Court of International Trade Orders Removal of All IEEPA Duties: What Importers Need to Know

In the latest development following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision invalidating tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has ordered U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to remove IEEPA duties from all affected entries. In an order issued March 4, 2026, in Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States (Ct. No. 26‑01259), the CIT directed CBP to liquidate all unliquidated entries without IEEPA duties and to reliquidate any entries not “finally liquidated” without IEEPA duties. Typically, liquidation is considered final after the expiration 180 days after the date of initial liquidation, the deadline by which Protests have to be filed to challenge any final decision with respect to the entry. Liquidation is the final decision of duties owed on an entry, which always occurs each Friday around 314 days after entry is made.

This action operationalizes the Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc., et al. v. Trump, which held that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs and thereby invalidated all IEEPA‑based duties (for prior coverage, see the trade alert (Supreme Court Invalidates IEEPA Tariffs, Administration Replaces With New Surcharge: What Importers Need to Know) and FAQs prepared by BDO in the U.S.). While the Supreme Court did not specify at the time how relief would be administered, the CIT’s order provides a concrete mechanism discussed below for CBP to implement relief for all importers, not just litigants in that and hundreds of other similar suits already filed.

Background

In a 6–3 opinion issued on February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court concluded that IEEPA permits the President to “regulate” importation in a national emergency but does not confer tariff‑setting authority. Tariff powers remain exclusively with Congress as specified in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court also vacated a decision of a U.S. District Court holding the IEEPA tariffs to be illegal because it found that the CIT had exclusive jurisdiction over matters involving U.S. tariff laws, including changes to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S. (a statute) adding the Chapter 99 IEEPA tariff codes. 

Upon receiving the mandate from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to effectuate the Supreme Court’s decision, the CIT acted within days. In its March 4 order, the Court emphasized the constitutional requirement that duties be applied uniformly and that only a single judge (Richard Eaton) would be assigned to all IEEPA tariff cases, thus ensuring uniformity and consistency. The CIT then extended relief to all importers of record with entries subject to IEEPA duties (not only to importers that had filed lawsuits), directing CBP to remove those duties via the administrative processes of liquidation and reliquidation.

The Supreme Court/CIT actions invalidate all IEEPA‑based tariff programs (including reciprocal, country‑specific, and fentanyl actions). Other trade remedies remain unaffected, including Section 232, Section 301, antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD), and quotas.

CIT Order: What Changes Now

Based on the CIT Order:

• CBP must liquidate all unliquidated entries without IEEPA duties.
• For any previously liquidated‑but‑not‑final entries, CBP must re-open the entries and re-liquidate them without IEEPA duties.
• Finally liquidated entries are not addressed by this order; refund paths, if any, may depend on further agency or court action.

The government may appeal the CIT decision to the CAFC as a matter of right and request a stay of the CIT order and thus the refunds. However, the CAFC has previously ruled that the IEEPA tariffs are illegal (which led to affirmation by the Supreme Court), so it is unlikely any appeal would have merit, especially with regard to an injunction preventing CBP from issuing IEEPA duty refunds during the appeal process now that the Supreme Court has ruled them to have been illegally collected.

CBP Implementation and Near‑Term Uncertainty

CBP is expected to issue Cargo Systems Messaging Service (CSMS) updates and ACE programming changes to disable IEEPA duty collection and to clarify the treatment for transitional entries. Importers should anticipate a period of operational adjustment while those updates roll out. To facilitate timely refunds once CBP processes reliquidations, importers not already enrolled should activate ACH (Automated Clearinghouse) refunds as soon as possible in their ACE portal account.

Practical Considerations for Importers

To prepare for the impact of the CIT’s March 4 order, importers should begin identifying all entries where IEEPA duties were deposited and determining the liquidation status of each—whether unliquidated, liquidated but not final, or finally liquidated when the 180-day post-liquidation period expires.

Importers should also coordinate closely with their customs brokers on interim filing approaches, including how Chapter 99 reporting should be handled during CBP’s transition period. At the same time, compiling all relevant documentation—such as entry summaries, payment records, and internal reconciliations—will help ensure refund‑readiness once CBP initiates liquidations and reliquidations.

Because any and all tariff refunds will be issued electronically, enrolling in ACH refunds is another important step to streamline disbursement and internal cash‑application processes. 

Finally, importers should continue monitoring CBP’s CSMS messages and related agency guidance to stay informed about programming timelines, operational updates, and any technical instructions that may affect transitional entries.