Update on IEEPA Tariff Refund Litigation: Where Things Stand and What Importers Should Consider Next

Background

In 2025, certain importers challenged the lawfulness of tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump. Both the Court of International Trade (CIT) and the Federal Circuit have since held that IEEPA does not authorize the imposition of tariffs. Those rulings are now before the Supreme Court of the United States, which heard oral argument on November 5, 2025, in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump and a companion case.

Although the Supreme Court has not yet issued an opinion on the lawfulness of IEEPA tariffs, many importers filed protective actions at the CIT under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) in November and December 2025 to preserve their ability to obtain refunds of IEEPA duties. These protective CIT cases were filed in anticipation of a large number of imports becoming finalized by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through a process called liquidation, and amid uncertainty about the court’s authority to order refunds through re-liquidation.

Recent Developments at the CIT

Since late December, several developments at the CIT have clarified the procedural landscape and, in some respects, reduced the urgency for immediate filings:

• CIT authority to order refunds confirmed.
  The CIT has confirmed that it has authority in these 1581(i) IEEPA matters to order refunds through reliquidation if the IEEPA tariffs are ultimately held unlawful.
• Government position on refunds clarified.
  Counsel for CBP have repeatedly stated on the record that they will not contest the CIT’s authority to order reliquidation and refunds if the tariffs are invalidated.
• IEEPA refund cases at the CIT are paused pending Supreme Court decision.
  The CIT has stayed the IEEPA refund cases, which effectively pauses these cases, until the Supreme Court issues its decision in O.S. Selections. As a result, no action by the CIT will be taken in the IEEPA refund cases until the Supreme Court rules and the CIT issues follow-on guidance.

Net Effect

It is now reasonable for many importers to wait for the Supreme Court’s decision before deciding whether to participate in the CIT litigation, particularly if their entries are not yet liquidating.

What This Means for Timing

• The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in early 2026, although this timing is not guaranteed.
• Once the Supreme Court decision is issued, the CIT is positioned to move quickly to lift the stay and issue implementation orders, including instructions to CBP on reliquidation and refunds.
• If the Supreme Court finds that the IEEPA tariffs were unlawful, importers that filed early protective actions at the CIT may be better positioned for earlier relief once refunds become available. Late participation may still be possible depending on the scope of the Supreme Court’s ruling and the CIT’s implementation framework.

Protests, PSCs, and Reliquidation: Practical Considerations

Based on current guidance and recent CIT rulings:

• Protests (CF-19):
  Protests cannot be filed until entries have liquidated. Where CBP acts in a purely ministerial role (arguably, as with IEEPA tariffs), protests may ultimately be rejected. Protests can nonetheless still serve as a backstop if entries liquidate before final court guidance is issued.
• Post-Summary Corrections (PSCs):
  For unliquidated entries, PSCs may be an available mechanism to conform entries to the courts’ directives, depending on what the Supreme Court and CIT ultimately order. PSC availability and timing will depend on action by the courts and by CBP’s implementation guidance after the decision.
• Court-ordered reliquidation:
  The most likely outcome if the tariffs are struck down is court-directed reliquidation for plaintiffs, under which CBP recalculates duties and issues refunds, typically with interest.

At this stage, importers should avoid assuming which mechanism will apply and instead be prepared to pivot once the Supreme Court, CIT, and CBP provide direction.

Options for Importers

Importers currently have three practical paths:

1. Wait for the Supreme Court decision and reassess participation once the CIT issues implementing guidance.
2. File or join a protective CIT action now to preserve standing and position for early relief once the stay is lifted.
3. Prepare protests and PSC strategies as an administrative contingency plan.

The right approach depends on entry timing, duty exposure, and risk tolerance.

How Clark Hill Is Assisting Clients

Clark Hill is actively advising importers on:

• Evaluating entry and liquidation timelines;
• Identifying company’s IEEPA exposure;
• Determining whether and when to file protective CIT actions;
• Preparing rights-preserving protest language and PSC strategies; and
• Navigating post-decision reliquidation and refund implementation.

If you would like to discuss how these developments affect your imports, or whether it makes sense to act now or wait, please do not hesitate to contact our international trade attorneys below.