When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose sweeping tariffs, many in the business community felt a moment of hope. Clarity in trade law matters. Predictability matters. The Court’s decision restored some guardrails around executive tariff authority, and presented anopportunity for the administration to signal a step towards a more reasoned policy direction.The reader may perhaps expect SESOLINC Group, Inc. a local veteran-owned metal fabricator,to cheer tariffs. The company, which operates a 70,000-square-foot facility in Statesboro,Georgia is proud to fabricate and manufacture steel products here in Georgia using largely US made components. But no country is a trade island. And for any complex system, like the United States economy, a successful trade policy requires diversity of concepts, care and planning.

All tariffs aren’t bad. When applied surgically, along with well-planned policies supporting the industries targeted for protection, tariffs can be a building block for growth. But trade policy aimed more at revenue collection than support for American industry, that is also unpredictable, inequitable, and possibly illegal, will slow or even reverse what should be America’s economic goals.

Two examples come to mind.

First is the current steel tariff. While the Court invalidated tariffs imposed under IEEPA, significant steel tariffs remain firmly in place under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The steel tariff percentage – 50% – is the highest it has been for many decades. Such a policy appears to be geared to revenue production instead of advancement of local industry. The taxes are applied across a huge swath of products, some of which are not produced with any quantity at all in the States.

Two other blows to industry arise from its implementation: tariff amounts have changed frequently and unpredictably, and there are no concurrent policies or plans offering US industry a chance to grow market share under the protection of the tariffs.

The final blow is that while small business has little protection, these huge tariffs have been limited for some of the largest companies. In April 2025, the administration exempted carmakers that pay 25% on imported cars from paying other tariffs, such as those on steel and aluminum, and provided a rebate on a proportion of tariffs paid for the next two years. One of the largest buyers of steel and aluminum was therefore given free reign to buy foreign steel with almost no penalty.

A second example arises in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the IEEPA tariffs. The February 20, 2026 Supreme Court decision provided an opportunity for a reset in tariff uncertainty. But the very day of the court decision striking down IEEPA tariffs, the president published a proclamation imposing a new blanket tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. He then publicly announced the intent to increase the rate a few days later. Since Section 122 requires per country analysis to determine “large and serious United States balance- of-payments deficits”, this proclamation appears to again lack solid legal foundation.This uncertainty and lack of planning is what is most destabilizing for non-multinational businesses.

Manufacturing accounts for more than 10% of Georgia’s total economic output and supports over 400,000 jobs statewide. The Georgia Department of Economic Development reports more than 7000 manufacturing facilities across the state. In Coastal Georgia, including Savannah and the surrounding region, manufacturing growth can be a cornerstone of economic expansion — fueling port activity, logistics networks, skilled trade employment, and small business supply chains. But when tariffs are inflated and policy is unpredictable, the consequences cascade:

• Bid pricing becomes nearly impossible
• Long-term supplier agreements lose stability.
• Capital investment decisions are delayed.
• Hiring plans slow.

These effects are being shown to play out from data measuring hiring and manufacturing payrolls since “Liberation Day”. The numbers are down. The result? Margins compress. Growth slows. Risk tolerance shrinks.

A call to draw back on aggressive and unpredictable tariff policy is not an argument against strong domestic manufacturing. On the contrary, Georgia manufacturers are deeply committed to producing here at home. We hire welders, electricians, engineers, machinists, and project managers from our communities. We invest in facilities. We support local vendors. We train skilled trades. But strong domestic manufacturing requires more than patriotic intent. It requires stability and planning. Trade policy should be structured, and strategically aligned to strengthen domestic production.

Georgia’s economy depends on manufacturing strength. Savannah’s and coastal Georgia’s growth depends on industrial stability. Small businesses depend on predictable rules of engagement. If we want to see continued investment, hiring, and expansion in our state, we must move beyond volatility, and toward a durable, well-designed trade framework that strengthens American industry.

Georgia manufacturers stand ready to compete. What we need is a level and predictable field upon which to do it.