Novo Next-Generation Obesity Shot Falls Short of Lilly Rival

Summary

---

Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Summary

Episode Title: Novo Next-Generation Obesity Shot Falls Short of Lilly Rival
Date: February 23, 2026
Hosts: Paul Sweeney, Scarlett Fu
Main Guests: Sam Fazeli (Pharma), Michael Halen (Restaurants), Mary Ross Gilbert (Retail), Holly (Litigation Analyst)

---

Episode Overview

This episode of Bloomberg Intelligence delves into competitive developments in pharma, the retail impact of tariffs, Domino’s Pizza’s performance, and the legal landscape after a Supreme Court ruling on tariffs. Anchored by Paul Sweeney and Scarlett Fu, Bloomberg’s in-house experts unravel recent headlines affecting major sectors, focusing first on Novo Nordisk’s disappointing new obesity drug results when compared to Eli Lilly, and later transitioning to retail/restaurant earnings and tariff litigation changes.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Pharma Update: Novo Nordisk vs. Eli Lilly in Obesity Drugs

Guest: Sam Fazeli, Director of Research, Global Industries & Senior Pharma Analyst
[Timestamps: 02:01 – 05:41]

• Novo Nordisk’s New Drug Falters:

  • Novo’s next-gen obesity shot, “cagri-sema,” showed 20.2% mean weight loss after 84 weeks, falling short of Eli Lilly’s rival drug “tirzepatide” with 23.6% [02:01].
  • Quote:

    “The trial was set up…to test one drug against the other and it failed. Right. …they do the number of patients to prove that cagri-sema is as good as tirzepatide. It didn’t prove that.” — Sam Fazeli [02:52]

• Investment/Economic Impact:

  • Novo shares dropped 16%, underperforming for the fifth straight day [02:01].
  • Eli Lilly now has a marketing advantage:

    “It’s handed the gift to Eli Lilly…they should be able to sell as much as they can make.” — Sam Fazeli [03:43]

• Why Did Novo Lose Ground?

  • Organizational culture wasn’t blamed; rather, strategic choices and a bit of “luck” for Lilly played key roles [04:19].
  • Quote:

    "Lilly took a calculated risk…Nobody thought GIP would do what it did. So they were lucky. ... Novo never went down that road, even since 2018 when we all saw the first data run." — Sam Fazeli [04:19]

  • Novo chose amylin combinations, while Lilly supercharged with the dual incretin approach (GLP-1 + GIP).

2. Merck Divides Its Pharma Business

[Timestamps: 05:41 – 07:45]

• Strategic Move:

  • Merck is splitting its pharma unit for more focused R&D and to manage patent expiry on its biggest seller.
  • AstraZeneca’s successful two-division approach cited as a parallel [05:58].
  • No plans for a public spinoff; it’s an internal reorganization [07:05].

• Significance for Oncology:

  • If Keytruda’s patents last longer (potentially until 2033), the oncology division stands to benefit significantly [07:05].

---

3. Domino’s Pizza: Value, Innovation, and Franchise Relations

Guest: Michael Halen, Senior Restaurant and Food Service Analyst
[Timestamps: 08:47 – 12:27]

• Performance Highlights:

  • Domino’s stock outperformed with a 2.4% rise, driven by better-than-expected sales and innovations like stuffed crust pizza [08:47].
  • Expanded on DoorDash & Uber Eats while retaining its own delivery network, driving economic efficiencies [09:37].

• Economics of Delivery:

  • In-house delivery is at least half as expensive as third-party delivery for Domino’s [10:45].
  • Quote:

    “For chains that already have a delivery network like Domino’s, it’s really a no brainer.” — Michael Halen [10:45]

• Franchise Relations & Pricing:

  • Domino’s increased supply prices and fees, but mitigates tension by sharing profits monthly with franchisees [11:33].
  • Expected low single-digit commodity inflation, with half of supply chain profit increases shared [11:33].

---

4. Tariff Relief and Apparel Retailers

Guest: Mary Ross Gilbert, Senior Equity Analyst (Retail)
[Timestamps: 12:57 – 18:16]

• Supreme Court Tariff Ruling:

  • Partial relief after the court struck down certain reciprocal tariffs, equating to ~25% savings for apparel retailers (20–50 bps margin boost) [13:29].
  • Retailers have mitigated tariff effects via supplier negotiation, diversifying out of China, and selective price hikes [13:29].

