Connect with us

Accounting

Trump tariffs’ fate rides on Supreme Court

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s three U.S. Supreme Court appointees will play pivotal roles as the court considers the fate of his signature global tariffs Wednesday.

Each of the three — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — has generally backed the president in a blizzard of emergency orders this year letting Trump implement his policies temporarily.

But the tariff case will be the first time the court and its 6-3 Republican-appointed majority have directly considered Trump’s underlying assertions of sweeping presidential power. And to varying degrees, the Trump appointees have hinted that they aren’t sure bets to back him as he seeks unprecedented authority to levy tariffs in the name of addressing national emergencies. 

“I don’t think it’s inevitable that this is going to be a sort of partisan alignment, or the sort of standard 6-3 alignment that we’ve seen in some other cases,” said Roman Martinez, an appellate lawyer at Latham & Watkins who helped file a brief for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposing the tariffs.

The case will decide the fate of most of the import taxes Trump has imposed since taking office, including his April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Trump says the tariffs are authorized by the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives the president a panoply of tools to address national security, foreign policy and economic emergencies — but doesn’t explicitly authorize tariffs. Administration lawyers say the national trade deficit and fentanyl crisis constitute emergencies that let the president invoke the law and impose tariffs on trillions of dollars of trade.

Here’s a look at how each Trump appointee might approach the case, along with another key figure, Chief Justice John Roberts. The companies and states challenging the levies will probably need the votes of two of the four to win the case. 

The court’s three liberals Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — are likely to vote against Trump. Conservatives Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito usually side with Trump.

Brett Kavanaugh

Some court watchers say Kavanaugh is the most likely of the Trump appointees to back his tariffs. It’s a bit of an unusual spot for Kavanaugh, who in other contexts joins Barrett or Roberts to put restraints on their more conservative colleagues, including Gorsuch.

But Kavanaugh is a staunch advocate of presidential power, particularly when interpreting statutes affecting foreign affairs or national security. “The usual understanding is that Congress intends to give the president substantial authority and flexibility to protect America and the American people,” he wrote in June in a case involving the Federal Communications Commission.

Kavanaugh made those comments while discussing the so-called major questions doctrine, an issue that could be central in the tariff case. Under that doctrine, which the court used repeatedly to thwart Democrat Joe Biden during his presidency, federal agencies need explicit congressional authorization to take actions that have sweeping economic or political significance.

The doctrine “has not been applied by this court in the national security or foreign policy contexts, because the canon does not reflect ordinary congressional intent in those areas,” Kavanaugh wrote.

The best hope for the challengers may be that Kavanaugh will see the case as more about the tariff and taxing powers that the Constitution allocates to Congress than about the president’s foreign-affairs and national-security authority. 

Even so, the opponents may be hard-pressed to win over Kavanaugh. He “may be less in play for the plaintiffs who are challenging the tariffs,” said Elizabeth Prelogar, an appellate lawyer at Cooley who was Biden’s solicitor general. 

Neil Gorsuch

In contrast, Gorsuch might be less sympathetic to Trump than the conservative justice is in other contexts. 

A stickler for statutory language, Gorsuch is likely to have questions about Trump’s use of a law that doesn’t explicitly mention either tariffs or taxes. The closest the law comes is by saying the president may “regulate” the “importation” of products in emergency situations.

Gorsuch is a staunch advocate of both the major questions doctrine and a related legal argument known as the nondelegation doctrine, which limits Congress’ leeway to hand off its constitutional legislative and taxing powers. In the FCC case, he said the nondelegation doctrine was especially important as a check on Congress’s ability to give away its domestic taxing power, though Gorsuch said tariffs might be a different matter.

Though he normally aligns with Thomas and Alito, Gorsuch may be more likely to vote against Trump’s tariffs than Kavanaugh is, according to Prelogar. “It might actually be the chief, Barrett and Gorsuch who are in play,” she said.

Amy Coney Barrett

Like Gorsuch, Barrett is a textualist who focuses heavily on the words of a statute. She has embraced a softer version of the major questions doctrine than some of her colleagues, describing it as a “common sense” tool to help ascertain how much power Congress was handing off.

Because the Constitution vests all legislative powers with Congress, “a reasonable interpreter would expect it to make the big-time policy calls itself, rather than pawning them off to another branch,” she wrote in 2023, when she joined the court in striking down Biden’s bid to slash the student debt of 40 million people.

One can imagine Barrett voting to block Trump’s tariffs as a similarly “big-time policy call” that Congress didn’t authorize. But her opinion didn’t mention taxes or tariffs, and she didn’t say whether foreign-policy or national-security implications would affect her analysis.

John Roberts

Roberts tends to care less about legal doctrine than the Trump appointees and more about the court’s institutional role and practical ramifications.

The chief justice famously cast the deciding vote in 2012 to uphold Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, declining to invalidate that president’s signature domestic accomplishment even while disagreeing with him on major legal questions. Roberts now will have to decide whether to vote against Trump’s top economic initiative.

Doing so may entail a cost, given Trump’s penchant for lashing out at the court and individual justices when they don’t agree with him.

“The justices who are going to determine the outcome of this case are going to feel like they need a really pretty strong case on the legal merits before they’re going to decide that they’re going to cross swords with the president,” said Donald Verrilli, an appellate lawyer at Munger, Tolles & Olson and former solicitor general under Barack Obama.

“You can’t help but think that that’s going to be hovering over the decision-making process in this case,” Verrilli added.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

on

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

on

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending