April Jobs Report: Resilient for now

In one of those economic surprises, or the ever circuitous path that the American economy has taken in recent years, on Friday the US Dept of Labor released its monthly job data for April revealing 115,000 non-farm jobs, much to the surprise of economists who expected at least half of that figure showing that the American jobs picture is still resilient. And, if that seems to be a hackneyed label, then so be it say a range of not only economists, but academics, market watchers, and others.

CNBC in its coverage said, “The report shows the labor market has been “pretty much stable for a year, year and a half,” Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve of Chicago, said in a CNBC interview. “I characterize that we’ve been stable without being good. ... The unemployment rate has been stable, the hiring rate’s been stable, the layoff rate’s been stable, the vacancy rate has been stable. So, I still think there’s not a lot of evidence that the job market is falling apart.”

While it cheered the White House and other administration officials, to others it still seemed to be a cautious praise at best, with higher than sough inflation, and the effects that the War on Iran, and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz which has hampered the delivery of 20 percent of the world’s oil and natural gas resulting in an average per gallon price of gasoline at $4.59 per gallon in the United States.

During his State of the Union address, President Trump declared that America under his leadership was “bigger, better, richer, and stronger” and created a “booming economy” now words that he may regret saying, especially with his polls tanking, those efforts will undoubtedly be on the way. 

The Associated Press-NORC-Center for Public Affairs recently reported that his support in the GOP fell from 74 percent to 62 percent in April, a stark figure among his base of support. Adding to that, 61 percent of Americans do not support the US in its war against Iran. A devolution in his handling of the economy is not far behind, especially with 80 percent of Americans feeling the price squeeze at the gas pump.

While wages increased to 3.6 percent, Americans are now forced to spend much of that increase on gasoline, especially those people who live in areas where public transportation is scarce; and, add to that the spectre of even higher food costs due to increased transportation costs, then the results for many Americans  may be burdensome, especially lower income individuals and families as they struggle to meet higher housing costs in a country that has not created enough of them.

Of equal concern is that job increases may not meet population growth as we reported in April, and where some demographers have said the nation has fallen behind, 

While the unemployment rate is 4.3 percent it could have been higher had not some people simply given up looking for work in a challenging environment, especially for those without college degrees.

A conundrum is that consumers are still spending, and while they are the economic drivers of the national economy the reasons for their continuance bear examining; or,one case, higher than average tax returns are one cause, interest rate cuts by the Fed last year are another, and, lastly, is that high income earners are still spending, it supports the often quoted K shaped economy. But economists say that might not last forever, and if consumers continue to cut back on spending to afford fuel, the consequences, according to Investopedia, would cause “a ripple effect  that hurts the job market. Some forecasters unemployment to rise as soon as this summer.”

Overall, this is an economy that has its visible markers, as well as its less visible ones, notably that job creation has consistently been higher in the small business community, commonly referred by some as the “Mom and Pop” market, where recent analysis has shown that  for companies with less than 20 employees they have created more than 525,000 jobs in 2025; and in January through March 169,000 jobs, a figure greater than by larger employers.

The recent back and forth on a resolution to end the conflict in Iran has caused the markets to go from high to low, often in less than 24 hours; a figure that some observers are attributing to President Trump’s vacillating remarks that the war is over, and there is another resolution pending, but then, also saying that there is no Iranian leadership to negotiate with; all of which has made the market indices seasick trying to keep up.

One prominent feature of the last several months of job reports is the dominance of health care related jobs, attributable to the aging of America, and the needs of the so called “baby boomers” whose longevity requires consistent care. As has been noted, economic observers are wondering of the precariousness of the jobs outlook where one industry dominates all the others. For April this dominance resulted in a gain of 37,000 jobs.

Likewise social assistance of 17,000 jobs gained and attendant home health care of 11,000. Common knowledge dictates this as a historical legacy but its dominance could cut into future gains, or losses for other industries.

On the down side is the continuing loss of federal workers, begun last year at the beginning of the second Trump administration, now with 9,000 additional jobs cut.

On the corporate side, cuts have been rampant lately with those at META, and now the bankrupt Spirit Airlines.

