………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
CIT Suspends Earlier Order Directing IEEPA Tariff Refunds
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Excerpted from thomsonhinesmartrade.com
Read full story here:
On March 6, 2026, Judge Richard Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) held a closed conference in Atmus Filtration, Inc. vs. United States, to continue the Court’s process in determining how the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs can be refunded to importers of record.
At the conclusion of the conference, Judge Eaton paused his earlier order directing CBP to immediately begin paying refunds (emphasis added), noting a declaration submitted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) discussing limitations and difficulties in complying with this aspect of the order.
This conference followed the CIT’s order earlier this week finding that “[a]ll importers of record whose entries were subject to IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit” of the U.S. Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026 decision, invalidating the IEEPA as lawful authority to impose tariffs. For recent background information, see Thompson Hine updates of February 20, 2026, March 2, 2026, and March 4, 2026.
In response to the CIT’s order on IEEPA tariff refunds, Brandon Lord, Executive Director of Trade Programs for CBP filed a declaration detailing how CBP may be able to provide tariff refunds. In providing the scope of the task, Lord stated that, as of March 4, 2026, “over 330,000 importers have made a total of over 53 million entries in which they have deposited or paid duties imposed pursuant to the [IEEPA] …. [and that] the total amount of IEEPA duties and estimated duty deposits collected pursuant to IEEPA is approximately $166 billion.” The declaration generally details the framework for entry and liquidation and the capabilities of CBP’s electronic Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system that records U.S. imports.
To address the CIT’s order to refund the IEEPA duties, Lord states in his declaration that CBP is faced with an “unprecedented volume of refunds” and that the agency’s “existing administrative procedures and technology are not well suited to a task of this scale and will require manual work that will prevent personnel from fully carrying out the agency’s trade enforcement mission.” He also notes that the current system “requires refunds be certified for accuracy by personnel from both CBP’s Office of Field Operations and Office of Finance, separately, before submission to the Department of the Treasury for issuance.” Assuming each entry subject to the IEEPA tariffs is entitled to a refund, Lord notes that this would total 53,173,939 refunds involving 330,566 importers..
Lord states in his declaration that “CBP is confident that it can develop and implement new ACE functionality that will streamline and consolidate refunds and interest payments on an importer basis,” and anticipates that the process will involve the following steps:
- The importer files a declaration in the ACE that includes a list of entries on which IEEPA duties were paid.
- The ACE runs a series of validations on each entry within the declaration and automatically re-calculates the duty owed without the IEEPA tariffs (with applicable interest).
- CBP verifies the declaration and processes refunds as soon as practicable.
- The ACE automatically finalizes (liquidates or reliquidates) the entries.
- The ACE automatically aggregates the refunds with interest by importer and liquidation date.
- CBP certifies the refunds.
- The Department of the Treasury issues IEEPA refunds electronically.
CBP is making all possible efforts to have this new ACE functionality ready for use in 45 days.
It should be noted that two immediate legal options remain for the U.S. government defendants: (i) filing a petition before the U.S. Supreme Court for rehearing of its IEEPA decision; and/or (ii) appealing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit any of the recent orders issued by the CIT seeking to implement the higher court’s decision and addressing how refunds will be issued. Despite a surprisingly quick response by the CIT to proceed, it should be remembered that President Donald Trump stated that this matter could be litigated for years.
See also, additional information from Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, PA:
