At some point over the weekend, economist Justin Wolfers posted on X: “In just 25 hours, the U.S. has had four tariff regimes.”
That dizzying pace captures the reality small businesses are facing. Hours after the Supreme Court ruled on Friday, February 20, that President Trump lacked the authority to impose the sweeping tariffs he had enacted, the administration announced a new global tariff of 10%. The following day, a 15% tariff policy was introduced under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which limits those duties to 150 days unless Congress extends them.
In other words, the tariff rollercoaster isn’t ending anytime soon.
And small businesses continue to shoulder much of the burden. Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that roughly 90% of tariff costs fall on U.S. businesses and consumers.
Adam Rizza, President and Founder of Sunscape Eyewear Inc., imports products for wholesale and retail distribution. He told me the initial Supreme Court decision felt like “a positive step for small businesses. At the very least, it provides some stability and allows us to plan ahead with more certainty.” But he also noted that in the past, added costs have been difficult to recover. “We absorbed a portion of the increases and passed the rest along. In the end, U.S. consumers still felt the impact.”
To gain more clarity on what comes next, I spoke with three experts who closely track small business trends and finance:
- Ben Johnston, COO of Kapitus, a specialty finance company serving SMBs
- Karen Kerrigan, President and CEO of the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
- Kyle Cooper, SVP and GM of Checking and Payments at Bluevine, a large digital banking platform.
The interviews have been edited for length and clarity.
Rieva Lesonsky: What is the immediate impact of the Supreme Court’s decision on small businesses that have been absorbing higher import costs due to tariffs?
Ben Johnston: Given the administration’s aggressive response to the Supreme Court’s decision, it seems unlikely that small businesses will see tariff relief anytime soon. The President quickly moved to maintain tariffs using other provisions of the Trade Act of 1974, including a 10% global tariff under Section 122 and the potential for additional tariffs through Section 301 investigations.
The end result is continued volatility in U.S. trade policy, with little immediate relief for small businesses.
Karen Kerrigan: In the short run, uncertainty and cost pressures will persist as the President shifts to alternative legal paths to maintain broader tariffs. Over the mid- to long-term, there could be some relief given the 150-day limit tied to the current authority, which would require Congressional approval to extend—a step I don’t believe Congress is inclined to take.
However, the President has other avenues to pursue tariffs and appears committed to expanding those efforts. We should expect new legal challenges from the President’s shift to new strategies. And legal uncertainty is never good for business planning.
Kyle Cooper: The immediate impact is psychological. For many small businesses, tariffs have steadily eroded margins, forcing owners to either raise prices or absorb higher costs. The ruling signals potential relief, but the path to refunds or meaningful cost reductions remains unclear.
What we do know is that access to capital is top of mind. Bluevine’s most recent Business Owner Success Survey found that 63% of small business owners plan to seek financing in 2026—up significantly from last year. Any refund or cost recovery would likely be reinvested quickly to stabilize operations or revive growth plans that have been put on hold.
Lesonsky: How could this ruling influence pricing pressures and inflation in the months ahead, particularly for small retailers and manufacturers?
Johnston: The President has made it clear that tariffs remain central to his trade strategy, and that suggests meaningful relief for small businesses is unlikely in the near term. While different legal avenues may change the structure or duration of specific tariffs, the broader strategy appears intact.
For small retailers and manufacturers, that means pricing pressure is likely to persist. Businesses may continue to absorb higher input costs or pass them along to customers, keeping margin pressure in place and limiting the likelihood of a rapid price drop without Congressional action.
Kerrigan: Pricing pressures are likely to remain given the continuation of tariffs and the clear signal that the administration remains committed to this approach. Supply chains will continue hedging against policy volatility rather than betting on immediate relief, which supports sustained tariff-related price levels.
Inflation is influenced by multiple factors, and while we may see some easing under current conditions, geopolitical risks and unexpected shocks could quickly alter that trajectory. The bottom line is that elevated costs remain a headwind for many small businesses.
Cooper: Tariffs don’t just affect global trade—they hit small business cash flow first. When costs rise suddenly, owners must decide whether to pass those increases on to customers or absorb them themselves.
If the ruling ultimately lowers import costs, it could ease pricing pressure for small retailers and manufacturers operating on razor-thin margins. But relief won’t be immediate, and most businesses will remain cautious until they see tangible changes in their supply costs.
Lesonsky: Many small businesses have struggled with supply chain volatility in recent years. Does this decision create greater planning stability, or does it introduce new uncertainty?
Johnston: We believe this decision may actually increase short-term uncertainty for small businesses. While some tariffs could fall temporarily, any reductions may prove short-lived.
There is also the possibility that the government could be required to repay some of the roughly $170 billion in tariff revenue collected from importers. But any repayment would likely be tied up in litigation for years, offering little immediate benefit to small businesses.