The news that Meta plans to cut approximately 10% of its workforce—roughly 8,000 employees—starting May 20, 2026, “alongside 6,000 open role closures to fund massive AI investments” according to the New York Times CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who deemed 2026 "the year that AI starts to dramatically change the way that we work," expects to offset high infrastructure investment costs while driving efficiencies.

“Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s chief executive, has said he expects much of the work done in the technology industry to eventually be overtaken by A.I.-powered systems, including coding assistants that help engineers write software.”

“We’re doing this as part of our continued effort to run the company more efficiently and to allow us to offset the other investments we’re making,” Janelle Gale, Meta’s chief people officer, said in the memo to employees. “This is not an easy trade-off and it will mean letting go of people who have made meaningful contributions to Meta during their time here.”

Tech and other informational services have been on the downswing for some time and the April report shows this is a continuing trend with a loss of 13,000, and telecommunications another 3,000.

While the effects of the two months of war with Iran has only slightly affected the US, despite the higher gas prices, the resulting effect on the global economy has been harsh: “The fallout from two months of war in Iran is shuttering textile mills in India and Bangladesh, grounding airplanes in Ireland, Poland and Germany, and prompting energy rationing in Vietnam, South Korea and Thailand. The only country, it seems, that has been relatively spared from the economic chaos is the one that started the war: the United States,” also reported by The New York Times.

“While warning signs of a recession are flashing across countries in Asia and Europe, the United States is likely to outperform most of the world’s advanced economies. Growth is steady and unemployment low. “It’s still hard to bet against the U.S. economy,” the Royal Bank of Canada said last week.”

If the aggression lasts much longer then the effect on US jobs market will increase, despite the repeal of most of the Trump tariffs from the recent decision from the US Supreme Court; but, with recent threats on Spain for not supporting the administration's efforts to open the Strait, an area freight with danger, tariffs will once more be a factor facing American companies, and in turn consumers.

“Economists say it would take a much more significant spike in oil prices, perhaps as high as $150 a barrel, for them to begin worrying seriously about the possibility of a recession in the United States.

That is not the case elsewhere, where the dreaded combination of slower growth and higher inflation is already raising alarms about stagflation.”

Are we safe? Maybe, say some, again from the Times: “For the United States, the biggest advantage is that, unlike most of its global peers, it produces more oil and gas than it consumes. That doesn’t mean it is unaffected by what happens in global energy markets, but it helps dampen the impact.”

Most importantly, “The U.S. economy is also heavily based on services and depends relatively little on the energy-intensive manufacturing industries that have been hit hardest by the spike in oil prices. And it went into the war with a stronger economy than many other countries, giving it more of a buffer against a slowdown.

“We’re not feeling the same pain the rest of the world is,” said Jason Bordoff, the founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.

Others are not so sanguine citing the cost of diesel fuel which as the Times also noted, in late March, is less discernible to the average consumer but whose price has climbed faster than the price of gasoline which could lead “to inflation across a wide range of goods” affecting the price and shipping of those products that most Americans rely on.

“Diesel “powers a lot of basic industries,” said Vidya Mani, a visiting associate professor at Cornell University’s business school whose research focuses on supply chains. “Mining industries, chemical factories, clothing factories — a lot of those things come from diesel.”

“Because of its far-reaching consequences, it can stop a lot of industries,” she said, adding that if prices continue to rise, consumers will probably begin to see the effects on everyday items and necessities within the next several weeks.”

“Much of the diesel in the United States comes from domestic supplies. But oil companies can still price the commodity at global market rates. In January, a little more than 40 percent of the cost of diesel came from the price of crude oil, according to the Energy Information Administration” making things even murkier for consumers as time goes by without an end to the conflict.

Spirit Airlines shut down last  Saturday “after failing to strike a deal for a financial lifeline from the Trump administration, two people familiar with the matter said,” according to The New York Times.

For air travelers, looking for a no frills trip with low ticket costs, they had it but also faced charges for nearly everything to balance the fares, they succumbed to “high fuel prices, competition from larger airlines, the Covid-19 pandemic and an engine defect hobbled the company.

In recent weeks, “the airline had been negotiating a $500 million lifeline from the Trump administration. Some of the investors that Spirit owed money to oppose the terms of the bailout, under which the government could have ended up owning 90 percent of Spirit, because it would have left them in a worse financial position if the airline eventually failed.”

