No. The ruling does not trigger automatic refunds. The Administration has stated it will not voluntarily return the duties collected, and CBP has issued no administrative refund process. Recovery requires affirmative legal steps through the Court of International Trade — not an administrative process.

Yes. The reciprocal tariffs imposed under EO 14257 hit imports from 60+ countries at rates from 10% to 41%. If your company paid additional duties since April 2025 on goods from the EU, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, India, Brazil, or most other countries, those are IEEPA tariffs. The Supreme Court's ruling covers all of them.

Most importers do not track this themselves. Liquidation status lives in CBP's ACE system, and your customs broker can help you pull the data. We can also help you check. CBP typically finalizes entries about 314 days after import, so the earliest IEEPA entries started liquidating in December 2025, with more rolling through every week.

There is a two-year statute of limitations for filing at the Court of International Trade under 28 U.S.C. §1581(i), measured from the date the tariffs were published. For China's fentanyl tariff (effective February 4, 2025), the deadline is approximately February 7, 2027. For Canada and Mexico's fentanyl tariffs (effective March 4, 2025), the deadline is approximately March 4, 2027. For the April 2025 reciprocal tariffs on other countries, approximately April 7, 2027. But liquidated entries carry separate 180-day protest windows, and the first of those arrive around June 2026. Waiting adds real risk.

Not as a standalone strategy. The Court of International Trade ruled in AGS Co. v. CBP (December 2025) that IEEPA tariff collection is a "ministerial" action — meaning protests are likely not an effective challenge on their own. Trade attorneys widely recommend a combined approach: filing protests on liquidated entries as a backstop while also pursuing action at the CIT.

Yes. The DOJ stipulated on January 8, 2026 that it would not oppose refunds for importers who filed protective suits at the CIT. The CIT confirmed this extends to future filers. The stipulation creates a legal commitment that is difficult to walk back — but enforcing it may require the CIT to act. The strongest position is one where you have already taken affirmative steps.

Not affected. The Supreme Court's ruling applies only to tariffs imposed under IEEPA. Section 232 tariffs (steel, aluminum, autos), Section 301 tariffs on China, and antidumping or countervailing duty orders were imposed under separate legal authorities and were not part of this case.

No. We help importers assess their exposure, review their entry records, and understand what recovery options are available before any legal filings happen. If pursuing a case at the Court of International Trade makes sense, we connect you with experienced trade counsel. You do not need to find an attorney on your own.

Yes. Under customs law, the right to pursue recovery belongs to the importer of record — the entity that paid the duties to CBP. Whether you absorbed the cost or built it into your pricing, that right sits with you. You may want to review any customer contracts that address tariff adjustments, but the claim belongs to the importer.

Since February 6, 2026, CBP processes all customs refunds electronically through the ACE Portal via ACH (Automated Clearing House). Paper checks are no longer issued except by special waiver. If your business is not enrolled, you will not receive funds when they are issued. We can help you verify your enrollment and get set up if needed.