Kerrigan: My initial reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision was that it could create greater certainty—and that may still prove true over the long term. But in the near term, the shift to alternative tariff strategies has introduced new uncertainty.
Cooper: It introduces more uncertainty in the short term. While the ruling suggests a potential shift in trade policy, the mechanics of refunds or adjustments remain unclear—and the administration has already signaled it will pursue tariffs through alternative measures.
Small businesses thrive on predictability, and for now, many are still operating in a gray area.
Lesonsky: From a lending perspective, how do tariff policies—and sudden policy reversals—affect small businesses’ access to capital and risk profiles?
Johnston: Continued volatility in tariff policy makes it difficult for lenders to assess a small business’s future cash flow. When revenue and cost projections are uncertain, lenders tend to respond conservatively—reducing loan amounts and increasing pricing to account for elevated risk tied to fluctuating input costs and demand.
Kerrigan: Uncertainty is never good from a lending perspective, as it increases risk, especially for businesses in certain industries.
Cooper: Anything that introduces unpredictability into a small business’s cash flow makes that business appear riskier to lenders. Sudden tariff shifts can disrupt revenue projections, inventory costs, and pricing strategies.
When expenses spike unexpectedly, businesses often turn to short-term capital to stay afloat. Prolonged uncertainty can also delay expansion plans, shifting financing needs from growth to survival. Greater trade policy stability would allow both lenders and borrowers to plan with more confidence.
Lesonsky: Looking longer term, what does this ruling mean for U.S. competitiveness and domestic manufacturing—particularly for SMBs?
Johnston: We believe the U.S. may be in the early stages of a manufacturing resurgence, and current tariff policy could be one contributing factor. While tariffs create challenges for manufacturers that rely on imported components, over time, they may also incentivize more domestic production.
At Kapitus, we’ve seen strong growth in the number of small manufacturers applying for and receiving capital over the past year. Many are investing in automation, AI, and robotics to improve efficiency. Combined with tariff protections and a weaker dollar, those investments could support a more competitive domestic manufacturing base over the long term
Kerrigan: There will be winners and losers. In my view, stable tax and regulatory policy—combined with access to capital markets and a strong workforce—creates the environment needed to strengthen competitiveness and manufacturing across the board.
U.S. businesses have shown remarkable resilience over the past several years, and I remain confident in small business owners’ ability to adapt. Notably, many have become rapid adopters of technologies like AI. Continued policy uncertainty and high costs may actually accelerate that adoption as businesses look for new efficiencies.
Cooper: It’s difficult to make definitive predictions about global manufacturing trends. What we can say—based on data from the largest small business banking platform in the U.S.—is that reshoring has not occurred at scale among small businesses in the 10 months since tariffs were implemented.
In fact, international payments by our customers grew at more than double the rate of overall payments, suggesting many small businesses lacked a practical path to reshoring and instead absorbed higher costs.
Lesonsky: What should small business owners be doing right now to protect themselves from future policy volatility—regardless of the direction trade policy takes?
Johnston: Small businesses should closely monitor tariff changes on the specific goods and countries they rely on. If tariffs drop, they’ll need access to capital to move quickly and secure inventory at more favorable prices.
At the same time, owners should plan for continued volatility and avoid assuming meaningful relief. Exploring domestic sourcing—and, for manufacturers, greater vertical integration—could strengthen long-term resilience and improve margins over time.
Kerrigan: Small business owners should continue to do more of what they have been doing—hedge for the unknown, continue to adopt and experiment with technology, stay super close to the customer to detect shifts and new trends, and stay confident in what they can control. If possible, build or continue building that rainy-day fund.
Cooper: Diversification and financial preparedness are essential—especially given the likelihood of continued legal and policy challenges. Business owners should evaluate their supply chains, build cash buffers, and remain flexible with pricing and inventory strategies.
Access to capital is critical, so they’re not forced into reactive decisions when policies shift. The businesses that navigate volatility best plan for multiple scenarios and secure financing options before they need them.
The reality is that there are no easy answers.
Shifting Tariff Policies
Tariff policy may shift again next week—or even tomorrow. What seems clear, however, is that volatility itself has become part of the operating environment for small businesses.
While legal battles and political strategies play out in Washington, small business owners are doing what they’ve always done: adjusting, hedging, investing carefully, and staying close to their customers. Whether relief comes quickly or not, the ability to plan for multiple scenarios—and access capital when needed—may prove to be the real competitive advantage in 2026.
Rieva Lesonsky is the founder of Small Business Currents, a content company focusing on small businesses and entrepreneurship. You can find her on Twitter @Rieva, Bluesky @Rieva.bsky.social, and LinkedIn. Or email her at Rieva@SmallBusinessCurrents.com.
Photo courtesy Getty Images for Unsplash+