• Complexity of Rebates:

  • Prospect of tariff rebates is seen as non-viable due to administrative complexity [15:26].

  • Net impact figures:

    • Gap (100–110 bps), Abercrombie (170 bps), American Eagle (200–225 bps) per year [16:57].

  • Quote:

    “I can’t imagine that a rebate process could actually go into effect. ...I think we just have to let whatever tariffs were already enforced and the funds received.” — Mary Ross Gilbert [15:26]

---

5. Unpacking the Supreme Court Ruling on Tariffs

Guest: Holly, Bloomberg Intelligence Litigation Analyst
[Timestamps: 19:47 – 25:46]

• What’s Left to Litigate:

  • Now attention turns to whether companies can get refunds for tariffs already paid—potentially via Customs protests or lawsuits [20:15].
  • Ongoing tariffs (e.g., steel, autos, “301” China tariffs) are unaffected.

• De Minimis Exemption Unanswered:

  • The status of low-value import exemptions remains an open legal question [21:04].

• Practicality for Importers:

  • It’s unclear if, or how quickly, companies will pursue refunds—many may opt out due to deadlines or limited gains [22:59].

• Major Supreme Court Finding:

  • The Court ruled that only Congress can authorize taxes/tariffs; the President’s powers under the statute were too vague [24:38].
  • Quote:

    “They said that this statute doesn’t allow tariffs at all. So any tariffs that is imposed via this statute are probably going to be struck. ...a tariff is a tax and only Congress has the power to tax.” — Holly [24:38]

  • “Well-settled” authorities like Section 232/301 are more legally secure, so newer tariffs may withstand future challenges.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “It’s handed the gift to Eli Lilly…they should be able to sell as much as they can make.” — Sam Fazeli [03:43]
• “For chains that already have a delivery network like Domino’s, it’s really a no brainer.” — Michael Halen [10:45]
• “I can’t imagine that a rebate process could actually go into effect. ...That could turn into a nightmare.” — Mary Ross Gilbert [15:26]
• “They said that this statute doesn’t allow tariffs at all. So any tariff that is imposed via this statute are probably going to be struck.” — Holly [24:38]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [02:01] Novo Nordisk vs. Eli Lilly Obesity Shot Results & Market Impact
• [05:41] Merck’s Pharma Unit Split
• [08:47] Domino’s Pizza Sales, Strategy & Franchise Management
• [12:57] Tariff Relief Ruling & Retail Margins
• [19:47] Tariff Litigation Outlook Post-Supreme Court Ruling

---

Tone and Style

The discussion is analytical and data-driven, with some lighthearted banter among the hosts. The tone remains professional, focused on the investment and operational implications for companies in pharma, restaurants, and retail, with accessible explanations for intricate legal and economic issues.

---

For more Bloomberg Intelligence insights, listen live weekdays at 10am ET or on demand wherever you get your podcasts.

Transcript

[Paul Sweeney]

At Oppenheimer, we're proven because we're grounded in discipline. For 145 years, we've been building and protecting wealth through every market cycle with precision, clarity and the courage to think boldly beyond the moment. This is what market tested legacy looks like for this generation and the next. Put the power of Oppenheimer thinking to work for you. Wealth management, Capital markets, Investment banking

[David Gura]

the news doesn't stop on the weekends.

[Scarlett Fu]

Context changes constantly and now Bloomberg is the place to stay on top of it all.

[David Gura]

Hi, I'm David Gura. Join us every Saturday and Sunday for the new Bloomberg this weekend.

[Scarlett Fu]

I'm Christina Raffini. We'll bring you the latest headlines in depth analysis and big interviews, all the stories that hit home on your days off. And I'm Lisa Mateo. Watch and listen to Bloomberg this weekend for thoughtful, enlightening conversations about business, lifestyle, people and culture.

[David Gura]

On Saturday morning mornings, we put the past week's events into context, examining what happened in the markets and the world.

[Scarlett Fu]

Then on Sundays, we speak with journalists, columnists and key political figures to prepare you for the week ahead. Join us as soon as you wake up and bring us with you wherever your weekend plans take you.

[David Gura]

Watch us on Bloomberg Television, listen on

[Paul Sweeney]

Bloomberg Radio, stream the show live on

[David Gura]

the Bloomberg Business app, or listen to

[Scarlett Fu]

the podcast that's Bloomberg this weekend. Saturdays and Sundays starting at 7am Eastern on February 28th. Make us part of your weekend routine on Bloomberg Television Radio and wherever you get your podcasts.

[Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Host]

Bloomberg Audio Studios Podcasts Radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at 10am Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube

[Scarlett Fu]

within the pharma space, Novo Nord Risk, the ADRs American depository receipts down by double digits, in fact lower for a fifth day, losing about 16% today. And this is after its next generation obesity shot, Kagari Sema delivered less weight loss than Eli Lilly's rival treatment. Let's bring in Sam Fazeli. He is our director of research for global Industries and senior pharmaceuticals analyst on what's happening here. And Sam, I mean, we've been keeping a close eye on Novo Nordisk because it was a pioneer in weight loss drugs. But it appears that it has really fallen behind Eli Lilly and continues to fall behind even with this next gen obesity shot. The data shows a 20.2% weight loss after 84 weeks compared with Eli Lilly's 23.6% weight loss. I mean, that sounds like it's pretty small differences. Is that an unqualified failure?

[Sam Fazeli]

Well, the trial was set up, Scarlett, to test one drug against the other and it failed. Right. So that's you. You know, when they start these trials, they have a hypothesis, we think our drug is as good as this one. And they said hypothesis up. They do the number of patients to prove that cagrosema is as good as tirzepatite. It didn't prove that. What it does. I mean, I don't really care about these 23%, 25%. A lot of people are happy with the weight loss they get and they maintain the weight loss. That's what they care about. This rapid weight loss, a very large weight loss, may matter for much more obese patients potentially. But the reality is this is handed the gift to Eli Lilly. Now, once this data is published, they can go out there and say, well, look, look, we've beaten. We go v, we've beaten the next generation drug. They've got at least on weight loss, on the surface, what happens to muscle loss and all that sort of stuff will come out, or fat versus visceral fat, etc. We've beaten them is the drug to take and they should be able to sell as much as they can make. So. Which is kind of what's been going on already.

[Scarlett Fu]

All right, thank you for explaining that. It's the relative effectiveness and in this case giving Eli Lilly an easy win. Why is it that Novo Nordisk has lost so much ground and its edge to Eli Lilly? Does it come down to the science of it or is there something culturally at the company that's led to this underperformance?

[Sam Fazeli]

Yeah, I can't speak to the culture, to be honest with you. I mean, this has been a phenomenal story for years, right? They were the pioneers in obesity, they in diabetes. With this class of drugs they brought for obesity. They have a lot to applaud for them, them for. The point is, all these companies take calcul back in 2015, 16, Lilly took a calculated risk to try this new molecule, a GLP1 attached to it, a GIP. Let's forget what they are, but they're two different ways of modulating the system. And nobody thought that GIP would do what it did. So they were lucky. They threw the dice and they got the right answer. Or they just had a very clever biology person said, I disagree with the rest of the world. GRP will do this. So they ended up with a supercharged product and Then of course, Novo never went down that road, even since 2018 when we all saw the first data run.

[David Gura]

Wow.

[Sam Fazeli]

There's a whole bunch of other companies who did this. We have a list that we keep. Not Novo. They put their dice or they put their money on this combination Amylin. A lot of people have too, but. So it hasn't worked out. It's just the way that drug development goes. In six years time you might find that some mechanism they've got starts to beat what Lilly has. But we don't see that at the minute and we haven't got any sight on those things.

[Paul Sweeney]

Karen from the Jersey Shore writes in and says she's a huge fan of Wegovy. Worked just great. Sam. Here we go. Merck splitting its main pharmaceutical unit in two as it prepares for the approaching patent expiry of its best selling drug. What's going on here?

[Sam Fazeli]

Yeah, so there's one other company that does this and it's been one of the. You plot the share chart and you go, wow, that's pretty cool. And that's AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca has for a long time had a division. A person is responsible for oncology business and responsible for oncology drug development. That's always been there. I think they recognized they had assets and that oncology drug development is quite different to every other area. Here's Merkna doing the same thing. Is it suggesting that they. Because of the number of drugs that they've got coming, some in oncologists, some elsewhere, it's better to have two units that look after these two things, especially in the R and D side. I think they're doing the right thing. I don't think it tells us much about separating the reporting lines and all that sort of stuff or the P and L look of things. I think it's much more to do with making sure that they're going to get the best chance in the specialty pharma, as they call, and oncology. And I think that's the right call to make by them.

[Scarlett Fu]

Does it lead to a formal spinoff where you might have two publicly traded companies or is this more like an internal division within the company?

