Tariff Refunds stall after SCOTUS ruling, pending CIT steps

What changed: IEEPA tariffs voided; refunds await lower-court, CBP guidance

The U.S. Supreme Court has invalidated the Trump administration’s global tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), but the ruling did not include instructions for returning duties already collected. As reported by Fortune, the decision struck the centerpiece tariff program while leaving refund mechanics, eligibility, timing, and process, unaddressed by the Court.

Administration officials have indicated they will look to lower courts for direction on implementation, and importers are awaiting guidance from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In practice, that places the initial contours of any refund process with the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) and CBP, pending further orders and agency procedures.

Why it matters: eligibility, process paths, and deadlines for importers

Eligibility and the practical path to a refund may hinge on the status of each entry. According to Clark Hill, importers with unliquidated entries are positioned to seek corrections administratively, while liquidated entries may require protests or court-ordered reliquidation via the CIT; those mechanisms determine whether, how, and when duties could be returned.

Timing and workload are material issues for trade compliance teams. As reported by S&P Global, trade attorneys note CBP can take significant time, potentially up to two years, to resolve protests, and robust documentation will be critical to substantiating claims and interest calculations.

Trade counsel have cautioned that any refund effort will be complex rather than immediate. Ted Murphy, a partner at Sidley Austin, said “it will not be automatic or immediate,” underscoring the need for structured claims aligned with court and CBP instructions.

Immediate steps: document entries, choose PSC, protest, or CIT action

Importers can begin by organizing entry files, ACE extracts, broker communications, and proof of duty payments, while mapping each entry’s liquidation status. From there, options typically diverge: post-summary corrections (PSCs) for unliquidated entries, protests for liquidated entries, and, where necessary, protective filings at the CIT, always subject to the statutory windows associated with liquidation and protest rights.

Monitoring official signals remains essential because procedures are not yet set. As reported by The Hill, senior administration figures have said they will need guidance from the courts on handling refunds, suggesting that CBP’s administrative pathway and any court-driven reliquidation orders will shape the workflow and deadlines importers must follow.

What the Supreme Court decision did: IEEPA tariffs unlawful ab initio

The ruling concluded that the tariffs imposed under IEEPA exceeded presidential authority, which means the duties are treated as unlawful from the outset and the refund question is now for the lower courts and CBP to administer. Legal analysis from Eversheds Sutherland notes that when duties are later deemed unlawful, refunds are typically owed with interest, though specific calculations and accrual dates are determined by statute and any court orders.

At the time of this writing, broader markets continue to digest policy developments; based on delayed NasdaqGS data, Walmart Inc. recently traded around $122.92 after hours on February 20, 2026, with an ex-dividend date listed as March 20, 2026.