WASHINGTON, October 2 — The bottom line: small-business importers face an average of $426,000 in extra tariffs paid from March 2025 through August 2026 compared to the prior 18 months. By the numbers, a new Center for American Progress analysis estimates that of the $115 billion in customs-duty refunds recorded from May 2026 through August 2026, approximately $35 billion may be attributable to the nation’s roughly 234,000 identified small-business importers—equivalent to about $149,000 per importer.
However, this amount pales in comparison to the extra $426,000 in tariffs paid per small-business importer from March 2025 through August 2026 compared to the preceding 18 months, or about $24,000 more per month. Investors will note that the analysis also found small-business importers in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., faced higher tariff burdens, with 21 states exceeding $200,000 in average additional costs per importer, and Texas, New Jersey, and Kentucky averaging over $300,000.
Despite the refunds, small businesses remain subject to a complex web of tariffs imposed under other legal authorities, with the U.S. applied tariff rate estimated to rise to 11.8 percent in 2026, up from 1.5 percent in 2022. Research using import data through November 2025 found that nearly 90 percent of the tariffs’ economic burden fell on U.S. firms and consumers rather than foreign exporters.
According to New York Federal Reserve research, approximately 26 percent of the 2025 tariff increase was passed through to consumers in the form of higher prices. Small businesses in goods and retail sectors were especially vulnerable due to reliance on imported inputs and limited capacity to absorb cost increases or reorganize supply chains, leading to increased operating expenses and reduced profit margins, with many passing costs to consumers through higher prices.
The figure that matters: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in February 2026 that the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose country-specific tariffs was unlawful, meaning the tariffs had been collected from U.S. importers for nearly a year without legal authority. Although importers of record paid the duties, much of the economic burden was passed through supply chains to American manufacturers, small businesses, and eventually consumers in the form of higher prices.
Looking ahead, policymakers and trade analysts will monitor whether ongoing litigation or legislative action addresses the lingering tariff structure affecting small importers, particularly as the administration continues to pursue trade policies under alternative legal frameworks. The coming months will test how quickly refunds are distributed and whether small businesses can recover from prolonged cost pressures.
