5 Small Businesses Hit Trump With Lawsuit Over Tariffs: Trade Deficits 'Are Not An Emergency'

Five American small businesses have filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump, accusing him of abusing powers to impose trade taxes under the guise of a national emergency, despite no such emergency existing.

The companies submitted the complaint on Monday to the U.S. Court of International Trade.

The plaintiffs argue that Trump unlawfully invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify global tariffs on imports without Congressional approval or clear economic justification.

The companies pressing charges include:

• V.O.S. Selections Inc., a New York wine importer sourcing from 14 countries
• Genova Pipe, a Utah-based manufacturer of plumbing materials
• MicroKits LLC, a Virginia startup building educational electronics
• FishUSA Inc., a Pennsylvania retailer specializing in fishing gear; and
• Terry Precision Cycling LLC, a Vermont brand producing women's cycling apparel.

Each company indicates that the products they import are either unavailable in the U.S. or cannot be sourced domestically without significant delays or higher costs. The tariffs, they say, threaten their business models, margins and long-term viability.

These five businesses are asking the court to declare the actions illegal, block the implementation of the tariffs, and reaffirm Congress’s constitutional role in trade matters.

What Is The Lawsuit About?

At the heart of the lawsuit is a claim that Trump overstepped his legal authority by using IEEPA to impose global tariffs.

The plaintiffs argue that IEEPA is intended for emergencies like war or terrorism—not for addressing trade deficits, which they called a long-standing and non-threatening feature of international commerce.

"His claimed emergency is a figment of his own imagination," the lawsuit said.

“Trade deficits, which have persisted for decades without causing economic harm, are not an emergency.”

The so-called “Liberation Day Order,” issued on April 2, imposed the highest tariff rates seen since the Great Depression, applying across nearly every trade partner—regardless of whether those countries impose tariffs on U.S. goods, or have trade agreements with the U.S.

According to the filing, the formula used to determine tariff rates “is not an accepted methodology for calculating trade
barriers and has no basis in economic theory.”

On April 9, a second executive order temporarily paused elevated tariffs on most countries for 90 days. A 10% global tariff remains fully in place, further exacerbating uncertainty for import-reliant businesses.

The administration justified the sweeping move by invoking a range of authorities, including the IEEPA, the National Emergencies Act, section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, and section 301 of title 3 of the U.S. Code.

Yet, the plaintiffs argue that none of these statutes grants the president the authority to impose tariffs.

Article I of the Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises." Congress also regulates commerce with foreign nations.

In other words, they say, Trump acted unilaterally without legal or constitutional grounding.

“This Court should declare the President's unprecedented power grab illegal, enjoin the operation of the executive actions that purport to impose these tariffs under the IEEPA, and reaffirm this country's core founding principle: there shall be
no taxation without representation,” the lawsuit states.

“Congress has not delegated any such power.”

Now Read:

• Goldman Sachs Cheers China Tariff Exemptions, Lifts Earnings Forecasts For Apple, Dell, HP

Image: Shutterstock