CIT and CBP Weigh in on IEEPA Tariff Refund Process
On March 4, 2026, the Cour of International Trade (CIT) issued a ruling in what appears to be a new “lead case” involving IEEPA tariff refunds. In Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, the CIT stated: “[W]ith respect to any and all unliquidated entries that were entered subject to the IEEPA duties, U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] is hereby directed to liquidate those entries without regard to the IEEPA duties. Any liquidated entries for which liquidation is not final shall be reliquidated without regard to IEEPA duties.”
Based on this broad wording and other statements in the decision, this is evidently styled as a nationwide mandate. Some nationwide injunctions have been challenged by the Administration and found improper in recent years (including in a 2025 Supreme Court decision called Trump v. Casa. However, the CIT defended its approach by explaining that there is only one CIT in the United States, and the Trump v. Casa ruling involved federal district courts organized under a different statute. The CIT Judge handling the case also noted that the CIT has assigned to him alone the task of handling CIT cases relating to IEEPA tariffs, reducing the risk of inconsistent rulings.
On March 6, 2026, CBP filed a declaration with the CIT in the Atmus case, stating that they were not presently able to comply with the CIT ruling but believed they could put a process in place for importers to seek refunds through their existing Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) in about 45 days from the declaration (around April 21, 2026). The CIT issued an order for CBP to provide an update to the CIT by Thursday, March 12, 2026. Both the CIT and CBP seem highly motivated to find a way to avoid using existing procedures to process potential IEEPA refunds.
While there could still be more twists and turns in this story, the Administration’s March 6, 2026 declaration provides the first relatively detailed account of how CBP could attempt to implement refunds via a new process within CBP’s existing Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system.
Based on the way things are proceeding, some importers are keeping an eye on liquidation and protest timeframes while waiting to take further steps until CBP and CIT take further actions to develop, clarify, and implement the refund process CBP has proposed. While there are certain existing mechanisms that can be used to request refunds, for some importers they may prove more cumbersome and expensive than the process CBP is working on, and it is possible that future CIT rulings may render those other mechanisms obsolete for purposes of IEEPA refund requests. Even if importers attempt to use existing processes to get in the “front of the line,” they are already behind thousands of others and might also find in a few months that they are in the wrong line. In the meantime, importers should ensure that they are set up to receive electronic refunds using a process CBP rolled out earlier this year that is not directly tied to IEEPA tariff refunds but will likely apply to them.
If you have questions about this matter, please let us know if you would like to discuss the IEEPA refund process further.