Julia Chirkova
Billions of dollars in tariff refunds are now being processed for importers following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisive ruling earlier this year that deemed President Trump’s "Liberation Day" tariffs illegal. This landmark decision has opened the door for substantial financial reimbursements to major corporations such as Costco, Home Depot, FedEx, and General Motors, who are anticipating the return of significant funds paid out in tariffs over the past year. However, the path to these refunds is proving to be a complex and often inaccessible one for many small business owners in the St. Louis region and across the nation, who express concerns about the intricate application process and rules that appear to favor larger, direct importers.
Shayn Prapaisilp, whose family owns and operates Global Foods Market in Kirkwood, United Provisions in the Delmar Loop, and several Asian restaurants, articulated the challenges faced by businesses like his. "The opportunity cost for small businesses like ours to take the time to apply for them through attorneys and consultants…doesn’t make sense at the current moment," Prapaisilp stated. His family businesses experienced an estimated 30% increase in costs on products sourced from Asia, Europe, and Latin America due to these tariffs.
The imposition of these tariffs by former President Donald Trump in 2025 aimed to fundamentally reshape the United States’ trade standing. At their peak, tariffs on goods from China reached an imposing 145%. The economic ripple effect was widely felt across U.S. businesses and consumers, as increased costs were passed down the supply chain. Data from Congress’s Joint Economic Committee indicated that the average American family bore approximately $1,745 in tariff-related expenses in 2025 alone.
The Supreme Court’s Intervention and the Refund Process
The turning point came in February of this year when the U.S. Supreme Court declared President Trump’s "Liberation Day" tariffs unlawful. The Court’s ruling affirmed that the president lacked the authority to impose such tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The Trump administration had, in total, collected approximately $166 billion in emergency reciprocal tariffs, according to reports from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
In response to the Supreme Court’s decision, a government-operated refund portal was launched in late April, allowing importers to submit their refund claims online to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. As of this month, the U.S. Treasury Department reported that $81 billion has already been disbursed in tariff refunds, signaling a significant financial repatriation.
The "Importer of Record" Dilemma
Despite the substantial sums being returned, many small business owners remain skeptical about their eligibility. Prapaisilp, who also serves as the chief operating officer of Global Foods Group, noted that his businesses are situated downstream from distributors, making them unlikely recipients of direct refunds. The key determining factor for eligibility is being the "importer of record"—the entity that directly paid the tariffs to the government, even if those costs were subsequently passed on to customers.
Nithya Nagarajan, an attorney with over three decades of experience in trade, customs, and tariffs at Husch Blackwell in Washington, D.C., explained the intricacies of the refund process. "Most small businesses that buy their inventory from suppliers or distributors won’t receive any reimbursement money unless it’s stipulated in their individual contracts, because they don’t have a right to the money," Nagarajan stated. She emphasized that proactive engagement is crucial: "This is not a situation where passivity will guarantee refunds. You really do have to take ownership and responsibility for your exposure and where your money is caught up."
The implications for consumers are also significant. In a motion to dismiss a class-action lawsuit concerning tariffs, Nintendo of America argued that consumers who paid higher prices for their products were not entitled to rebates. The game maker’s stance was that price adjustments based on fluctuating costs are a standard business practice, where a company might raise prices due to increased expenses and subsequently lower them when those costs decrease.
Small Business Voices: Frustration and Resilience
The impact of the tariffs and the subsequent refund process has resonated deeply with small business owners in the St. Louis area. Trinita Rhodes, owner of Beauty Supply Refresh in Florissant, experienced price increases ranging from 15% to 35% due to the emergency tariffs. While not expecting direct refunds, Rhodes expressed frustration over a perceived lack of clear communication from suppliers and importers regarding the tariff situation. "Who are we supposed to talk to?" Rhodes questioned. "I think they’re going to depend and rely on people, especially at our small business level, just to give up and not focus on this because honestly, that’s what we’ve done… I don’t have the time to sit and check in on this every day."
