William McKinley passed 50% tariffs as Rep, but evolved to favor reciprocal trade deals as president. Campaigning in OH, 1896. Getty // Bettmann
Q1. Last week, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court ruling that struck down the Trump administration’s "reciprocal" tariffs.
Those tariffs are the baseline 10% on every country, and additional amounts for countries that have trade surpluses with the US (Laos, 40%) or are deemed uncooperative (China, 30%), or seen as a fentanyl risk (Canada, 35%), or whose domestic policies don't please the administration (Brazil, 50%).
The reciprocal tariffs average about 14%, all other US tariffs average 5%, for a total average US tariff rate of 19%. When Trump left office in 2021, the average US tariff was 3%, and about 2.5% when he reassumed office in 2025. The average tariff other countries charge the US was about 7% to start the year.
Generally speaking, do you want to see the reciprocal tariffs upheld or struck down?
Those tariffs are the baseline 10% on every country, and additional amounts for countries that have trade surpluses with the US (Laos, 40%) or are deemed uncooperative (China, 30%), or seen as a fentanyl risk (Canada, 35%), or whose domestic policies don't please the administration (Brazil, 50%).
The reciprocal tariffs average about 14%, all other US tariffs average 5%, for a total average US tariff rate of 19%. When Trump left office in 2021, the average US tariff was 3%, and about 2.5% when he reassumed office in 2025. The average tariff other countries charge the US was about 7% to start the year.
Generally speaking, do you want to see the reciprocal tariffs upheld or struck down?
(Image: Trump objects to the legal tribulations ex Pres Bolsonaro faces in Brazil, Oval Office, 2019. Getty // Chris Kleponis)
overall
custom
male
female
rep
ind
dem
18-29
30-44
45-64
65+
Want the reciprocal tariffs upheld
40%
52%
31%
91%
24%
2%
26%
42%
47%
35%
40%
Struck down
56%
45%
63%
8%
70%
92%
63%
52%
51%
63%
56%
Not sure
4%
2%
6%
1%
4%
7%
9%
6%
2%
2%
4%
Don't care
0%
1%
0%
0%
3%
0%
2%
0%
0%
0%
Q2. The original May 2025 ruling striking down the tariffs, by the US Court of Intl Trade, did so on two grounds: Trade deficits do not rise to the level of emergency required by the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) Trump had invoked, and the Constitution reserves the authority to impose such broad tariffs for Congress, not the president.
In last week's 7-4 appellate ruling that upheld the lower court ruling, the justices agreed that the Constitution prohibits the president from using broad tariff authority, and added that the IEEPA was not intended to be used for tariffs and had never been used for tariffs in the past.
Previous presidents to use IEEPA include Carter (1980) to freeze Iranian assets in response to the Hostage Crisis, Clinton (1990) to sanction Iraq after it invaded Kuwait, and Biden (2022) to sanction Russia after it invaded Ukraine.
The case is nearly certain to go to the Supreme Court — will the Court allow or strike down the reciprocal tariffs?
In last week's 7-4 appellate ruling that upheld the lower court ruling, the justices agreed that the Constitution prohibits the president from using broad tariff authority, and added that the IEEPA was not intended to be used for tariffs and had never been used for tariffs in the past.
Previous presidents to use IEEPA include Carter (1980) to freeze Iranian assets in response to the Hostage Crisis, Clinton (1990) to sanction Iraq after it invaded Kuwait, and Biden (2022) to sanction Russia after it invaded Ukraine.
The case is nearly certain to go to the Supreme Court — will the Court allow or strike down the reciprocal tariffs?
(Image: Carter visiting the Shah called Iran "an island of stability", Tehran, Jan 1978. Getty // AFP)
overall
custom
male
female
rep
ind
dem
18-29
30-44
45-64
65+
Allow
53%
50%
54%
67%
41%
43%
55%
46%
60%
46%
53%
Strike down
14%
14%
13%
8%
19%
17%
6%
13%
14%
17%
14%
Neither (kick it back to lower courts)
17%
19%
16%
9%
20%
23%
21%
21%
9%
23%
17%
Not sure
17%
17%
17%
16%
20%
16%
18%
19%
16%
14%
17%
Don't care
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Q3. Some suggest that if the tariffs are struck down, the government would be told to return the approximately $160b collected thus far back to the importers that have paid the tariffs. These importers range from mom and pop retailers to Amazon and Walmart.
If the tariffs are stuck down, would you like to see the importers get back the reciprocal tariffs they paid?
If the tariffs are stuck down, would you like to see the importers get back the reciprocal tariffs they paid?
(Image: FishUSA, wholesaler/retailer of fishing tackle, one of 5 small business plaintiffs in the tariff case via Facebook)
overall
custom
male
female
rep
ind
dem
18-29
30-44
45-64
65+
Yes
44%
36%
49%
12%
49%
69%
41%
42%
40%
54%
44%
No
42%
51%
35%
79%
36%
12%
38%
42%
45%
38%
42%
Not sure
12%
9%
16%
6%
13%
18%
11%
14%
14%
7%
12%
Don't care
2%
4%
0%
3%
3%
1%
10%
1%
0%
2%
For the non-reciprocal tariffs, such as levies on steel and aluminum imports, Trump has invoked a different statute, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 which allows a president to adjust imports, through tariffs if the Dept of Commerce determines those imports pose a threat to national security.
When the lower court struck down Trump's reciprocal tariffs, 55% approved, 41% disapproved, 41% believed the appeals process would ultimately uphold the ruling, 38% thought it would be reversed
76% thought the next Democratic president would remove the tariffs should the still be in place, 22% thought the next GOP president would
July 2025
57% believe consumers will bear most of the cost of tariffs,18% say foreign suppliers, 8% say importers, 11% say all equally.
Topics
Entities in this poll: (rate and comment)
