Some assorted thoughts from around Wall Street on the Supreme Court’s tariff ruling:
Deutsche Bank
“Looking ahead, the reality is that the 15% tariff imposed under Section 122 can only remain in place for 150 days (late July), after which Congressional approval would be required to extend it. Section 122 was designed as a temporary tool to address emergency balance of payments issues and would likely face further legal challenges if rolled over repeatedly.
That raises a key political question: will a small number of Republicans in either chamber be reluctant to support what could be framed as an extension of a consumer tax hike just three and a half months before the mid term elections? At that point, the administration faces a binary choice: try to secure an extension or allow the tariff to lapse. The latter appears the more likely outcome. In that scenario, the administration would probably pivot to other legal authorities—most notably Section 232 (national security) or Section 301 (unfair trade practices)—to re establish a more durable tariff regime. While the groundwork for such a move has almost certainly been laid, these measures are narrower in scope and would themselves be vulnerable to legal challenge.”
Goldman Sachs
“Imports from countries that will experience meaningful tariff reductions from the latest policy changes are likely to pick up in coming months, but the impact on GDP should be largely offset by increased inventory accumulation and consumption, reduced imports from other countries through which trade had been rerouted, and small reductions in imports from countries whose tariff rate has risen. We are launching our 2026Q1 GDP tracking estimate at 3.4%, though this incorporates a 1.3 percentage point contribution from the end of the government shutdown in 2025Q4. We continue to forecast 2.5% GDP growth for 2026 Q4/Q4, a 0.3 percentage point acceleration from 2025 Q4/Q4 that partly reflects the fading drag from tariffs giving way to a boost from tax cuts.”
Jefferies
“Retailers face decisions around whether to reinvest tariff savings into lower prices, allow margins to expand, or redirect savings into the business. We expect outcomes to vary by category, competitive intensity, and brand positioning. Reduced tariff pressure could allow retailers to revisit suppliers or sourcing regions that had become less economical, potentially improving assortment, innovation, or supply chain efficiency.”