4,000 employees in Florida alone are now without jobs, with almost 1,000 employees laid off from Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston airports, plus more in Detroit, with rough estimates of a total of 17,000 ending an era, but also a model that was not working in post pandemic America. 

“Spirit has been widely credited with democratizing air travel in the United States by keeping costs and ticket prices very low. The approach served Spirit well for years, generating huge profits. But competition from larger airlines and rising costs, particularly for pilots and other professionals, hobbled the company after the pandemic. It also suffered disproportionately from industry wide engine problems,” noted the Times.

Meanwhile that old bugaboo, inflation - is still a large concern as has been widely noted, and the Federal Reserve Bank has kept interest rates the same in light of the 3.8 inflation rate, much higher than its 2 percent target, 

While Jerome Powell’s term as head, ends in a few days, the nominee by the president, Kevin Warsh is expected to have Senate approval, and is expected to cut interest rates, since while “the Fed cut rates last year, it did not deliver the kind of relief that Mr. Trump wanted. Since January, it has also turned cautious on subsequent reductions, a sentiment that has only grown amid the war in Iran, which has caused an acute energy shock,” said the Times.

It’s no secret that Trump wants stronger cuts and is determined to influence the Fed from the White House, threatening its traditional independence hinged by mandates on low inflation and job stability, which was threatened by the false charges of cost overruns attributed to Powell at the headquarters building.

Warsh has said if approved there is the chance that he would do so, besides his statement that he would not be the president’s “sock puppet”. Critics and Capitol Hill observers worry that should be stray from the president’s wishes this could be a repeat scenario “according to Peter Conti-Brown, an expert on Fed governance at the University of Pennsylvania, said Mr. Powell’s insistence on a clear, certain end to the investigation was about “not just about protecting himself but about protecting the Federal Reserve.”

“If this becomes a tried-and-true path to bully a central banker out of office, then we will see its invocation again,” said Mr. Conti-Brown, who added that the investigation had already proved damaging in other ways.”

March Jobs Report: Optimism or despair?

Now that the Passover and Easter holidays are over, it’s time to take a closer look at the March jobs report and its surprising report from the US Dept of labor that showed 178,000 non-farm jobs, a figure that far exceeded expectations, and predictions marry that to the previous month’s heavy hitters of health care, as well as a decrease in the unemployment rate to 4.3 percent, it seems that there might have been a rebound from earlier worrisome reports, yet a closer look under the hood shows a different view.

One of the chief concerns is the lowered rate of job participation, and while the BLS deems it negligible,  - 61.9 % - but economists are watching the figure and see that the downward trend is concerning, the less people working, or giving up looking the less the match to population growth and the formula that economists examine to determine the health of the US economy.

“The unemployment rate dropped, but for the wrong reasons: a loss in labor force participation,” Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG told Fortune. The declines were concentrated among prime working-age men (twenties to thirties); young women between ages 20 and 24; and men over 55. In other words, the unemployment rate fell not because people found work, but because they became discouraged and stopped looking.”

Add to that the deportation of undocumented workers by the Trump administration and the uncertainty regarding judicial oversight, things don’t seem as rosy as they seem, But, a single report does not hold significance for macro economists, since there is the rule of three reports to accurately predict future concerns.

And, as is BLS custom, all reports are subject to revision as we saw with February that gave a few concerns with its decrease of 133,000, among economists, as well as lawmakers.

One surprise was that construction added 26,000 people to their payrolls and while much of this gain was due to project specific contracts, it is still far less than it has been in the past.

Much of this increase has been attributed to the policies of President Trump, and campaign promises, but this is unclear as of this date.

Federal employment has continued its downward spiral after the DOGE decimation of last year, now down to 355,000 or 11.8 percent, yet there are unverified reports that there are efforts to increase hiring.

Taken together with the threats of AI in the workforce, especially for some programmers, that is a matter of controversy with wildly fluctuating reports varying from total elimination of some jobs, entry-level and white-collar, to the retraining of others.

