Policy & Compliance
for a maximum period of 150 days. When merchandise is brought into the US, an importer pays an estimated amount at entry which is then finalised around 314 days later, a process known as liquidation. Eaton directed CBP to finalise the entry cost on shipments without the tariff being assessed, resulting in a refund. “Customs knows how to do this,” he told a court hearing, according to a recording on the court’s website. He said the agency should be able to programme its system to issue refunds, which are regularly issued when an importer overpays on an estimated duty. “They do it every day. They liquidate entries and make refunds,” he said. Refund process Once liquidated, importers have 180 days to formally contest the duties. After that window closes, the liquidation is legally final. The judge’s view was that the agency would have to recalculate the correct amount. Eaton said he did not want to have to hear each case. “We want to work out a method by which those importers can make a claim for duties that were unlawfully applied.” More than 300,000 importers paid the higher tariffs. The vast majority of importers are smaller businesses, who are hoping that customs officials adopt a simple, low-cost system to pay reimbursements. Many US importers had publicly stated that they might abandon their refund if they had to sue or go through a cumbersome customs administrative process. US court processes are complex and multi-layered, creating opportunities for delays. To date no refunds have been paid by the Customs & Border Protection (CBP) and there is the danger that the US government will appeal Eaton’s decision. Then there are additional questions to consider – who is entitled to keep the refunded duties? The importer or the final consumer? The reader should remember that using legal routes, the Administration is seeking to re- impose higher tariffs. It looks like the US import market will be disrupted for some time yet.
The US Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump’s tariffs have not been legal. But what happens next? Another day, another US court judgment
T he US Supreme Court ruled in March that President Trump could not use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on US trading partners. The majority decision was that only Congress could impose such taxes. BIFA noted that the judgment made no reference to the need to repay the estimated $130 billion overpaid in tariffs, nor the procedure to be followed. Tariff refunds In a very significant development, federal judge Richard Eaton of the US Court of International Trade has potentially cleared the way for thousands of businesses to receive refunds for tariffs that the US Supreme Court struck down last month. The US Court of International Trade ordered Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to issue refunds for levies introduced last year by
President Donald Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The court’s order does not explicitly lay out the refund process but instead applies to customs entries that are “unliquidated” – ie those that are pending – and those that are liquidated but not yet final. The order, issued as part of a tariff refund lawsuit, heard within a week of an air filtration product company filing the case, suggests that courts intend to move quickly on refunds after the Supreme Court’s six-to- three ruling finding that Trump had no authority to impose his emergency tariffs. Curiously the judgment also pointed out that the correct legislation the President should have used was Section 122. Under this previously unused legislation, the President has the authority to introduce temporary trade measures, including additional tariffs of up to 15% on imports, to protect the balance of payments of the US
“ To date no refunds have been paid by the CBP and there is the danger that the US government will appeal
Richard Eaton’s decision
10 | April 2026
www.bifa.org
Made with FlippingBook Annual report maker