[Sam Fazeli]

Yeah, I doubt this is about a spin off. I mean, who knows? I'm not in the board of Merck listening to the. Or even a fly on the wall. And the thing is, I don't think you need to go that far. I think this just reorganizing the business in a way that works best for the pipeline. And I think that's the right thing to do, especially if my colleague Aud Gerstbacker and Renee Hamilton are right that actually the keytruda that people think is going to expire in terms of their patents in 2029 has another extra three years of cash flow or four years of cash flow to 20. Remember, it's the biggest drug in the world. If they're right in their patent analysis. You know, this really puts that oncology business in supercharged mode.

[Paul Sweeney]

Yep. Sam, thanks so much for joining us. Appreciate it. Sam Pazelli, director of research for Global Industries and senior pharma analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. He's based in London, where it's not snowing. Stay with us. More from Bloomberg Intelligence coming up after this.

[Scarlett Fu]

Bloomberg Daybreak is your best way to get informed first thing in the morning, right in your podcast feed. Hi, I'm Karen Moscow.

[David Gura]

And I'm Nathan Hager. Each morning we're up early putting together the latest episode of Bloomberg Daybreak US Edition. It's your daily 15 minute podcast on the latest in global news, politics and international relations.

[Scarlett Fu]

Listen to the Bloomberg Daybreak US Edition podcast each morning for the stories that matter with the context you need.

[David Gura]

Find us on Apple, Spotify or anywhere you listen.

[Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Host]

You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live weekdays at 10am Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube.

[Scarlett Fu]

One of the big gainers in today's trade, or maybe big is an overstatement, but given that we're seeing sizable losses in the equity indexes, I'd say a 2.4% move higher is kind of, kind of big. Right? Domino's Pizza dpz, is the ticker moving higher Today the company reported a bigger than expected rise in comparable sales. So let's bring in Michael Halen. He is our senior restaurant and food service analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. And Michael, Domino's provides a lot of value to people. You see those ads for buy one, get one free, and they've added stuffed pizza crust to their repertoire. So their people are getting value and they're getting something, I guess, in terms of food value as well. Talk to us about Domino's Pizza and the strategy here.

[David Gura]

Yeah. So, you know, to your point, they, they are outperforming the market pretty handily today. It was, it was a pretty sol solid report. Same store sales topped expectations. You know, they're doing it with a few different things. Yes, the food innovation stuffed crust isn't groundbreaking, but it's something that their national competitors had already offered. Right. And so they're trying to take a piece of that market here in the US Value. To your point, right. They're number one pizza player here in the United States. They have more stores than anyone else and they have that scale. So they are able to offer price points that their competitors really can't match and, and keep it profitable for the franchisees, you know. And then another big part of the strategy here has been the DoorDash and UberEats expansion. Right. So they're still delivering the food themselves, but, but they're posting their, their food on the third party aggregator sites and that's been been a big boost to their business as well.

[Paul Sweeney]

What's the difference in economics, Mike, to using one of their own drivers versus a third party like a doordash?

[David Gura]

Yeah, it's a big difference, Paul. It's, it probably costs a big player like Domino's. It would probably, you know, for them to deliver it themselves, it probably cost them half of what it would cost, maybe even less than half of what it would cost. So it makes a huge difference on the delivery economics, you know. So for the chains that already have a delivery network like Domino's, it's really a no brainer.

[Scarlett Fu]

One thing that Domino's did over the last quarter was make more money by selling more food to its stores, charging higher prices for ingredients, collecting more fees from the franchise operators for advertising and royalties. That's good for the bottom line. But does it sour relationships with franchise operators? I mean, how does that, how does Domino's manage that going forward?

[David Gura]

Yeah, that's, that's a good question, Scarlett. You know, franchisee relationships is crucial in this business because they're going to the ones, you know, forking up the capital to build new stores. Right. So you want to keep them happy with strong same store sales, you know, 3% plus almost 4% gain keeps them happy, you know, in terms of the supply chain. So, you know, Domino's owns the supply chain. They want to make sure that their, their franchisees aren't skimping on quality. Right. And so what they do to make this palatable for their franchisees is they actually split the revenues on a monthly basis via checks with their franchisees. Right. And so yes, prices are going up, expected to go up low single digits this year for commodities and in the supply chain. Right. But they give back half of that, half of their profit increase back to their franchisees in a sharing agreement.

