NBAA Explores How Tariff Developments and Threats Could Impact Business Aviation

A recent webinar held by the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) shared updates on the evolving tariff issue following an announcement that threatens a 15% global tariff.

The rise of global tariffs to 15% came after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled most of the tariffs imposed by the current administration unlawful.

In an informative webinar, Senior Vice President, Government Affairs, NBAA, Kristie Greco Johnson moderated a discussion on the implications of the Supreme Court decision and the president’s new tariff plans for the business aviation sector.

What does the Supreme Court decision mean?

To begin, Of Counsel, Capitol Counsel, Bruce Hirsh began by providing some context on using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to implement tariffs.

Hirsh said, “The Supreme Court issued a pretty straightforward decision that IEEPA does not authorize the president to apply tariffs. It authorizes the president to take a number of other steps in response to a national emergency, but tariffs isn't one of them.”

Hirsh continued, “President Trump had chosen a year ago to go with the IEEPA authority because it did give him more flexibility than other authorities…which have processes and certain standards handled by various agencies, whereas IEEPA really didn't require more than him saying there's an emergency, and here's what I'm doing about it.”

“So, the supreme court said no, tariffs aren't one of the options,” added Hirsh, “They did not address any issue with remedies or refunds. That’s going to be left to the trial court.”

Discussing the president’s immediate response to the ruling—announcing a raised global tariff of 15%—Hirsh explained, “Essentially, the administration is trying to maintain tariffs, and they appear to be interested in trying to maintain them at the same or similar levels, country by country.”

He proceeded, “The first thing they're doing—which one of the EOS imposed—are tariffs under Section 122 the balance of payments provision. The challenge for them there is that they're only good for 150 days, unless Congress extends them.”

“And the other challenge is that they have to be the same for every country, so you can't have the kind of structure that has been in place for IEEPA, where each country has a different tariff level and gives the president leverage to negotiate an agreement based on where they set that level,” noted Hirsh.

He added, “What they appear to be doing is pairing Section 122 with the intention to initiate a number of Section 301, investigations which are based on foreign unfair trade practices, which can be used to establish country-by-country duties.”

How do the tariff updates impact aviation?

Johnson explained what the tariff updates mean for business aviation, sharing, “What we see is zero tariffs for aircraft, aircraft engines and aircraft parts as a result of the Supreme Court decision, the repeal of the IEEPA tariffs and extensions for aircraft under the 122 tariffs.”

She continued, “We've essentially returned to a zero-for-zero tariff regime with a pending Section 232 investigation and eventual other tariffs that may come from this administration.”

Katie DeLuca, partner at Harper Meyer LLP, commented, “It seems that they are tracking the agreement of trade and civil aircraft and that unless something changes if the increase of 15% from 10% goes up and they remove those exemptions, then it seems like we are in good shape.”

DeLuca listed these exemptions listed in the annexes of the most recent proclamation, which included:

• Civil aircraft
• Civil aircraft engines
• Civil aircraft parts

DeLuca noted, “There are other authorities that the president and the administration can impose tariffs under. There is an active 301 investigation against Brazil.

She added, “There will be other 301 investigations against other countries, presumably, and hopefully, aviation would be excluded if any tariffs result from those investigations…In the interim, it is very good news for these Section 122 tariffs that civil aviation products seem to be exempt.”

Returning to the proposed global tariff of 10% and immediate increase to 15% on this, Tobias Kleitman, president, TVPX, said, “I think it's anybody's guess as to whether we'll see the 15% actually implemented.”

Kleitman explained, “The original 10% figure was chosen carefully. It did not exceed the amount that we are currently assessing on UK imports. We have an agreement with the UK to keep it to 10% and likewise, we have an agreement with the EU to keep it to 15% and others as well.”

He continued, “I suspect that given the fact that they had to use the same tariff level for everybody under Section 122 they chose 10% for that reason. We'll see whether they implement the 15% in response to the Truth Social post from the president.”

“Hopefully, there is no obvious reason why they would change the annexes and change the aviation exception because of that. But again, we have to wait and see,” concluded Kleitman.

How does the Supreme Court decision impact aircraft imports?

Since tariff updates from 2025 created issues like varying import costs for foreign aircraft, Kleitman discussed how the Supreme Court’s recent decision offers at least a temporary mitigation.

Kleitman explained, “Now, it seems we have a window at least where we can import these aircraft free from tariffs. The question is how long that window is going to last, but it is a stunning change.”

“People still will need to import, clear their aircraft, make their entries when they come into the U.S. to sell them, noted Kleitman, “But there's going to be a lot of movement now, I think, with people that had these aircraft that were affected by tariffs that they couldn't sell into the U.S. market”

He added, “I think we're going to see a lot of aircraft get imported that people have been trying to sell and people been trying to buy, quite frankly. But the tariffs were prohibitive in terms of the added cost to a transaction. For the time being, it seems like we're back to where we were before April of last year.”