When President Donald Trump declared intentions last year to elevate the effective tariff rate to levels unseen since the 1930s, the majority of chief executives remained silent. They recognized that opposing the President’s ambitions—let alone his defining economic agenda—could lead to consequences far exceeding those policies themselves.
With billions in annual revenue at stake, leaders of multinational corporations typically kept a low profile. However, Victor Schwartz, proprietor of the small New York wine importer VOS Selections, took a significant step forward.
Schwartz became the face of the effort to overturn Trump’s most sweeping tariffs—and he prevailed in a case that the Supreme Court ruled upon this past Friday.
Initially, he was hesitant to assume such a prominent role, he told CNN in an interview following the verdict on Friday.
“It’s one thing to join a case, but being the lead plaintiff gave me pause,” Schwartz stated.
He took on this position after a family contact connected him with the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian-leaning, public-interest focused nonprofit legal group. The Liberty Justice Center was preparing to challenge the unprecedented use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to unilaterally impose tariffs, and after discussions with numerous other small businesses, the group selected Schwartz as the lead plaintiff.
With corporate America largely standing on the sidelines, Schwartz mentioned feeling like the “last line of defense” in stopping the tariffs, which he views as a serious overreach of executive power and a threat to his family business.
Ultimately, he achieved a victory, as the Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s broad emergency tariffs were unlawful. Yet, Schwartz’s triumph came with a personal cost.
“I’m constantly being attacked via messages, emails, and I can’t stop it,” he shared. “It’s a bit ugly. It could probably be worse. We’re keeping the office doors locked.”
“We Can’t Just Pass on the Costs”
Schwartz’s business imports wine and spirits from 16 nations. He is intimately familiar with the country’s complex tariff code and how swiftly rates can shift, especially under Trump’s watch. For instance, at one point last year, Trump threatened to impose a 50% duty on goods from the European Union.
“The economic situation right now, especially in my industry, is definitely very unhealthy,” he observed. “We’ve had to go through every single item in our book since ‘Day of Liberation’—it seems like at least four times.” (Trump termed the date of April 2, 2025, the day he introduced his now-rescinded tariffs, as “Day of Liberation.”)
Schwartz’s win could mean that he and other importers might receive substantial refunds amounting to at least $134 billion, based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection tariff revenue data as of December 14th. However, the mechanism for this reimbursement remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, Friday’s judgment will not prevent Trump from pursuing other forms of tariffs. The President already signed a 10% global tariff on Friday under a separate trade statute and has hinted at a host of other measures aimed at restricting imports.
Schwartz expressed concern about other tariffs Trump might impose, but noted that those would likely be far more limited in scope and carry expiration dates.
“We try to keep the fear at bay while still acknowledging the difficulties of what’s around us,” Schwartz concluded.
Even large corporations faced backlash for pointing out the burdens of Trump’s tariffs. Amazon drew the administration’s ire following reports that the e-commerce giant was planning to illustrate how tariffs impacted consumer pricing.
However, after speaking with Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Trump stated that the company would not proceed in that direction. (A company representative, however, told CNN at the time that the move was “never actively considered for core Amazon.”)
For Schwartz, the positive backing he received from other businesses across the country and spanning the political spectrum sustained him amid the criticism.
Similarly, Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources, proudly took on the Trump administration’s tariffs.
“The math was simple: I couldn’t afford the tax they were trying to impose on me,” Woldenberg told CNN. However, unlike Schwartz, he personally absorbed his legal expenses, which amounted to a “seven-figure sum.”
“I wanted my name on that lawsuit. I hadn’t done anything wrong,” Woldenberg asserted.
“He’s threatening individual companies. He’s making carve-outs. All of this makes people feel very vulnerable,” said Morrison.
With the lawsuit spearheaded by Morrison, large corporations had the opportunity to “sit on the sidelines and wait and see what happens” in the current tariff proceedings.
In this instance, however, thousands of corporations, including Costco, had preemptively sued the U.S. government, seeking refunds for their share without risking their reputations in the manner that Schwartz and Woldenberg did.
Schwartz doesn’t mind that corporate America might benefit from the risk he assumed: “Well, to start a fire, you need a small match. Fine, I’ll take that. I’m not going to feel bad about it. I’m going to be proud of it.”
To commemorate the victory, Schwartz said he planned to open an old bottle of Châteauneuf-du-Pape.
About the Author
