Introduction
Recent U.S. court rulings on tariffs have created confusion across many industries. A common question we now hear is:
If some tariffs were struck down in court, will tariffs on steel fasteners (screws, bolts, nuts, and rivets) be removed too?
The short answer is: not automatically—because many fastener-related duties come from a different legal authority than the tariffs addressed by the court.
1) What tariffs did the court decision affect?
On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the president lacked authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping “global” tariffs under that statute.
After that decision, litigation quickly shifted toward how refunds should work for importers who paid those IEEPA-based duties, and U.S. trade court rulings have directed Customs to begin moving the refund process forward.
Important limitation: These court decisions focus on IEEPA-based tariffs. They do not automatically remove other tariff programs that rely on different statutes.
2) Why fastener tariffs often remain: Section 232 is a different legal tool
Many steel fasteners are affected by Section 232 tariffs, which are imposed under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (national security authority). These are not the same as IEEPA-based tariffs addressed by the Supreme Court ruling.
In 2025, the U.S. increased Section 232 tariff rates on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50% (effective June 4, 2025).
Also, U.S. Customs has explicitly noted that Section 232 articles and derivatives are treated differently from “reciprocal” tariffs.
3) Steel “derivative products” can include fasteners
Even when a product is not raw steel, it may still fall into steel derivative coverage—especially when it contains steel content and is listed under covered tariff lines.
U.S. Customs communications have issued guidance on additional derivative steel products subject to Section 232 duties.
And multiple trade/compliance references describe that derivative coverage can include downstream categories such as fasteners and hardware (including screws, nuts, and bolts).
What this means in practice:
- Some fasteners may be captured directly by covered tariff lines (often in the broader “articles of iron or steel” space).
- In other cases, the duty may be applied based on the steel content valuation rules for derivatives (depending on classification and reporting requirements).
(Note: exact applicability depends on HTS classification and CBP reporting—this is where import compliance and broker guidance matters.)
4) How big is the money? Section 232 tariff revenue is measured in billions
Section 232 has generated substantial U.S. government revenue over time.
One analysis reports that between FY2020 and FY2024, the U.S. collected:
- $8.14B from Section 232 steel tariffs, and
- $2.48B from Section 232 aluminum tariffs.
Because steel derivative coverage includes many downstream categories, including fastener-related classifications, the fastener supply chain is one of the many sectors exposed to this ongoing duty framework.
5) Will fastener-related tariffs be removed in the future?
It’s possible, but uncertain—and it likely depends on how the policy and legal environment develops.
Here are realistic pathways that could change outcomes over time:
A) Policy changes under Section 232 authority
Section 232 tariffs can be adjusted through executive action and agency processes (for example, changes in scope, exclusions, or the inclusion process for derivatives).
B) Court challenges focusing on enforcement and calculation
Even if Section 232 remains legally valid, disputes can arise over how CBP calculates steel content valuation and applies duties to derivatives. Lawsuits and ongoing disputes in this area can influence compliance practices and potentially narrow or clarify application.
C) Congressional action
Because Congress holds core tariff and taxing powers, legislative changes could reshape the tariff landscape—but that is inherently political and hard to predict.
Bottom line: The Supreme Court’s IEEPA decision does not automatically cancel Section 232 duties. For steel fasteners, the key question is not “Were some tariffs struck down?” but rather “Will Section 232 scope and derivative enforcement change?”
Conclusion
Recent U.S. court rulings struck down certain IEEPA-based tariffs, and refund litigation is now underway.
However, many steel fasteners remain affected because Section 232 tariffs—and their derivative product rules—operate under a different legal authority and continue to be enforced.
For companies sourcing steel fasteners globally, this is a reminder that “tariff news” can involve multiple legal programs—and a change in one program does not necessarily change the others.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and reflects general industry observations. It does not constitute legal, tax, or trade compliance advice.
Sources (for transparency)
(Shown as citations above; included here for reader trust and SEO context.)
- Supreme Court decision on IEEPA tariffs and its implications
- Trade court rulings on refund process
- White House fact sheet on increasing Section 232 steel/aluminum tariffs to 50%
- CBP Section 232 FAQs (treatment vs reciprocal tariffs)
- CBP guidance message on additional derivative steel products
- Trade/compliance analyses describing derivative scope including fasteners
- Section 232 revenue figures (FY2020–FY2024)
- Valuation/content reporting concepts for derivatives
- Example discussion of CBP enforcement uncertainty/litigation