Forbes noted that, “The pressing question is, ‘You’re going to have a technological shock — how painful is it going to be?” Martha Gimbel, the executive director of the Budget Lab at Yale University, told the [New York] Times."

“At this point, no one knows. Maybe it will be far less than some of the high estimates thrown about. What investors, workers, and the country at large have to realize is there is a risk of unknown size that could further undermine the labor market, also known as the ability of people to make money and live.”

There are a few groups of workers that are vulnerable in today’s job climate: younger workers, those under 25 years of age, especially recent college graduates, and Black and Asian workers.

Taking a rear view look at the beginning of the year, “Through February, employers announced 156,742 job cuts, the lowest January-to-February total since 2022, when 34,309 cuts were recorded in the first two months of the year. It is the fifth-highest January-February total since 2009.”

“February’s dip is a nice reprieve from the elevated job cut plans to start the year. With U.S. involvement in a growing war in Iran, the end of Q1 may bring more layoff plans as companies tighten belts amid uncertainty and higher costs,” said Andy Challenger, workplace expert and chief revenue officer for Challenger, Gray & Christmas,” in their statements posted on their website.

In a forecast for the future, based on their prior analysis, “Hiring plans rose 140% in February to 12,755 from 5,306 in January. They are down 63% from the 34,580 hiring plans in February 2025. So far this year, employers have announced plans to hire 18,061, down 56% from 40,669 new hires during the same period in 2025.”

Wages increased by 0.2 percent after reaching 0.4 percent in February, and further decreases with higher inflation dependending on the continuing war in the Middle East could cause American consumers to cut back on their spending and with further layoffs, earnings of Big Tech firms, reportedly 32 percent of the S&P 500’s value would sink pulling downwards at the top of the K, according to Dario Perkins, an economist a consultant at TS Lombard, reported This Week.

Taking an even broader look we are still seeing the K shaped economy that we noted last month, the “golden age” that Trump says Americans are living in, most industries are in a hiring freeze inflation is still at 2 percent, and with the richest 1 percent holding nearly 32 percent of the nation’s wealth as they also reported, the future for America’s working families remains uncertain.

With income equality still a present reality there is speculation as to whether it will last or not, but Mark Zandi chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said to them “This is not a cyclical or temporary phenomenon, he said, noting that it’s “structural.”

Of course, the Israeli-American war and the loss of access to the Strait of Hormuz has increased the cost of gasoline to over $4.00 a gallon and in some stations in Chicago we have seen prices of regular gasoline as high as $4.59 a gallon. Consumers, especially those with children will be hard pressed to balance the family budget with increasing rents, a shortage of affordable housing, and  the higher cost of food, already seen in some areas.

Of note, “This is not the kind of oil shock economists typically look through. Those tend to hit both sides of the equation at once, slowing growth while raising prices, and eventually wash out. This one “is more COVID-esque,” Swonk said, pointing to supply-chain disruptions that extend far beyond crude—from diesel and jet fuel to helium, a key input in semiconductor production. Swonk said CFOs she has spoken with are watching shipping costs soar after the transportation sector had just begun recovering from a recession.”

Recently released figures from the BLS on the Consumer Price Index show that "In March, the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers rose 0.9 percent, seasonally adjusted, and rose 3.3 percent over the last 12 months, not seasonally adjusted. The index for all items less food and energy increased 0.2 percent in March (SA); up 2.6 percent over the year (NSA)."

Add that to the cost of producing crops and the increasingly high costs of fertilizer, {the  US is the world’s highest consumer},not to mention the cost of transporting food, the golden age looks deeply tarnished, and despite the repeal of some tariffs by the US Supreme Court, some farmers are still reeling from the president’s tariffs, specifically those that were not able to make purchases before the tariffs hit. To make matters worse, agricultural economists are predicting a 40 percent increase in the cost of fertilizer creating possible food shortages in American supermarkets.

Taking the long view of the March numbers is Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell who said, “You can have a series of these supply shocks and that can lead the public generally — businesses, price setters, households — to start expecting higher inflation over time. Why wouldn’t they?” Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said at an event this week” reported The New York Times.

Despite this risk, Mr. Powell did not convey any immediate urgency to take action, saying instead that the Fed’s policy was “in a good place for us to wait and see how that turns out.”

