Trump’s trade negotiation tactics may have risen in the smoke as the court blocked tariffs, but economists believe it “has little end to this story.”

• Analysis: US courts have found the Trump administration lacking authority It will impose drastic global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Force Act, requiring the White House to rewind certain tariffs within 10 days, but an appeal is ongoing. While the decision presents a major challenge to Trump’s trade strategy, experts hope that the administration may pursue alternative legal measures to maintain or reintroduce tariffs and shift its focus to sector measures or other provisions under the Trade Act.

Trump’s Customs Saga took another turn over the White House with the US International Trade Court ruled There was no authority It imposes “liberation date” economic sanctions around the world.

And Canada, Mexico and China were further removed from hits on April 2, but a three-judicator panel extended its ruling to tariffs announced earlier this year in those countries.

The Trump 2.0 retreat is major as it undermines the very foundation the administration has relied on to drive more favorable transactions with key trading partners.

Of course, the Trump team quickly announced that they would appeal the decision.

In summary, the current state of play with tariffs is that most of the world is subject to a 10% import tax on the US. China is sitting at 30% following the agreement with Beijing. Furthermore, Canada and Mexico face a 25% tax as a result of Trump’s demands on countries to tackle immigration and fentanyl trade.

Under this week’s ruling, the oval office will have 10 days to carry out administrative work to remove these tariffs. Sanctions on steel, automobiles and aluminum are not included in the prohibition.

It is not clear how quickly tariffs will be reverted, or whether the White House will maintain them while the White House advances to the Court of Appeal and potentially the Supreme Court.

Whatever the outcome, this wrench in this work may still have an impact on the negotiation timeline. During his second term, Trump routinely announced sanctions with rather quick turnarounds.

When these tariffs are delayed –They often have– The time frame remains tight to complete the transaction, for example, with a 90-day suspension after the “liberation date” tariffs and a similar window that allows negotiations with China.

What is clear is that this ruling is not a conclusion to the tariffs, but merely marks the beginning of the next chapter.

Jim Reid from Deutsche Bank luck This morning: “We should first say that this is not the end of this story, as the administration is suing this decision. But already, the market has In response, a substantial gathering. ”

In fact, S&P futures have grown by 1.7% at the time of writing, and Dow Jones Future has also grown by 1.3%.

Wideer impact

Economists look at the income that tap cards have When it is turned on, you will find it to be so attractive Courtesy of the enormous revenue they could generate as future administrations are turned off.

But how these funds would be revived into the wider Trump 2.0 budget, and whether they had been there. I relied on spending packages like “big and beautiful bills” It was not made clear.

“We haven’t heard directly from President Trump about this issue yet, so it’s unclear how the administration will respond in the future,” Reid points out. “This could have a broader impact on revenue, as we wanted to use tariffs as a source of income to fund other tax cuts.

“If the ruling is enforced… one option for administration is to expand the use of other customs equipment, such as Section 232 on national security grounds used for tariffs on automobiles, steel and aluminum.”

Goldman Sachs’ Alec Phillips shouted that he doesn’t think the tariff setback will change the administration’s broader fiscal strategy, explaining that “tax revenues don’t count towards offsetting the costs of the package, and that most lawmakers have never made a clear link between the two issues.”

He added: “The tariffs that the court overturned are likely to raise nearly $200 million per year, which is what the fiscal package will increase the deficit next year (compared to current policy), more than the impact of the following year.”

Other paths to achieving tariffs

Like Reid, Phillips expects Trump’s team to explore other legitimate routes to achieve the same goal.

Trump’s tariffs were blocked by the court because they relied on the International Emergency Economic Force Act (IEEPA), but this is not the only way to achieve sanctions. The court itself emphasized that Trump could use two sections of the 1974 Trade Act to impose a tariff of up to 150 days (which Congress could extend). 301 Address unfair trade practices.

Phillips noted that the White House could also expand tariffs in the sector. A move that many analysts are already hoping for. He explained: “Uncertainty regarding IEPA-based tariffs could lead the White House to focus on tariffs in sectors with far less legal uncertainty.

“While President Trump hasn’t emphasized departmental tariffs as often as he did earlier this year, departmental tariffs may once again be attracting attention if the White House determines they are less flexible with regard to country-centric tariffs.”

He added: “According to Article 338 of the Trade Act of 1930, the President allows the imposition of tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that discriminate against this unused authority.

This story was originally introduced Fortune.com