Rhodes suggested that any potential price reductions from distributors might stem from a desire to clear excess inventory acquired during the tariff-induced buying frenzy, rather than a genuine pass-through of refunds. "That’s all still part of this big game that’s being played, it’s not like a genuine ‘Oh, I want to help,’" she observed. Despite these challenges, Rhodes maintained a resilient outlook: "We are looking at it as just another small hurdle. You already have business pain points, challenges and we’re still navigating. We’re still surviving."
Brian Pelletier, owner and chief chocolatier of Maplewood-based Kakao Chocolate, echoed the sentiment of being "way down the food chain on tariffs." He procures his supplies from distributors, who in turn source from suppliers and ultimately importers. Pelletier has not received any indications of refunds from his suppliers, particularly as the cost of chocolate remains elevated. He, like many others, lacks the time and resources to pursue potential reimbursements. "I didn’t apply for anything because I just assumed that it’s not accessible to businesses my size," Pelletier admitted. "Small businesses are just another casualty in this stupid stuff that’s going on… We’re second-class businesses. We’re left behind."
Larger Companies Reap Rewards
In contrast, some larger, publicly traded companies in the St. Louis region have benefited significantly from the tariff refund process. Clayton-based shoemaker Caleres has already begun to receive reimbursements. Dan Karpel, the company’s chief financial officer, informed investors during a June earnings call that Caleres is eligible for approximately $57.8 million, plus interest, in tariff payback.
Similarly, Energizer Holdings, also headquartered in Clayton, is entitled to $67.1 million in tariff refunds, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Mark LaVigne, Energizer’s President and CEO, stated in a May earnings call, "We’ve kind of had the position of the ‘right to recover’ is not in question, but the process and the timing is a little open… We’re going to continue to work that process and see if we can receive the funds as soon as possible."
Evolving Tariff Landscape and Predictability Concerns
The removal of the "Liberation Day" tariffs did not signify an end to trade-related levies. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, President Trump implemented new 10% global tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which expired in late July. These were subsequently replaced by tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on goods from 60 countries, which the White House cited as having failed to prevent imports made by forced labor.
This was followed by a 25% tariff on Brazilian exports, impacting items like farm equipment, clothing, and wood products. Further tariff announcements included a 50% tariff on most Canadian goods, slated to take effect by mid-August. Additionally, a 100% tariff on imported generic medicines was announced, scheduled to begin next August and rise to 200% by 2028.
Mamoun Benmamoun, a professor of international business at St. Louis University, suggested that the Supreme Court’s ruling on the emergency tariffs has introduced a degree of stability for small businesses. He posited that the administration likely employs these levies as negotiation tactics with trading partners rather than as a permanent policy. Benmamoun, who previously authored a piece highlighting how businesses not acting as their own importer of record would be excluded from refunds despite bearing higher costs, believes the primary concern for businesses is not necessarily the refunds themselves, but the overall predictability of the tariff system.
"I don’t think the concern is necessarily the refund, it’s more about the stability on the tariff system," Benmamoun explained. "I don’t think that companies are upset about the fact that we are using tariffs—they are more upset about the fact that we cannot predict what’s coming next. I’m sure all these businesses were not even expecting to get this refund in the first place. The damage was already done for small businesses."
Lingering Uncertainty and Individual Cases
In Belleville, Jackie James, owner of The London Tea Merchant, has received assurances from some of her suppliers that she will recoup some funds, though the timeline and exact amount remain unclear. James estimated her direct tariff payments to be around $2,000. She cited an instance where a 50-pound bag of Assam tea from eastern India, normally priced at $70.95 per pound, surged to $98 per pound due to tariffs.
James paid tariffs directly to suppliers and, in some cases, to the shipping company, creating a tangled process for reconciliation. "It is a headache and I realize it could be sometime before we see anything," James remarked. "We are fine. We were able to continue business without any negative impact even though we did absorb most of the cost and didn’t raise our prices by much at all." Her experience underscores the ongoing complexities and the personal effort required by small business owners to navigate the aftermath of these trade policies, even when facing significant cost increases.