Updated April 12, 2026

February Jobs bottoming out against background of war

Friday’s Jobs report from the US Labor Dept. caused quite a shock to lawmakers, economists and investors with its loss of 92,000 jobs - a sudden departure from the rosy optimism of previous months that had seemed to show greater resilience in the employment sector, despite uncertainty across many related sectors, including the Trump tariffs, a K shaped economy, and the low-hire, low-fire mantra of many employers. All of which now seems to affect any potential rate cuts at the next Federal Open Markets Committee meeting, and any effects of the ten day old American Israeli war against Iran.

On the consumer side, gasoline, especially for America, the major focus is on the cost of crude oil which as a consequence of the war which on Monday surged to over $100 per barrel creating even more uncertainty than possible rate cuts; and, the residual effects on energy, and food supplies, not to mention its transportation are now overshadowing the February job losses.

The stock market indices were lowered, and then rose on Monday and then lowered again, giving some hope to investors, but with no predictable end in sight of the war despite reports to the contrary from the White House and the Defense Dept. who are predicting a short duration, despite a heightened level of uncertainty from many quarters.

The February highlights included a decrease in what seemed to be the iron clad area of health care, now taking a dip to 28,000 after a peak of 77,000 in January, shattering some who believed it to be a new standard for job seekers.

“Offices of physicians lost 37,000 jobs in February, primarily due to strike

activity. Hospitals added 12,000 jobs. Over the prior 12 months, health care had added an average of 36,000 jobs per month,”  reported the Bureau of Labor and Statistics.

The nurses strike in New York was emblematic of the dangers of reliance, or over reliance, on one industry, despite the pressing needs of American baby boomers, Andrew Flowers, chief economist at Appcast, said in a statement. But even accounting for that, job declines are still present and he noted. “When labor market growth depends on a sole industry, we will inevitably end up with large swings like today,” Flowers said.

Social assistance driven by individual and family needs has increased to 9,000, with a concentration of over 12,000 for the aforementioned population; and, while the report does not give detail on who is receiving what type of services, it is believed to have come from those facing a decrease in such social program cuts, and work requirements for those receiving food assistance from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and some Medicaid cuts.

While the unemployment rate, what we prefer to call the marquee rate, nudged up slightly to 4.4 percent, inflation has increased to 2.4 percent, (still over the Federal Reserve target range of 2 percent) and wages while holding steady for higher income earners at $37.82,an increase of 0.4 percent; and while wages are up for some for others they are not for many American working families (especially those without college degrees) covering the high cost of a dwindling supply of affordable housing, a great challenge.

Wholesale inflation in January climbed to 0.5 percent with the producer price index reported by the Labor Dept. in late February, driving year over year prices from December, and in January 3.6 percent, both higher than forecasted, according to The Associated Press. Key to that were the tariffs from the president, and while many retailers and wholesalers stockpiled products before they were put in place, there were still some passed onto consumers.

With groceries still higher than consumers want, and the threat of increased prices due to the war, it’s important to note that gasoline and energy can account for 70 percent of the costs. This threat to oil exports that must travel through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iranian government threats to bomb any oil bearing cargo ships using that route are panicking wholesalers despite a statement on Tuesday by an American official that a ship was recently escorted through the straits; but, that statement was later retracted causing even more concerns in global markets.

"In February, average hourly earnings for all employees on private non farm payrolls rose by 15 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $37.32. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.8 percent. In February, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees rose by 9 cents, or 0.3 percent, to $32.03."

That may not be the total picture, however and “Wage growth remained healthy, at 3.8 percent over the year. Average hourly earnings have been slowing very gradually, but remain relatively steady, suggesting that hiring is not being constrained solely by the supply of available workers,” noted The New York Times.

Looking back at year over year statistics and seeing the loss of up to 317,000 federal job losses in 2025, and for 2026 is a sobering thought: “213,000 to 260,000+ federal employees left the workforce through various voluntary and involuntary mechanisms,” according to web searches.

The Joint Economic Committee Report from Congress reported that, “Revised numbers from December show 65,000 fewer jobs from a gain of 45,000 to end with a loss of 17,000 jobs. January’s report revised down by 4,000 from a gain of 130,000 to end at 126,000. Taken together, employment in December and January was down 69,000 more than previously reported.”

