特朗普全球关税被推翻！美国最高法院裁定违法，超1750亿美元税收面临退款

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against President Trump's tariff measures implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), stating that the President lacked legal authority to impose tariffs without Congressional approval [2][4]. Group 1: Supreme Court Ruling - The Supreme Court voted 6-3, affirming that the IEEPA does not grant the President the power to impose tariffs without Congress's consent [2]. - This ruling upholds a previous lower court decision that found Trump's tariffs exceeded the authority granted by the IEEPA [2]. - The ruling affects a significant portion of the tariffs currently in place, including the "fentanyl tariffs" and the so-called "reciprocal tariffs" announced in April [2]. Group 2: Financial Implications - The ruling raises concerns about potential refunds for over $175 billion in tariff revenues, which could exceed half of the total tariff income projected over the next decade [4][15]. - The Congressional Budget Office estimated that Trump's tariffs would generate approximately $300 billion annually over the next ten years [4]. - If the full $175 billion is refunded, it could reduce the average effective tariff rate from 13.6% to 6.5%, a decrease of more than half [15]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Following the Supreme Court's decision, U.S. stock markets reached new highs, with the S&P 500 rising approximately 0.7%, the Dow Jones increasing by nearly 320 points, and the Nasdaq gaining close to 0.9% [5]. - The U.S. dollar index fell, dropping over 0.3% and hitting a new low for the day [6]. - U.S. Treasury prices also fell, with the yield on the benchmark ten-year Treasury note surpassing 4.10% [8]. Group 4: Political Reactions - President Trump described the ruling as "shameful" and indicated he is considering alternative strategies to mitigate the impact of the court's decision [3]. - Democratic Senator Warren urged the government to issue refunds to the public, while Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer stated that the ruling is a victory for American consumers [17].