temporary setback” for the president, who will likely seek out other methods in order to push his tariff agenda.

Reuters reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Trump meets Swiss business leaders, orders more trade talks

President Trump has met with executives from Switzerland to discuss tariffs and trade. The US president suggested that more trade talks were needed as both sides attempt to rebuild the frayed relationship.

Bloomberg News reports:

Read more here.

Jenny McCall

Prospects for Big Three US carmakers improve despite tariffs

In the first few months of President Trump’s tariff regime, uncertainty and chaos defined the auto sector. US carmakers felt exposed to higher tariffs, and many believed the industry would have to pass these higher costs on to consumers. However, the prospects for the Big Three US automakers — GM (GM), Ford (F), and Stellantis (STLA) —seem to be improving.

The FT reports:

Read more here.

Ben Werschkul

Are tariffs taxes on Americans? The fate of blanket tariffs appears to hinge on questions Trump has evaded for years.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday began its highly anticipated consideration of President Trump’s sweeping blanket tariffs, with the lawyer for the government making an audacious case.

Trump’s duties “are not revenue-raising tariffs,” US Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued before the court, calling the tens of billions of dollars currently being brought in each month “only incidental.”

He went further, saying Trump has based his moves this year “not on the power to tax.” What Trump is imposing, he said, “are clearly regulatory tariffs, not taxes.”

The argument was met with immediate skepticism, leading both legal experts and the markets to conclude Wednesday that these blanket tariffs — a centerpiece of President Trump’s trade program — may be in peril.

Read more here.

Brett LoGiurato

The takeaway: Supreme Court appears skeptical of Trump’s authority to impose his most sweeping tariffs

Oral arguments at the Supreme Court have concluded. The emerging consensus is that a majority of the high court’s justices appeared skeptical of President Trump’s authority to impose the tariffs. We’ll outline a sampling of coverage below.

From Bloomberg:

The New York Times:

The Wall Street Journal said in its headline that the “Supreme Court appears skeptical of Trump’s tariffs.”

One more reaction, nodding to the dipping prediction market odds of US government victory:

Brett LoGiurato

Trump’s odds of winning Supreme Court case plummet on prediction markets

Prediction markets are notoriously volatile. Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way: Those markets have grown much more bearish today on the odds of President Trump prevailing in this case.

Polymarket has odds of the Supreme Court ruling in favor at 23%, down from around 40% before the oral arguments. Odds on Kalshi took a similar dive. On PredictIt, bettors saw about 80-20 odds that the court would “strike down” the tariffs.

Brett LoGiurato

Gorsuch leads conservative questioning of government over tariffs

Several of the Supreme Court’s conservative-leaning justices questioned a US government lawyer over President Trump’s authority to impose tariffs on trading partners, casting early doubt over their future.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, drew the most notice for his line of questioning to US Solicitor General D. John Sauer. Gorsuch posed a hypothetical in the case of a theoretical future Democratic president.

“Could the president impose a 50% tariff on gas-powered cars and auto parts to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat from abroad of climate change?” Gorsuch asked.

Sauer responded that it was “very likely.”

Gorsuch also questioned Sauer over the president’s ultimate authority and when Congress could delegate it to the executive.

“What would prohibit Congress from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce — for that matter, declare war — to the president?” he asked.

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh — the latter two of whom were appointed by Trump — also at times posed skeptical questions. Kavanaugh asked why no president before Trump had invoked this authority, while Barrett questioned the across-the-board nature of the tariffs.

Brett LoGiurato

Oral arguments ongoing

Oral arguments in the case involving President Trump’s tariffs are ongoing. (You can listen at the Supreme Court’s website.)

I am also enjoying following the SCOTUSBlog live blog, for those interested in catching up!