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, 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, 2026March 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:

  1. The importer files a declaration in the ACE that includes a list of entries on which IEEPA duties were paid.
  2. 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).
  3. CBP verifies the declaration and processes refunds as soon as practicable.
  4. The ACE automatically finalizes (liquidates or reliquidates) the entries.
  5. The ACE 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.

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.

Thompson Hine LLP trade attorneys and advisors continue to monitor this matter and will report further developments on IEEPA tariff refunds.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Scott E. Diamond** Scott E. Diamond**

Scott is a senior policy advisor with more than 25 years’ experience with the legislative and regulatory processes involved in international trade policy, remedies and enforcement. This includes working with clients on matters involving export controls, economic sanctions, human rights and forced labor…

Scott is a senior policy advisor with more than 25 years’ experience with the legislative and regulatory processes involved in international trade policy, remedies and enforcement. This includes working with clients on matters involving export controls, economic sanctions, human rights and forced labor compliance, corporate anti-boycott and antibribery compliance, national security investigations, and foreign direct investment in the United States.

**Not licensed to practice law.

Photo of David M. Schwartz David M. Schwartz

David is the leader of Thompson Hine’s International Trade practice group and a member of the firm’s International Committee. He advises clients on the risks and opportunities presented by U.S. international trade laws and regulations and international trade agreements. He focuses on antidumping…

David is the leader of Thompson Hine’s International Trade practice group and a member of the firm’s International Committee. He advises clients on the risks and opportunities presented by U.S. international trade laws and regulations and international trade agreements. He focuses on antidumping (AD), countervailing duty (CVD) and safeguard litigation, international trade policy, and cross-border compliance issues affecting goods, services, technology and investments that involve transportation, customs, export controls, economic sanctions, anti-boycott and anti-bribery laws and regulations.

Photo of Michelle Li Michelle Li

Michelle focuses her practice on assisting clients in a wide range of industries with trade remedy proceedings. Her experience includes representing clients before the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. International Trade Commission, U.S. Court of International Trade, and U.S. Court of Appeals for…

Michelle focuses her practice on assisting clients in a wide range of industries with trade remedy proceedings. Her experience includes representing clients before the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. International Trade Commission, U.S. Court of International Trade, and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. She also advises on import entry clearance and other customs and importation issues involving food, drug, medical, and tobacco products regulated by the FDA and consumer products regulated by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Photo of Kerem Bilge Kerem Bilge

Kerem advises U.S. and foreign clients on a broad range of international trade and customs matters. He represents clients in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings before U.S. government agencies and courts. Kerem also assists clients with import compliance, including identifying risks and developing…

Kerem advises U.S. and foreign clients on a broad range of international trade and customs matters. He represents clients in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings before U.S. government agencies and courts. Kerem also assists clients with import compliance, including identifying risks and developing strategies to remain compliant with U.S. Customs and Border Protection requirements.

Photo of Samir D. Varma Samir D. Varma

Samir advises multinational corporations on export controls, economic sanctions and customs, and counsels individuals and corporations on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and other anti-corruption laws. He represents clients in enforcement actions before U.S. regulatory agencies and conducts corporate internal investigations.

Photo of Francesca M.S. Guerrero Francesca M.S. Guerrero

Francesca counsels clients on compliance with export controls, sanctions, import regulations, human rights and forced labor, and the FCPA and antibribery laws. She works closely with companies to develop tailored compliance programs that fit their specific needs, and routinely advises clients on some…

Francesca counsels clients on compliance with export controls, sanctions, import regulations, human rights and forced labor, and the FCPA and antibribery laws. She works closely with companies to develop tailored compliance programs that fit their specific needs, and routinely advises clients on some of their most challenging international transactions, involving dealings in high-risk jurisdictions or with high-risk counterparties. Francesca also counsels companies through all phases of internal investigations of potential trade and antibribery violations and represents companies across industries before related government agencies.

Photo of Aaron C. Mandelbaum Aaron C. Mandelbaum

Aaron focuses his practice on advising clients on compliance with international economic sanctions, export controls, and U.S. import laws and regulations. He is also involved in assisting clients with complex cross-border transactions, anti-dumping and countervailing duty litigation, utilization of international and preferential trade…

Aaron focuses his practice on advising clients on compliance with international economic sanctions, export controls, and U.S. import laws and regulations. He is also involved in assisting clients with complex cross-border transactions, anti-dumping and countervailing duty litigation, utilization of international and preferential trade agreements, and customs classifications. Most recently, Aaron has counseled clients navigating requirements under the Export Administration Regulations.