Revisions for previous months are standard operating procedure for the Labor Dept, and caution should always be taken to avoid making large judgements on the basis of one month’s report; but, taking into consideration the politics of economics and President Trump’s falling poll numbers on his handling of the economy, plus the war, there is greater overall concern from many quarters on what the American economic outlook will look like in future months.

Looking at the nervousness among many observers, lawmakers and investors, plus the overall statistics and patterns, and the revisions, the Times reported: “Revisions to previous months bolstered the case that the job losses in February were consistent with a broader trend rather than a blip. Employers shed 17,000 in December, and hiring figures for January were also revised downward slightly. Taken together, job growth for the last three months effectively slowed to zero.”

When it comes to the labor pool, the decrease in immigration, commingled with the Trump administration crackdowns on immigrant labor, we are also seeing “slower growth in the supply of labor. That has made it difficult to determine if a slowdown in job growth is caused by decreasing demand for workers, fewer available job-seekers or a combination of both,” added the Times.

All in all the general view, the war excepted, reaction has been alarming, “Today’s jobs report was overwhelmingly disappointing — there’s no other way to say it,” Cory Stahle, economist for Indeed Hiring Lab, said in a statement, and reported by truckingdive.com who also added as others have observed, “Today’s data show that the labor market has averaged essentially zero net job creation over the past six months,” Stahle continued. “This is concerning because when an economy stops creating jobs, it’s often not long before it starts losing them.”

Reaction from the White House has

remained positive and has expressed optimism, with this stance: “I think it’s consistent with everything else we’re seeing, which is the economy is really strong,” Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, maintained in an appearance on CNBC.

With gasoline prices surging as of Tuesday to $3.50 cents per gallon, the president and his administration are facing a tough call, and with no clear objective of the war, critics are expressing concern, even among his own party; and, while defections, Marjorie Taylor Greene excepting, are not happening yet, at least, it’s anyone’s guess what the immediate economic future will bring, but in a recent poll by PBS/NPR/Marist 56 percent of those polled oppose the war against Iran giving some indication of public sentiment.

In earlier reportage, “[But] Mr. Trump and his top aides largely shrugged off higher gas prices all week, describing the increase as just another temporary blip.

“So, if we have a little high oil prices for a little while,” the president said at one point, “as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop.”

US Supreme Court blocks Trump tarrifs

Friday’s news from the US Supreme Court that President Trump’s use of tariffs under his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was unlawful came as a shock to much of the public, but some economists say they were not surprised, while others say that position might be one of cynicism rather than reality. But, no matter how it is termed, this represents a strong push-back on what has been seen as a legislative acquiescence to the demands of Trump since he began his second term.

“We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs,” Roberts elaborated in his 21-page written opinion. “We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that (the International Emergency Economic Powers Act) does not authorize the President to impose tariffs."

Along with immigration, tariffs have been a keystone of his administration, and also a campaign promise that the US would be very rich from them, But taken with tax cuts for the wealthy the lost revenue must be made somehow, and this was a major source of revenue, now compromised.

The blow to importers in the US that paid what is in effect a tax, was in most cases passed onto American consumers, and while some companies stockpiled products ahead of their implementation, many smaller business could not, and many families were paying more than they wanted for them and, on the back of higher grocery prices, and increasing housing costs the president has received increasingly negative poll ratings on his handling of the economy.

To no one’s surprise Trump, in less than five minutes after the 6-3 decision was announced he stated that he would still levy global tariffs. As The Hill reported, “Even so, Trump still has plenty of power to impose new tariffs to replace the old, and he is warning trading partners against celebrating with his critics.”

“Any Country that wants to ‘play games’ with the ridiculous supreme court decision, especially those that have ‘Ripped Off’ the U.S.A. for years, and even decades, will be met with a much higher Tariff, and worse, than that which they just recently agreed to,” Trump wrote Monday in a post on Truth Social.”

“Trump had used the IEEPA to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China soon after taking office last year, claiming those countries had not done enough to stop fentanyl trafficking into the U.S.,” the report added.

