United States Customs and Border Protection Unveils Tariff Refund Process
In the IMA’s last tariff update with Barnes & Thornburg, the IMA reported that the new tariff refund system was being developed allowing mass claims. United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has now released its long-anticipated instructions for how and when importers should submit refund requests following the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
From Barnes & Thornburg
On March 4, 2026, the Court of International Trade issued an order instructing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to begin issuing refunds to importers that previously paid IEEPA duties to CBP. Below are a few highlights from the CIT order.
- For unliquidated entries, CBP has been instructed to liquidate those entries without the application of IEEPA duties (i.e., CBP must liquidate with refund of IEEPA duties), and
- For liquidated entries for which “liquidation is not final,” CBP has been instructed to reliquidate those entries without regard to IEEPA duties (i.e., to issue a refund on IEEPA duties).
- This order applies to all importers who paid IEEPA duties.
The term “liquidation” refers to the final computation or ascertainment of duties on entries, which typically occurs around 314 days after the entry date. However, many importers have found that some of their entries subject to IEEPA duties liquidated earlier than the 314 days; thus, each importer should confirm their entry liquidation status. Additionally, effective February 6, 2026, CBP has stated it will only issue tariff refunds electronically to importers that are enrolled in ACE and have set up refund authorization via Automated Clearing House (ACH). CBP’s instructions on ACH refund authorization can be found at the following Federal Register notice: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/01/02/2025-24171/electronic-refunds.
Notwithstanding today’s CIT order, there remain several unanswered questions, including:
- What is meant by “liquidation is not final”? Typically, this is defined as more than 180 days after the date of liquidation (i.e., protest deadline).
- What will happen to finally liquidated entries (i.e., have passed the 180 days and that were not protested)? We note that, in a different IEEPA case before the CIT, the Court stated that filing protests may be “futile” in protesting the constitutionality of IEEPA duties. However, in an abundance of caution and in light of today’s CIT order, importers may want to consider filing protests for any liquidated entries that are approaching the 180-day deadline to delay the finality of liquidation.
- Is this CIT order the final word on IEEPA tariff refunds? We think the US government is likely to appeal this CIT order and ask that the Federal Circuit stay (i.e., “freeze”) the CIT order. Following a conference before the CIT on Friday, March 6, more information will certainly come this week.
On March 6, CBP filed a declaration to the CIT stating that it is working on an ACE functionality to deploy for ACE refunds. That process would potentially include the following:
- The importer files a declaration in ACE that includes a list of entries on which IEEPA duties were paid.
- 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.
- ACE automatically finalizes (liquidates or reliquidates) the entries.
- 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.
On March 6, CIT Judge Eaton suspended his March 4 order as the Court considers the next steps. On the same day, CIT Judge Eaton issued an order directing an update from CBP on the ACE functionality process development by March 12. In his order, Judge Eaton wrote the following:
The court has read the Declaration of Brandon Lord, Executive Director, Trade Programs Directorate, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (ECF No. 31), which states that Customs “can develop and implement new . . . functionality” in Customs’ Automated Commercial Environment (known as ACE) “that will streamline and consolidate refunds and interest payments on an importer basis” and describes the steps of a simple and efficient process to issue the refunds. (emphasis added).
Judge Eaton held a closed conference session on Friday and the CIT has not yet released the transcripts or recordings from the hearing. So, at this point, the only inkling of whether the CIT will approve of this process is in Judge Eaton’s order. His language indicates that CBP’s proposal is a “simple and efficient process to issue the refunds.”
Supreme Court strikes down Trump tariffs
The Supreme Court on Friday, February 20, 2026 struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump’s tariff agenda.
The law that undergirds those import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” the majority ruled six to three in the long-awaited decision.
Read the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Full Here
The Illinois Manufacturers’ Association (IMA) released the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision on tariffs:
“American manufacturers need a fair, rules-based system to successfully compete in markets across the globe. While tariffs can be an effective tool when tailored narrowly, many Illinois manufacturers reported that constantly changing across-the-board tariffs caused uncertainty, limited their ability to procure critical inputs, raised costs, and hurt competitiveness,” said Mark Denzler, president & CEO of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association. “We hope today’s decision will provide a stable, effective framework for the United States to negotiate trade agreements with partners, while utilizing tariffs to go after bad actors cheating the system, stealing intellectual property or otherwise undermining the rules. This should serve as a reminder of the importance of collaboration and coordination between industry and policymakers to maintain our nation’s manufacturing and economic strength.”
NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons and Rockwell Automation Chairman and CEO and NAM Board Chair Blake Moret issued the following joint statement on today’s Supreme Court decision:
“Today’s decision underscores the importance of clarity and durability in U.S. trade policy.
“Manufacturers rely on stability to plan investments, grow operations and create jobs. Ongoing legal and policy uncertainty makes it more difficult to make the long-term decisions that drive American competitiveness.
“Now is the time for policymakers to work together to provide a clear and consistent framework for trade, one that strengthens domestic manufacturing, secures supply chains for critical inputs, empowers the administration to negotiate strong trade deals and ensures manufacturers can access the materials and components they need to grow, compete and create jobs in America and the export markets they need to sell U.S.-made goods around the world. If tariffs are utilized as a tool, they should be targeted to countries engaged in specific unfair trade practices, particularly by nonmarket economies.
“We share the president’s goal of ushering in the greatest manufacturing era in American history, and clear, durable trade policies will help manufacturers deliver on that promise. Strengthening supply chain resilience will ensure manufacturers can expand production, compete globally and power economic growth here at home.
“The NAM will continue working with leaders in Congress and the administration to advance durable solutions that support manufacturers, strengthen America’s industrial base and benefit the millions of Americans who depend on a strong manufacturing economy.”
