Update on CBP IEEPA Refund Progress and New Orders from the U.S. Court of International Trade

Importers seeking to obtain refunds of the illegal IEEPA tariffs may face new challenges following U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) updates on the progress of IEEPA duty refunds and a change in position on CBP’s ability to provide IEEPA tariff refunds for “finally liquidated” entries, as well as new orders issued by the Court of International Trade (CIT). 

On May 26, 2026, CBP provided an update to the CIT on the current progress of IEEPA duty refunds in the CAPE (Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries) processing environment. Following a closed conference the next day, Judge Eaton issued two orders in the two separate cases governing the refund process: 

1. The first order addressed the progress of duty refund claims and includes concerns about how CBP plans to address all remaining entries currently not eligible for CAPE processing, including “millions” of entries for which liquidation is final. 
2. The second order requires CBP to “show cause” why he should not lift his suspension of the CIT’s previous order requiring CBP to liquidate or re-liquidate all entries on which IEEPA tariffs were paid without regard to liquidation status (meaning that even “finally liquidated” entries (see below) would have to be reliquidated). The judge also directed the CBP Commissioner to appear in court on June 9 to explain the agency's slow compliance in developing Phases 2 and beyond for the CAPE refund process. 

Key Takeaways from the CAPE Update

• CAPE declarations that passed the file validations cover nearly 16 million entries and were accepted for the removal of IEEPA duties through CAPE. Of those, approximately 8.5 million have been liquidated/re-liquidated without IEEPA duties.
• Of the roughly $166 billion in duties CBP has collected under IEEPA, approximately $85 billion in both potential and certified refunds have been accepted for processing in CAPE. Of those, refund claims worth $20.6 billion have completed the CAPE process and been sent to Treasury for disbursement.
• Over 4,000 consolidated refunds (each potentially covering many entries) have not been transmitted to Treasury due to a lack of ACH banking information. Potential refund recipients should ensure their ACH Refund Authorization is properly recorded in the ACE Portal.

CBP Changes Position on “Finally Liquidated” Entries

Three days after Judge Eaton’s orders, on May 29, CBP (through the Justice Department) changed its position regarding its ability to provide IEEPA tariff refunds for entries that are “finally liquidated,” i.e., those for which 180 days has passed since the liquidation date (either the original date, which normally takes place about 314 days after the date of entry, or the re-liquidation date if CBP chooses to re-liquidate an entry within 90 days of the original liquidation date).

This change of position was set forth in a CIT motion in which CBP stated that, unless an importer had obtained its own CIT judgment, the agency lacked the ability to issue IEEPA duty refunds even though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 20, 2026 that the IEEPA tariffs were illegally imposed and that CBP lacked legal authority to collect them in the first instance. In its filing, CBP stated: “Once an entry is finally liquidated, CBP has no authority to reliquidate or refund money without a court order . . . [CBP] has maintained that refunds for such imports must be handled through importer-specific orders requiring reliquidation once CBP has completed programmatic changes for other categories of refunds the Court has directed it to prioritize.”

Notwithstanding its published guidance on the IEEPA FAQ that the CAPE process will later include entries that are finally liquidated, CBP nonetheless posited in its May 29 motion that the CIT order requiring refunds for all entries regardless of liquidation status exceeded the CIT’s jurisdiction and equitable authority. CBP stated it intends to appeal this universal injunction and seek a stay of that order except as to importers that have filed their own cases at the CIT.

Finally, CBP claimed that its Commissioner (as a Senate-confirmed official) could not be required to testify on June 9 as the CIT ordered absent “extraordinary circumstances.” It thus requested that CBP’s Executive Assistant Commissioner be allowed to testify on behalf of the agency instead of the Commissioner.

Judge Eaton promptly denied CBP’s motion, and the government filed an appeal on June 2, 2026.