A few days ago, President Trump announced on Truth Social that tariff dividend checks are in the works for the majority of Americans. With the exception of high-income individuals, President Trump plans on giving every American citizen $2,000 in the form of dividend checks from a portion of the money his tariffs bring in. On Monday, President Trump once again confirmed that this will be happening. Watch what he had to say here: JUST IN: From the Oval Office, President Trump CONFIRMS he will be rolling out $2,000 “tariff dividend” checks to low and middle-income Americans “We’re going to use the remaining tariffs to lower our debt… TRILLIONS of dollars have been taken in terms of investment, from… pic.twitter.com/9YwbUYnc6C — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) November 10, 2025 JUST IN: From the Oval Office, President Trump CONFIRMS he will be rolling out $2,000 “tariff dividend” checks to low and middle-income Americans “We’re going to use the remaining tariffs to lower our debt… TRILLIONS of dollars have been taken in terms of investment, from the tariffs.” If this comes to pass, it will be interesting to see how many Democrats refuse to cash in those checks… Anyone want to take any bets?! However, it’s important to note that giving tariff dividends to every American would take an act of Congress, since they are the ones with power of the purse. USA Today explained: Can Trump send $2,000 checks alone? Not legally, the power of the purse remains with Congress. The stimulus checks sent out during the pandemic were passed by Congress and then signed by Trump, for example. The other issue is how much a dividend would actually cost. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget — nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that seeks to educate the public on issues of fiscal policy impact — is working on an analysis but so far has found that a $2,000 dividend will cost about $600 billion. Tariffs are expected to bring in about $300 billion in revenue per year, meaning a dividend would be twice as expensive as tariffs. President Trump’s proposal for tariff dividends also comes as the Supreme Court is set to make a very important ruling on his tariff powers. As President Trump noted in that clip, it would be disastrous if SCOTUS ruled against him, as it would require the U.S. to pay back trillions of dollars in tariffs and/or investments already secured. Forbes has more: There may be another problem. About half of the tariffs—roughly $100 billion—were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Whether President Trump had the power to impose those tariffs is now under review by the Supreme Court. The 1977 law allows the president “to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,” if he declares a national emergency “with respect to such threat.” This includes regulating imports and exports. Trump suggests that there are two threats: the flow of fentanyl into the U.S. and large trade deficits. Small businesses and states challenged the use of IEEPA in court, and those challenges eventually landed at the Supreme Court. The theory asserted in those lawsuits is that the executive’s power to regulate imports does not include the power to impose tariffs. They go on to say that tariffs are effectively like the internal taxes collected by the IRS, and taxing power—apparently uniquely—can be delegated by Congress to the president only with a highly specific delegation. Importantly, those challenging the president’s power to impose tariffs aren’t arguing that Congress cannot delegate the power to tax or to tariff, only that there is no delegation here. When Congress delegates the “uniquely dangerous” tax power to the president, they assert, it must speak clearly, preferably using specific words like “tariff.” While the justices have been asked to resolve the matter quickly, it’s unclear when we’ll have the court’s ruling. However, if the oral arguments offer any sort of window into the Supreme Court’s leaning (they generally do), the Court appeared skeptical of President Donald Trump’s authority to impose sweeping tariffs. The justices seemed to agree with those who argued that the tariffs exceeded the president’s powers. And, interestingly, while arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, Solicitor General John Sauer attempted to downplay the dollars being collected. “The fact that [the tariffs] raise revenue is only incidental,” Sauer told the Court.