CIT and CBP Outline IEEPA Tariffs Recovery Process

JD Supra Trade Law

Published March 6th, 2026

Detected March 12th, 2026

Summary

The Court of International Trade (CIT) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are outlining a process for importers to recover unlawful IEEPA tariffs. This guidance suggests importers may not need to file protests on all entries immediately, potentially reducing recovery costs. Importers are advised to update their ACE accounts and prepare for potential protest filings.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Court of International Trade (CIT) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are developing a framework for importers to recover tariffs deemed unlawful by the Supreme Court. Recent court orders and CBP declarations suggest a simplified refund mechanism may be implemented, potentially allowing importers to delay filing individual protests until closer to the 180-day deadline. This approach aims to reduce the administrative burden and cost associated with recovering over $142 billion in IEEPA tariffs collected since 2025.

Regulated entities, specifically importers, should ensure their Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) accounts are up-to-date and that they are set up for ACH refunds. While a simplified process is being outlined, the government may still challenge the universal remedy, and some entries may have already passed liquidation or protest deadlines. Therefore, importers are advised to monitor entries for liquidation and protest deadlines, be prepared to file protests, and consider filing an action at the CIT to preserve their rights to a refund.

What to do next

Ensure ACE account is up to date and set up for ACH Refunds.
Monitor entries for liquidation and protest deadlines.
Consider filing an action at the Court of International Trade.

Source document (simplified)

March 11, 2026

69. March 11, 2026 | CIT and CBP Begin to Outline Route to Recovery of IEEPA Tariffs, Suggesting a Possible Reduction in the Cost of Recovery

Thompson Coburn LLP + Follow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X Send Embed

| TRADE ALERT – IMPORTS | |
| HEADLINE | CIT and CBP Begin to Outline Route to Recovery of IEEPA Tariffs, Suggesting a Possible Reduction in the Cost of Recovery |
| DATE | March 11, 2026 |
| AGENCY | Court of International Trade; U.S. Customs and Border Protection |
| EFFECTIVE DATE | March 6, 2026 |
| SUMMARY | Recent developments at the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) have indicated that importers may not need to file protests on all liquidated entries to recover the IEEPA tariffs paid to Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”). While protests may still be necessary to preserve the right to recover duties, importers may benefit from delaying the filing of protests until closer to the end of the protest period (180 days after liquidation) to allow time for the CIT and CBP to implement a simplified refund mechanism.

It is still possible that the government will challenge the universal remedy proposed by the CIT. Additionally, some entries may have (1) liquidated before the Supreme Court’s ruling on Feb. 20, 2026, and/or (2) exceeded the protest deadline. For both of these reasons, we continue to recommend that importers file an action at the CIT.

Action Items for Importers
1. Ensure that your account on CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (“ACE”) is up to date.
2. Ensure that you are set up for ACH Refunds.
3. Monitor entries for liquidation and protest deadlines.
4. Be prepared to file protests before the 180-day protest deadline.
5. Consider filing an action at the Court of International Trade. |
| BACKGROUND | On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court struck down IEEPA tariffs as unlawful— affirming the May 28, 2025, ruling of the CIT in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump. The ruling implicates more than $142 billion in IEEPA tariffs collected by the Trump Administration since 2025. Importers have filed more than 2,000 actions at the CIT to preserve their right to a refund.

On March 4, 2026, the CIT issued an order directing CBP to liquidate all unliquidated entries without IEEPA duties. The CIT also ordered that all entries for which liquidation is not final to be reliquidated with a refund of the IEEPA duties. |
| DETAILS | On March 6, 2026, the CIT suspended the March 4 order “to the extent that it directs immediate compliance.” This suspension followed a closed conference in Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, to continue determining how the IEEPA duties can be refunded to importers. The CIT will hold another conference with the parties on March 12, 2026.

In response to the CIT’s March 4 Order, CBP filed a declaration detailing a proposed framework for how CBP may provide IEEPA duty refunds. CBP currently anticipates the process will involve the following steps:
1. The importer files a declaration using their portal account in the Automated Commercial Environment (“ACE”) that includes a list of entries on which IEEPA duties were paid.
2. The ACE system 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).
3. CBP verifies the declaration and processes refunds.
4. The ACE system automatically finalizes (liquidates or reliquidates) the entries.
5. The ACE system automatically aggregates the refunds with interest by importer and liquidation date.
6. CBP certifies the refunds.
7. The Department of the Treasury issues IEEPA refunds electronically via the ACH Refund system.

CBP expects this functionality to be ready in approximately 45 days. However, even if refunds are managed through summation of all entries by each importer of record, there are over 70 million entries that are due refunds, so processing will take time. In anticipation of this process, importers should begin to gather and retain records of all entries on which IEEPA duties were paid.

While these filings demonstrate that CBP is moving forward with the design of a refund process, significant questions remain. The CIT did not direct CBP to suspend the liquidation of entries. It is unknown how entries that are liquidated but not protested will be treated. For this reason, we suggest that importers continue to file protests and cases until this decision is finalized, but importers may want to delay filing protests until the end of the protest period to allow the CIT and CBP to provide additional information.

One of the issues that is certain to develop in the coming weeks is the prioritization of the refunds. There remains a possibility that those who have a pending action at the CIT or have filed protests may have their refunds processed first, although this is not a guarantee.

The Court filings make it increasingly clear that importers must have an importer account on CBP’s ACE portal for the recovery of duties. We urge all importers to establish their accounts on ACE and to make sure that they are set up for the ACH refund process. CBP’s declaration noted that CBP will be unable to process refunds to any importer who has not completed the necessary steps to receive refunds electronically, and even noted that a small percentage of importers have ACE portal accounts or have set up ACH Refund. Finally, as the litigation is likely to go on for a few more months, importers should continue to monitor entries for liquidation, be prepared to file protests on those with imminent deadlines, and consider filing actions at the CIT. |
| BASIS | International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq.) |
| CITE | Federal Court of Appeals order (March 2, 2026) : V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, Nos. 2025-1812, -1813 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2, 2026). Supreme Court decision (Feb. 20, 2026): affirmed: Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., 607 U.S. __, case No. 25–250 (2026); vacated and remanded: Learning Resources v. Trump, 607 U. S. __ (2026), case No. 24–1287.

CIT Order re: pending IEEPA cases (Dec. 15, 2025): AGS Co. Auto. Sol. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 25-00255 (Ct. Int’l Trade, Dec. 15, 2025).

Federal Court of Appeals decision (Aug. 29, 2025) : V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States, 149 F.4th 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2025), cert. granted, No. 25-250 (U.S. Sept. 9, 2025). |
[View source.]

Send Print Report

Latest Posts

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
Attorney Advertising.

Written by:

Thompson Coburn LLP Contact + Follow more less

What do you want from legal thought leadership?

Please take our short survey – your perspective helps to shape how firms create relevant, useful content that addresses your needs:

Take the survey now »

Published In:

Court of International Trade + Follow Customs and Border Protection + Follow Imports + Follow International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) + Follow International Trade + Follow Protests + Follow Refunds + Follow SCOTUS + Follow Tariffs + Follow Trump Administration + Follow US Trade Policies + Follow Administrative Agency + Follow International Trade + Follow more less

Thompson Coburn LLP on:

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Sign Up Log in ** By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.* - hide - hide