By Johnathan Paoli
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit delivered a landmark ruling on Friday, striking down most of President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff policies as unlawful.
In a 7–4 decision, the court found that Trump had exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law intended to regulate financial and sanctions measures during national emergencies.
While declaring that tariffs imposed under IEEPA were “unbounded in scope, amount, and duration,” the court left them in place until 14 October to give the administration time to appeal to the US Supreme Court.
This temporary reprieve prolongs uncertainty for America’s trading partners, including South Africa, one of the countries hardest hit by the measures.
The judges stressed that although Congress has delegated tariff powers to presidents through statutes such as the Trade Act of 1974 and the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or taxation.
The ruling effectively voids Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs of April 2025, which imposed a 10% baseline levy on nearly all US trading partners, as well as his “reciprocal tariffs” of up to 50% on countries accused of unfair trade practices, including South Africa.
Also struck down were tariffs tied to fentanyl trafficking that had extended duties on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China.
For South Africa, the decision comes at a critical juncture.
The US is a top-five export destination, with shipments valued at around $8.2 billion (R148 billion) in 2024.
Platinum-group metals, vehicles, citrus fruit, and wine dominate the trade relationship, with automotive exports alone previously contributing more than $1.5 billion (R27 billion) annually under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Trump’s tariff wave in 2025 has significantly disrupted these flows.
Vehicle and component exports from South Africa’s Eastern Cape hubs Gqeberha and East London have suffered sharp declines as baseline and reciprocal duties eroded competitiveness.
The agricultural sector has also felt the squeeze.
A 30% tariff on citrus exports, imposed under emergency justifications, was described by growers as “crippling,” particularly as South Africa supplies the US market during its off-season.
In the Western Cape and Limpopo, farmers have warned that sustained tariffs could make shipments unviable, threatening rural employment in packhouses and farms.
Despite the legal victory in Washington, South African exporters cannot yet bank on relief.
With tariffs legally intact until mid-October, shipments scheduled for September and early October will continue to face higher landed costs.
Automotive original equipment manufacturers and citrus exporters are likely to remain cautious, adjusting contracts, hedging against potential duty changes, or exploring diversion of cargo to Europe and the Middle East.
The perishability of fruit leaves little flexibility for re-routing, while vehicle exports can be re-timed but at significant logistical cost.
This means that, in the immediate term, South Africa will continue to absorb tariff pain even as legal developments hint at possible relief.
If the Supreme Court upholds the appeals ruling, South African vehicles and fruit regain price competitiveness in the US market from late 2025 onwards.
Automotive exports could recover toward their pre-tariff annual levels of over US$1.4 billion (R25 billion), stabilising production in the Eastern Cape.
Citrus and wine margins would improve as seasonal complementarities with U.S. consumers are restored.
If the Supreme Court reverses the ruling, the tariffs remain.
That would prolong uncertainty, forcing South African producers to continue diversifying into alternative markets.
If the outcome is partial, with some tariffs struck down but others retained under alternative statutes such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, South Africa may see mixed fortunes.
Agriculture could benefit more than manufacturing, leaving autos exposed while easing pressure on citrus and wine.
South African officials are expected to closely monitor the US Supreme Court docket in October while quietly lobbying Washington for exemptions, particularly for counter-seasonal agricultural exports.
Industry associations, including the National Association of Automobile Manufacturers of South Africa (NAAMSA) and the Citrus Growers Association, have urged the Trade, Industry and Competition department to adopt a dual strategy: pushing for relief abroad while cushioning affected exporters domestically.
Beyond South Africa, the ruling has global consequences.
Trump’s tariffs raised concerns about inflation, disrupted supply chains, and unsettled emerging-market exporters.
If the Supreme Court upholds the decision, it would reassert Congress’s role in trade policy and limit the use of emergency powers in tariff battles.
If not, it would entrench an unpredictable era of tariff diplomacy led from the White House.
For now, South Africa must operate in a holding pattern.
The appeals court has delivered a potential lifeline, but real relief depends on the Supreme Court.
If tariffs are rolled back, South Africa’s auto and citrus exporters will be the biggest winners, supporting jobs in both factory towns and farming regions.
If not, the pressure to diversify markets and secure carve-outs will intensify.
Either way, the ruling has given Pretoria and industry players a six-week window to prepare for one of the most consequential trade policy decisions of the decade.
INSIDE POLITICS