US tariffs change. Who pays the difference?

One trade framework, several possible outcomes

In its presentation updated on 27 July 2026, the Commission describes the EU–US framework as implemented from 1 July. It reports a 15% ceiling for most European exports, with exceptions and particular treatment of some steel and aluminium derivatives. Most does not mean all: this institutional summary does not establish the duty payable on a specific product. [1]

On 25 June, the Council announced final adoption of two regulations implementing tariff commitments, with safeguard and suspension mechanisms. Its press release still referred to forthcoming publication in the Official Journal. It establishes a procedural step; it should not alone be treated as proof of the date on which every measure entered into force. A particular transaction requires the applicable texts. [2]

A court ruling does not erase every invoice

On 20 February 2026, in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the US Supreme Court concluded that IEEPA did not authorise the challenged tariffs. The relevant passage of the Court’s opinion was consulted. That conclusion concerns this legal basis; it does not mean that all US tariffs have disappeared. Cornell’s explanatory commentary helps place the judgment in context but does not replace it. [3,4]

Separate the customs treatment of the transaction from the contractual allocation of its cost. Before discussing a surcharge, have the product classification, origin, relevant date and asserted regime clarified. Request supporting records for the shipment concerned. An average, an announced ceiling or the rate for a similar product cannot replace that assessment. Keep unresolved points visible until they have been checked.

Then examine pricing and adjustment clauses. Who must substantiate an additional charge? Which date provides the baseline? Are decreases treated like increases? Does the agreement address a possible refund? These questions prepare the assessment. They do not presume an automatic right to renegotiate or an automatic entitlement to suspend delivery. Those conclusions would need their own factual and legal analysis.