[Paul Sweeney]

All right, Mike, thanks so much for joining us, as always. Our go to voice on all things in the restaurant business. Mike Kaelin covers the restaurant for Bloomberg Intelligence. Stay with us. More from Bloomberg Intelligence coming up after this.

[Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Host]

You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at 10am Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube.

[Paul Sweeney]

Apparel retails, retailers, they win some tailor relief, tariff relief on Supreme Court ruling. So how about that? So maybe some of these apparel retailers will get a little bit of a break here as they've been bearing some of the brunt of the tariffs here. Mary Ross Gilbert joins us, senior equity analyst. She covers the retail space for Bloomberg Intelligence. She's out there in LA where it is not snowing, I can tell you that. Mary, thanks so much for joining us here. Supreme Court ruling striking down some of those reciprocal tariffs. What's it mean for the retailers that you cover?

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

Yes. So Paul, what this means is that we're going to get some relief. We're not getting complete relief from tariffs. So when you think about it, just before Trump over the weekend on Saturday, I mean, first on Friday, he said he was going to exercise his ability to enforce Section 122 of the 1974 tariff code, and you can go up to about 15%. So on Friday, he announced 10% immediately, or actually it was in three days, and then Saturday said immediately 15%. So really what that means is you're going to get about a 25% savings from the tariff rates that these apparel retailers were paying just prior to this news that came out on Saturday. And so we estimate that the savings could be anywhere from 20 to 50 basis points, maybe a little more than that. And many of these apparel companies have been putting in mitigation measures. And of course, the number one being, well, first of all, diversifying away from China, so they have a lot less exposure there. And then also their suppliers absorbing, let's say, about half of the tariff impact. And then, of course, price increases. And that's being passed on to the consumer. And it's done that very selectively. And so that's why the savings, the net savings is going to be somewhere around 20 to 50 basis points. And just to give you an example, what companies have disclosed is on an annual basis, they were looking for a net tariff impact, again, net of these mitigation measures to be somewhere in that sort of hundred to 200 basis points in that range.

[Paul Sweeney]

So I guess the interesting here because some of these retailers have in fact been Right. Kind of in the crosshairs of the tariff debate, have any of the companies that you cover, they talked about whether they would even think about getting tariff rebates, if that's a possibility?

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

Paul, that's a really good question. It's. I can't imagine that a rebate process could actually go into effect. It would be a nightmare to try to go back and recover these funds. It just seems, I don't know, I think it's too complex. I think we just have to let whatever tariffs were already enforced and the funds received. I certainly hope that doesn't happen because that could turn out to be a very expensive nightmare trying to recover those funds. And then the idea would be, well, should it go back to the consumer once, you know, if companies were to recover it?

[Paul Sweeney]

So, yeah, it's very complex. So given that, I mean, we've had, you know, roughly a year of these tariffs, is there a kind of a ballpark that you've arrived at, or the companies have just disclosed about how much they took into their margin versus maybe how much the importer took into its margin, the consumer took into its margin there?

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

Yeah, it's very. It's complex to say specifically, but I think what we were trying to allude to earlier, that 100 to 200 basis points is what these companies are effectively taking in on an annual basis based on commentary from the third quarter earnings call. So they might have gotten hit more or less, depending on the retailer that we're talking about and goods that were sourced during various times.

[Holly]

Right.

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

Because if you had some retailers that sourced fall and winter during that time, when China had a tariff that was well over 100%, then that merchandise and their margin was affected very much so because they had already taken delivery of that product. So really, it depends on the retailer. And then you have a couple of retailers, for example, Aritzia and Ralph Lauren, both of those companies have been posting margin increases all year, and so they've been able to benefit from strong sales. What that means is that they're able to leverage fixed costs and get incremental benefits there and also pass on price increases. And so even though they've been negatively impacted by tariffs, you're not seeing that net effect. Whereas most of the other retailers, you have seen margins dented and they've disclosed every quarter what the tariff impact has been, net mitigation, memory measures, and also they'll provide sort of the gross impact. So like I said, I would say the net 100 to 200 basis points. Think about GAAP, Abercrombie Gap's at the lower level. They said annual impact about 100 to 110 basis points. Abercrombie and Fitch about 170. And American Eagle, they were sort of harder, 200 to 225 basis points.

[Paul Sweeney]

All right, very good. Mary Ross Gilbert, thank you so much for joining us. Mary Ross Gilbert, she's a senior equity analyst. She covers the retail space for Bloomberg Intelligence and she's located out there in la, California office. Stay with us. More from Bloomberg Intelligence coming up after this.