In April of last year, on the so-called Liberation Day, Trump’s announcement in the White House Rose Garden, themselves questionable in their calculation brought uncertainty not only to global markets but the aforementioned consumers, and the fallout caused the zigzag pattern of tariffs, on again, then off again, causing as much concern on Wall Street, as well as Main Street.

Now there are calls for refunds from American companies as well as politicians, and state leaders such as Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker who has called for a check to be cut for refunds to Illinoisans.

On Monday, NBC News reported that “FedEx today filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, seeking a “full refund” of all tariffs it paid to the government under the overturned International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

“Accordingly...Plaintiffs seek for themselves a full refund from Defendants of all IEEPA duties Plaintiffs have paid to the United States,” lawyers for FedEx wrote in the lawsuit lodged at the Customs and Border Protection Agency in the United States Court of International Trade.”

Going ahead, the picture looks murky and in the same report from NBC we have “House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., [who] said today that the House was not likely to get on the same page when it comes to legislation on tariffs.

“We have a wide range of opinions on this topic, so I think it’d be difficult to build consensus around it, but we’ll have to see,” Johnson said.

Asked if Congress should take the lead on tariffs now that the Supreme Court has issued a ruling, Johnson said the House would “wait and see what the administration does with the executive authority” regarding tariffs.

“As I’ve said, it may take a couple weeks to sort all this out, given the Supreme Court opinion, so we’ll see,” Johnson said.

According to the Associated Press, “Trump has already signed an executive order enabling him to bypass Congress and impose a 10% tax on global imports, starting on Tuesday, the same day as his State of the Union speech.”

Taking a closer look at Trump’s next move, Yahoo Finance reported, “On Friday, he imposed a "global" tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. That statute allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for up to 150 days to address trade deficits. After 150 days, Congress would need to approve any extension. That authority, however, has never been used to impose tariffs,” and is predicted to be a cumbersome process.

“On Monday, the US Customs and Border Protection agency said that it will stop all collections of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as of 12:01 a.m. EST on Tuesday. The agency said in a message to shippers on its Cargo Systems Messaging Service that it will deactivate all tariff codes associated with President Trump's IEEPA-related ‌orders.”

Ratification of the US trade deals from last year with the European Union are now pending, waiting for clarification. Yahoo Finance reported, "Tariff rates on goods negotiated separately, such as steel, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, critical minerals, and agricultural products, aren't impacted by the Supreme Court's decision and will remain in place."

In characteristic fashion the president lashed out against those justices that voted against him, and, “calling them “fools and lap dogs” and he suggested that two he had nominated during his first term — Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — were “an embarrassment to their families” because they didn’t take his side,” according to The New York Times.

While the embattled president engages in his Plan B, according to some on Capitol Hill, he faces this from the NBC/Marist polls: “As of February 2026, a NPR/PBS News/Marist poll shows a record 59% of Americans disapprove of President Trump's handling of the economy, the highest in his terms. Only 36% approve, with 56% believing his tariffs hurt the U.S. economy. Key concerns driving this sentiment include inflation, cost of living, and the potential for a recession. “

Last April the president said that his goal was to even the playing field and force foreign companies to make their products in the United States, but that goal was hardly feasible, with tariff retaliation, and the near impossibility of suddenly reformatting global supply chains, which in the best case scenario could take years, and considerable expense. And, now we see the reality of those lofty goals, failure, rebuttal from the Supreme Court, and anger from those who expected more, and got less.

“The Supreme Court just confirmed what we already know. Trump’s tariffs are illegal. He did it without the support of Congress or the voters, and you paid the price,”  Gov. Pritzker said in a short video posted on the social platform X.

He claimed Trump “illegally took $1,700 from every American family,” a figure that falls within the range cited in Yale Budget Lab research from March of last year, which projected an average household loss of between $1,600 and $2,000 due to the tariffs.

“That’s a tax on working people. Donald Trump now owes you a refund for every dollar of it. America’s working families deserve a refund. Cut the check, Donald,” Pritzker added in a report from The Hill.

Notably, they added, “The governor, who’s been floated as a possible 2028 presidential contender, demanded in an accompanying letter that the president issue refunds of that amount to more than 5.1 million households in Illinois, totaling nearly $8.7 billion.”