A victory has been set by refund claimants as the U.S. Court of appeals denied the government a stay and remanded back to the U.S. Court of International trade (CIT). While the decision is procedural in nature, this marks another step forward for importers seeking refunds of the illegal tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
History & Context
On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of the IEEPA tariffs to broaden global tariffs was illegal. Following the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruling, the Department of Justice (DOJ) tried to dela the process by requesting to implement 90-day stay. Their argument was that Congress needed time to create a “Legislative solution” for the mass volume of possible refunds. On March 2nd however, the Federal Circuit issued a unanimous order denying the government’s stay. This effectively ended the “pause” on litigation and returned jurisdiction to the CIT).
Operational Challenges for Importers
Despite the ruling there continues to be disconnect between the legal rulings and the administrative implementation. While U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a notice to stop assessing IEEPA duties, the Automated Commercial Ace (ACE) System has continued to liquidate some entries with those Tariffs still attached. Imports must stay vigilant about liquidation statuses and protest deadlines, as the system has not yet fully synchronized with the court’s implemented changes.
The “New” Tariff Landscape
The invalidation of IEEPA tariffs does not mean a zero-tariff environment. The administration has already implemented a 15% “Global Import Surcharge” under Section 122 of the Trade Act, which has a 150-day lifespan unless approved by Congress. Moreover, the government intends to pursue Section 301 tariffs, which are unaffected by the IEEPA legal challenge. These challenges continue to stick around, causing a headache for those who thought they were free from the tariffs.
Strategic Recommendations for Importers
To effectively “secure their place in line” for refunds, it’s recommended that importers take a proactive legal stance rather than wait for a general administrative resolution. This involves filing Post-Summary Corrections (PSCs) for entries that have not yet liquidated and lodging formal protests for those that have already liquidated with the unlawful tariffs. Furthermore, the firm suggests initiating direct litigation by filing a complaint with the Court of International Trade (CIT) to firmly establish legal standing, ensuring that the importer is positioned for a recovery regardless of how the broader administrative process unfolds.
Why TradeFlex?
Strategic decision-making and collaboration are crucial for navigating these challenges and ensuring growth and success in the globalized supply chain. With careful management and informed policy decisions, there are opportunities for growth and success in the complex landscape of global manufacturing.
Here at TradeFlex, we can guide and help overcome the possible issues that may arise in the future and provide a long-lasting partnership that will help overcome any obstacle. With our El Paso and Valley locations, we deliver the best dedicated and reliant teams no matter what your location. We are always ready to share a helping hand. Visit us at https://trade-flex.com/ for more details.