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

You can get the news whenever you

[Holly]

want it with Bloomberg News now.

[Scarlett Fu]

I'm Amy Morris. And I'm Karen Moscow, here to tell you about our new On Demand news report delivered right to your podcast feed. Bloomberg News now is a short 5 minute audio report on the day's Times stories. Episodes are published throughout the day with the latest information and data to keep you informed.

[Holly]

Yes, there are other products like this from a variety of news organizations, but they usually rerun their radio newscasts throughout the day. That's not what we do. We create customized episodes that can only be heard on Bloomberg News now.

[Scarlett Fu]

And we don't wait an hour to publish breaking news. When news breaks. We'll have an episode up on your podcast feed within minutes. So you're always getting the latest stories and developments.

[Holly]

Get the reporting and the context from Bloomberg's 3,000 journalists and analysts. We're all over the world. Listen to the latest from Bloomberg News now on Apple, Spotify or anywhere you listen.

[Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Host]

You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live weekdays at 10am Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube.

[Paul Sweeney]

Friday we had the Supreme Court strike down some of President Trump's reciprocal tariffs. We've got some new ones. They're back 10, no, 15% coming back. Are these things going to be litigated? I have no idea. Holly from She's a Bloomberg Intelligence litigation analyst. Holly, thanks so much for joining us here. We had the Supreme Court ruling here. What's left to be litigated, if any? Because there's still lots and lots and lots of tariffs out there.

[Holly]

So what's left to be litigated probably is what happens with all the tariffs that have been collected? Like do do the importers have to go who want refunds have to go to the Court of International Trade to seek refunds? Do they have to file lawsuits or can they just file some kind of application with the customers Border Protection Agency so that's a question that's still outstanding. It doesn't affect the tariffs that Trump imposed via section 232, which were on things like aluminum, steel, and auto. And auto parts. And it doesn't affect 301 tariffs that were imposed in 2018.

[Scarlett Fu]

Okay, so that's, that's where it stands on the main tariffs. What about the de minimis exemption? Explain to us how that works and whether that's affected by the Supreme Court's ruling.

[Holly]

So the de minimis exemption is not necessarily affected. It's an exemption. It's not a tariff. So it's an exemption to a tariff. So we don't know if the, if the ruling means that the, that the court. That he cannot remove any. He cannot remove an exemption to a tariff. So it's not necessarily the case that. So the Supreme Court didn't answer that question. In other words, that ruling doesn't answer the question. But I think there's a case that's playing out now at the International Trade Court. That ruling was. That case was state, pending appeal of the Supreme Court ruling. And so what I think happens is I think that the court will say that he probably can't remove that exemption via executive order. It probably has to be some kind of regulation. And it's not even clear that, that, that his, his trade secretary promulgates. It's not even clear that he can remove it at all, because there's some question as to whether that exemption is mandatory based on the language of the statute.

[Paul Sweeney]

If I want to get a refund to some tariffs that I've paid, how do I do that?

[Holly]

So normally what you do is the, what happens is the goods come in, you, you estimate what you think you owe. The Customs Border Protection Agency decides whether that's correct. That's called liquidation. If that amount is finalized and it liquidates, you have 180 days to protest what the customs agency says you owe. So that's normally how you get a refund. You file a protest. And they think that that might be the procedure used here, but nobody really knows because this has never happened before.

[Paul Sweeney]

Well, if I'm, if I'm Nike or something like that, I mean, do I say you owe me hundreds of millions of dollars or something like that? Is that how we think it's going to go?

[Sam Fazeli]

Or.

[Paul Sweeney]

They are. They actually are. People actually are companies actually go through that, the work of doing this?

[Holly]

Well, you know, it probably depends on the amount that they think that they overpaid. And there are also, you know, other issues that they may take into account. So, you know, it's not clear whether all companies will seek refunds. There are probably some companies that say it's not worth it for them to try, so they're going to waive their right to do that. Some of them may be time barred from doing that by virtue of the deadlines of protest. So we don't expect the full amount that's been collected to be refunded.

[Scarlett Fu]

Holly, what will you be watching for and listening for when the president speaks in his State of the Union tomorrow? When it comes to tariffs, I mean, he's going to say a lot of things and we know that a lot of what he said he doesn't necessarily it's more in the spirit of what he wants. But specifically when it comes to the legality of some of this stuff, what will you be listening for?

