Podcast Summary: The Indicator from Planet Money

Episode: Trump's backup options for tariffs
Date: November 12, 2025
Hosts: Stephen Basaha and Waylon Wong (NPR)

Overview

This episode explores the implications of a recent Supreme Court hearing that could strike down President Trump's preferred mechanism for imposing tariffs—specifically, his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The hosts break down what other legal paths the Trump administration could pursue if IEEPA is ruled off-limits, diving into the strengths and limitations of alternative tariff authorities. Experts Phil Magness and Inu Manik offer important context and analysis.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why IEEPA Is Under Scrutiny

• IEEPA as Trump's “Everything Bagel” Law
  Trump has relied on IEEPA for its broad powers—no congressional oversight, any country can be targeted, and tariff rates can be set at his discretion.

  • Quote [02:28]: “The reason is that at least with how the administration is interpreting iipa, it gives the president everything he wants. From tariffs, no congressional oversight, target any country with a quick emergency declaration, rates he can change whenever into whatever he wants. You know, the everything bagel of tariff laws.” —Waylon Wong

• But IEEPA Lacks Tariff Authority

  • Quote [02:49]: “IEEPA does not even mention the word tariffs. And several of the justices pointed this out.” —Phil Magness

2. Supreme Court Math and Alternative Authorities ([00:15]–[01:05])

• The Supreme Court appears likely to block Trump’s use of IEEPA for tariffs, but other laws exist. Even Neil Katyal (opposing Trump in the case) acknowledged alternative routes during oral arguments.
  • Quote [00:51]: “I do think if you ruled as we're suggesting you do against the government, they can go and try and seek to use other authorities, whether it's 338.” —Neil Katyal

3. Backup Tariff Options

a. Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (“Smoot-Hawley Tariff”) ([03:17]–[04:43])

• Classic tariff law, infamously linked to the Great Depression.
• Allows up to 50% tariffs if another country is found discriminating against U.S. commerce.
  • Quote [03:50]: “It plunged the United States much more deeply into the Great Depression. It happens right on the heel of the stock market crash.” —Phil Magness
• Not as swift or easy to deploy as IEEPA, but powerful.
  • Quote [04:26]: “It's the closest to IEPA as a backup option...they're exploring that use.” —Phil Magness

b. Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 ([04:43]–[05:33])

• Untested law; lets the president impose tariffs quickly and without a prior investigation—but only for 150 days, beyond which Congressional authorization is required.
• Maximum tariff rate: 15%.
  • Quote [05:13]: “So it's 150 days versus 10 years. It's a very different Picture.” —Phil Magness

c. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 ([06:12]–[07:17])

• Focuses on tariffs tied to national security risks posed by imports of specific goods (e.g., steel, aluminum, autos, potentially pharmaceuticals and semiconductors).
• Requires an investigation to establish the national security threat.
  • Quote [06:48]: “One restriction, though, is that it requires an investigation showing these imports are a threat to national security.” —Waylon Wong
• No legal limit on the tariff rate or duration.
  • Quote [07:02]: “There's no restriction on how high the tariff can be.” —Stephen Basaha

d. Congressional Action: The Old-School Way ([07:17]–[08:44])

• Most direct and constitutionally robust method: President asks Congress to pass tariffs.
• Historically, presidents sought Congressional support; modern presidents often avoid this due to tariffs’ unpopularity.
  • Quote [08:22]: “Maybe members of Congress don't want to put these tariffs in place. If you're looking at the views of the American public, the tariffs just aren't that popular. And so if the president wants to enact and keep his tariffs in place, he's probably going to have to do that on his own somehow and not have Congress there to support him.” —Stephen Basaha

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Supreme Court’s Skepticism

  • Quote [00:22]: “Three of the court's conservative justices had pointed questions for the government — if just two of them joined the liberal justices against the government, well, that's the end of Trump's favorite tariffs.” —Waylon Wong

• Historical Tariff Baggage

  • Quote [03:50]: “It plunged the United States much more deeply into the Great Depression.” —Phil Magness (on Smoot-Hawley)

• Section 232’s Unlimited Power

  • Quote [07:02]: “There's no restriction on how high the tariff can be...This is why President Trump has threatened everywhere from 25 to 100% tariffs on a whole range of products.” —Stephen Basaha

• Congressional Abdication?

  • Quote [08:04]: “That would be thinking abdication.” —Waylon Wong, referencing Justice Gorsuch’s grilling of the government lawyer about executive overreach.

Important Timestamps

• Supreme Court outlook & topic intro: [00:15]–[01:05]
• IEEPA advantages & limitations: [02:18]–[02:49]
• Smoot-Hawley/Section 338: [03:17]–[04:43]
• Trade Act/Section 122: [04:43]–[05:33]
• Section 232/National security tariffs: [06:12]–[07:17]
• Congressional tariffication: [07:17]–[08:44]

Conclusion

The future of Trump’s tariff authority hinges on the Supreme Court’s decision regarding IEEPA. But as explored in this NPR episode, even if that door closes, several other—albeit more restrictive or politically fraught—statutory doors are available. The hosts and guests underscore how the presidential quest for unilateral tariff power is a recurring theme in U.S. politics, but the legal foundations shift and come with different constraints and risks.

The episode wraps up awaiting the Court's ruling, which could come the following month.