Looking ahead, it is critical that we provide the clarity and predictability businesses need.
I will work to provide clarity and predictability for businesses regarding tariffs and related policies.
Occurrences
Evidence
Today’s ruling affirms, despite all the noise of the moment, that the Founders’ system of checks and balances remains strong nearly 250 years later. Several questions remain unanswered, including what happens to the revenue already collected and how the Administration may use alternative authorities to impose tariffs. Looking ahead, it is critical that we provide the clarity and predictability businesses need.
Over the years, I’ve spoken with energy innovators across Utah and the nation. From the Uintah Basin to Beaver’s geothermal fields, I’ve seen cutting-edge facilities building the future of power. Their consistent ask isn’t subsidies—it’s predictability and deregulation.
The site’s May 15, 2026 front-page update highlights a small business and innovation expo Curtis hosted in Utah and lists other recent items, but it does not show any new tariff-specific legislative or executive action in the lookback window.
USTR announced a May 19, 2026 trade-ministerial initiative and said President Trump’s tariff program is actively rebalancing global trade while USTR prepares discussions on MFN, food trade, and excess capacity.
On June 2, USTR said it determined 60 economies had failed to enforce forced-labor import prohibitions and proposed additional duties, including 10% or 12.5% tariff rates and a reduced-rate textile mechanism for some imports.
Curtis continued to address tariffs publicly in a townhall, saying Congress should "take it back, regardless of what the Supreme Court does."
Curtis said the Supreme Court tariff ruling still left unanswered questions about revenue already collected and about how the administration might use other authorities, and he stressed that businesses still need clear, predictable rules.
USTR said it found 60 economies had failed to enforce forced-labor import prohibitions and proposed additional duties, with a public comment period and July hearings still pending.
The homepage's newest items on June 18 highlighted a Foreign Relations hearing on Chinese influence in Jamaica, the FIRE SMART Act, and a 250-mile walk announcement; none of the featured recent items was a tariff-policy action.
Reporting said Curtis privately signaled openness to a bipartisan resolution limiting emergency tariff authority, then voted against the measure, which failed 49-49 after GOP leadership pressure.
The Senate's 2026 roll-call list shows votes during the lookback window from June 9 through June 24, with the latest listed vote on June 24. Searches within the official vote list found no tariff or trade vote in that period.
Curtis's current press-release archive lists recent items on religious liberty, supply chains, health costs, China, firefighters, prediction markets, gambling ads, wildfire fuel removal, and AI labeling; the page contains no match for tariff or trade.
Curtis's official sponsored-legislation page lists recent bills including the Fiscal Commission Act, Community TEAMS Act, ePermit Act, Timeshare Transparency Act, and other measures; searches on the page found no tariff or trade entry.
USTR's Federal Register notice proposed additional duties of 10% or 12.5% for many economies, set written comments due July 6, 2026, and scheduled public hearings beginning July 7, 2026.
On October 30, 2025, the Senate passed S.J.Res. 88, a joint resolution terminating the national emergency declared to impose global tariffs, by 51-47. Curtis is recorded as voting Nay.
On April 30, 2025, S.J.Res. 49, a joint resolution terminating the national emergency declared to impose global tariffs, was defeated 49-49. Curtis is recorded as voting Nay.
Assessments
Curtis has publicly emphasized the need for clearer, more predictable tariff rules for businesses, but the record does not show a binding tariff-policy deliverable, sponsored tariff-clarity legislation, or a successful vote attributable to him. Federal tariff policy remained unsettled during the period reviewed, and Curtis voted against Senate resolutions that would have limited emergency tariff authority. Because he is still serving in the relevant federal office and the promised outcome remains possible, this is unresolved rather than a final failure.
Curtis has publicly emphasized that businesses need clearer, more predictable tariff rules and has discussed restoring congressional control over tariffs, but the record here does not show that he authored, passed, or materially advanced a binding policy that delivered that clarity. The broader federal tariff regime was still changing in 2026, and the strongest legislative evidence cited is a bipartisan limitation measure that failed after Curtis ultimately voted against it. Because he remains in office and the promise is framed as ongoing work rather than a completed discrete action, the best judgment on this record is unresolved.
Curtis repeatedly said businesses need tariff clarity and predictability, and he publicly advocated for congressional action, but the evidence does not show that he enacted or materially secured a binding policy that actually delivered that clarity. The tariff regime was still changing through executive-branch actions in the lookback window, so the promise remains ongoing rather than fulfilled.
Curtis has publicly advocated for tariff-policy clarity and predictability for businesses during his current federal term, including responding to the April 7, 2026 tariff ruling and emphasizing unresolved business uncertainty. The evidence does not show that he enacted, sponsored, or materially advanced a concrete law, binding policy, or completed federal action that actually provided that clarity. Related USTR activity appears to be executive-branch action not credited to Curtis. Because the promise is broad and ongoing, and there is evidence of advocacy but not delivery, the outcome remains unresolved rather than delivered or never.
The evidence shows Senator Curtis repeatedly voiced support for providing clarity and predictability for businesses regarding tariffs and related policies. However, there is no clear record of substantive legislative or executive action taken to deliver on this promise—only public statements and advocacy. Thus, it cannot be determined that the promise was fulfilled or that a serious attempt was made beyond advocacy.