[Holly]

Well, we want to see what, like what you said, we want to see what he says because what he wants has to be justified by some kind of legal authority. And so we want to see, you know, what he's aiming to do. And then we'll try to figure out how he's going to do that. And so there are various that he has and he's already imposed terrorists via Section 122, but those are time limited for 150 days. So we'll probably he'll probably use other authorities. And so that's something we're we're going to look at is, you know, what is he trying to do? Can he use the other authorities to do that?

[Paul Sweeney]

Holly, was there anything or I guess what was most notable to you from the Supreme Court ruling on Friday?

[Holly]

I think that was what was really striking was that they said that this statute doesn't allow tariffs at all. So any tariff that is imposed via this statute are probably going to be struck. So tariffs on India and Brazil are going to be struck. And what they said was a tariff is a tax and so only Congress has the power to tax. And if they are going to delegate that power, they have to be very, very clear when they do that. And, you know, using this vague language in the statute, you know, wasn't enough. And so that I think that was very interesting. And the other the other thing to note is that, you know, they did talk about other tariffing powers he has. So it may be the case that, you know, and we think that those tariffing powers rest on, you know, better legal footing. So the challenges will be harder to the new tariffs he imposes. If he's going to use you know, well settled authorities like Section 232 of the Trade Expansion act or Section 301 of the Trade act, which both of which he's used before. So challenges will probably be harder.

[Scarlett Fu]

All right, good stuff. Holly from. Thank you so much. Bloomberg Intelligence litigation analysts on how President Trump's 15% tariff will likely stick. But if it doesn't, he's going to have several options. Holly mentioned section 232, there's section 201, there's section 301, there's section 122, there's section 338. All these things take time, so they can't be imposed instantly. They require an investigation. And in the case of section 232, I believe, oh, no, section 122, there's like a, you know, a time span, a time limit of only 15 months.

[Paul Sweeney]

Months, right.

[Scarlett Fu]

Which seems like a lot of work to get a temporary tariff.

[Paul Sweeney]

Yeah. I guess my question, I ask a lot of folks, particularly on the political side like Henrietta Trez. Clearly this is polling. Tariffs in general is polling very poorly. Affordability, broadly defined is, is polling as a very key issue. It just, it's almost mind boggling that the president continues to double down and triple down on this whole tariff issue. But it is certainly key to his trade policy, to parts of his economic policy, his geopolitical policy. Yep. But I would just, if I were his advisor, I'd say but it's coming at a big cost, Mr. President, in terms of and we've got the midterm elections coming up and we got some people that are nervous, but I'm sure those discussions are being had.

[Scarlett Fu]

But well, he's a second term president so maybe it's their problem, it's someone else's problem, not his problem.

[Paul Sweeney]

Exactly right.

[Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast Host]

This is the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast available on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get. Your podcasts listen live each weekday 10am to noon Eastern on Bloomberg.com, the iHeartRadio app, TuneIn and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live Every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg Terminal.

[Scarlett Fu]

I'm Carol Massar.

[David Gura]

And I'm Tim Stenovec inviting you to join us for the Bloomberg businessweek daily podcast.

[Scarlett Fu]

Now every day we are bringing you reporting from from the magazine that helps global leaders stay ahead.

[David Gura]

We've got insight on the people, the companies and trends that are shaping today's complex economy.

[Scarlett Fu]

That's right, Tim. We're all over global business, finance, tech news, all as it is happening in real time. And we've got complete coverage of the US Market.

[Mary Ross Gilbert]

Close.

[Scarlett Fu]

Got to say, basically, if it impacts financial markets, if it impacts companies, if it's impacting trends and narratives that are out there, we are on it.

[David Gura]

We also have a lot of fun doing it. Bloomberg businessweek also brings you the analysis behind the headlines through conversations with our expert guests.

[Scarlett Fu]

And we are doing this all live each weekday. And then we bring you the best analysis in our daily podcast search for

[David Gura]

Bloomberg business week on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen.

[Scarlett Fu]

Check it out on your way home from work to catch up on the conversations that you miss during the business

[Holly]

day and on the weekend.

[David Gura]

Check it out for a complete wrap up of your business week.

[Scarlett Fu]

That's the Bloomberg Business Week daily podcast. I'm Carol Massar.

[David Gura]

And I'm Tim Stanovec. Subscribe today wherever you get your podcasts.