What the Supreme Court Ruling, CIT Order, and CBP’s 45-Day Timeline Mean for Your Refund

By the Customs & Compliance Team at Transmodal Corporation  

In a rapid-fire sequence of legal developments that will reshape the U.S. import landscape for years to come, the Court of International Trade has ordered U.S. Customs and Border Protection to begin processing refunds on all tariffs collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. CBP responded today by telling the court it cannot immediately comply, but is building new ACE Portal functionality it expects to have ready within 45 days. Here is everything importers need to know right now.

The Story So Far: A Timeline

The legal battle over IEEPA tariffs has moved at an extraordinary pace. Understanding the sequence is critical for importers assessing their exposure and planning their next steps.

What the Supreme Court Actually Ruled

In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., the Supreme Court held in a 6–3 decision that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson, concluded that the statute’s grant of authority to “regulate importation” does not include the power to levy tariffs, which the Court characterized as a core congressional taxing power under Article I of the Constitution.

The ruling invalidated two major categories of tariffs. First, the “Trafficking and Immigration Tariffs,” first imposed in February 2025 on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, premised on the theory that fentanyl trafficking constituted a national emergency. Second, the “Reciprocal Tariffs” imposed on Liberation Day in April 2025 on virtually all trading partners, based on a declaration that trade deficits constituted a national emergency.

Critically, the decision does not affect tariffs imposed under other legal authorities. Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum remain in place. Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods remain in place. And the replacement Section 122 tariffs imposed within hours of the ruling are a separate matter entirely, though those too are already facing legal challenges from a coalition of 23 states.

The CIT Refund Order: What Judge Eaton Directed

Judge Richard Eaton’s March 5 order is sweeping. While it arose from a lawsuit filed by Atmus Filtration Technologies of Nashville, Tennessee, the order’s language applies broadly. Eaton wrote that all importers of record who paid IEEPA duties are entitled to the benefit of the Supreme Court’s ruling. He directed CBP to liquidate entries without assessing the IEEPA tariff component and to issue refunds with interest.

The scope is staggering. According to CBP’s own filing today, more than 330,000 importers made over 53 million entries under IEEPA, depositing or paying approximately $166 billion in tariffs that now must be returned. Penn Wharton’s Budget Model estimates the total refund liability, including interest, could reach $175 billion.

The order is significant for one additional reason: it suggests that importers should not need to individually sue to receive their refunds. The language indicates an administrative process should be sufficient. This is crucial for the hundreds of thousands of small and mid-size businesses that paid IEEPA tariffs but cannot afford the cost of litigation.

CBP’s Response: “We Can’t Do This Yet”

In a filing today, CBP told Judge Eaton that it cannot currently comply with the refund order. Brandon Lord, Executive Director of CBP’s Trade Programs Directorate, stated that the agency’s existing systems and administrative procedures are not equipped for a task of this scale. Processing 53 million individual refunds manually would, CBP argues, divert personnel from national security and trade enforcement missions.

However, CBP also proposed a solution. The agency is developing new functionality within its Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system that would streamline the process. Under the proposed approach, importers would file a declaration identifying their IEEPA tariff payments. CBP would verify the transactions, recalculate duties without the IEEPA component, finalize the entries, calculate interest, and issue refunds electronically through the U.S. Treasury.

CBP estimates this automated approach would save over 4 million hours of manual work and says it is making “all possible efforts” to have the new ACE functionality operational within 45 days, which would put the target date in late April 2026. The agency emphasized the new process will require minimal submission from importers.

What Importers Need to Do Right Now

1. Verify Your ACE Portal Account and ACH Enrollment

This is the single most important action item. Log into the ACE Secure Data Portal and confirm that your company’s Trade Account Owner has entered valid U.S. bank account information under the ACH Refund Authorization tab, for every 5106 EIN and suffix combination your company uses. If you do not have an ACE Portal account, you need one immediately. If you are unsure who your Account Owner is, contact ACE Support at ace.support@cbp.dhs.gov or (866) 530-4172.

2. Preserve All Entry Documentation

Maintain complete records of every entry subject to IEEPA tariffs, including entry summaries, duty payment confirmations, and any internal records of how tariff costs were allocated or passed through. While CBP’s proposed system will calculate refunds from its own data, having your own records ensures you can identify and dispute any discrepancies.

3. Understand What Is and Is Not Being Refunded

The refund applies exclusively to duties collected under IEEPA authority. This includes the fentanyl/trafficking tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China and the reciprocal tariffs imposed on Liberation Day. It does not include Section 232 tariffs (steel, aluminum, autos), Section 301 tariffs (China technology), or the new Section 122 replacement tariffs in effect since February 24, 2026. Additionally, country-specific trade deals negotiated during the IEEPA period, such as the UK framework agreement, may involve separate considerations.

4. Do Not Assume You Need to Sue

Judge Eaton’s order strongly suggests that an administrative refund process will cover all importers, not just those who have filed lawsuits. Over 2,000 companies, including major names like FedEx, have filed suit in the CIT to protect their refund rights. However, the court has signaled that it does not want to adjudicate each case individually. CBP’s proposed 45-day system appears designed as a universal administrative mechanism. That said, companies with very large refund exposure may still want to consult trade counsel to ensure their rights are fully preserved.

5. Plan for the Cash Flow Impact

If your company paid substantial IEEPA tariffs over the past year, the refund could represent a significant cash infusion. But do not budget against it arriving quickly. Even under the best-case scenario, CBP’s new system would not be operational until late April. There will then be a processing queue involving millions of entries. Companies should plan conservatively, recognizing that refunds may arrive in phases over several months. The refunds will include interest, but the timeline remains uncertain.

6. Review Your Current Tariff Exposure

The IEEPA tariffs are gone, but they have been partially replaced. The Section 122 tariff of 10–15% on all imports took effect February 24, 2026, and runs for 150 days unless extended by Congress. Section 232 and 301 tariffs continue. The net result is that while average effective tariff rates have dropped significantly from their IEEPA peaks, they remain elevated compared to pre-2025 levels. Importers should work with their customs broker to recalculate landed costs under the current tariff structure.

The Bigger Picture: What Comes Next

The IEEPA refund saga is far from over. The government is widely expected to appeal or seek a stay of Judge Eaton’s order. The administration has signaled that it views the refund process as properly belonging to the courts, not the executive branch, and may attempt to slow or limit payouts. Companies should be aware that even with the court order in hand, the path to actual cash-in-hand may involve further legal proceedings.

Meanwhile, the trade policy landscape continues to shift. The Section 122 tariffs are temporary by statute (150 days), but the administration has launched investigations under Section 301 and other authorities that could lead to permanent replacement tariffs. Congress is also weighing legislation that could either codify new tariff authority or constrain executive action further. The one certainty is continued uncertainty.

For importers, the practical takeaway is this: get your ACE account and ACH enrollment in order now, preserve your documentation, and stay in close contact with your customs broker. The refund money is real. The court has ordered it paid. The mechanics of getting it into your account are the remaining challenge, and they are solvable if you act promptly.

This article is provided for informational purposes by Transmodal Corporation and does not constitute legal or financial advice. Importers should consult qualified trade counsel for guidance specific to their circumstances. Information is current as of March 6, 2026, and is subject to change as the legal and administrative process evolves.