 Court Affirms Importers?Access to Potential IEEPA Tariff Refunds |
Source |
American Shipper |
Post Date |
12/17/2025 |
|
A Dec. 15 ruling by the Court of International Trade affirms that importers do not need to file suit immediately at the CIT to preserve their rights to potential refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
In litigation seeking refunds of IEEPA tariffs that was filed under 28 USC 1581(i), the CIT? residual jurisdiction, several companies sought a preliminary injunction to prevent U.S. Customs and Border Protection from liquidating entries subject to IEEPA tariffs. The companies reasoned that, once liquidation occurs, the CIT might be powerless to order CBP to reliquidate entries and provide refunds if the Supreme Court strikes down the IEEPA tariffs.
The government responded that it has repeatedly conceded throughout other IEEPA tariff cases that the CIT has the authority to order reliquidation of entries should the tariffs be struck down. In fact, ST&R obtained a stipulation from the government in an IEEPA tariff refund suit filed on behalf of a client that it would not contest a reliquidation order. Concessions like these, the government argued, make an injunction unnecessary.
The CIT agreed that liquidation will not prevent it from ordering reliquidation and refunds if necessary and denied the motion for injunction.
First, the CIT held that the government? statements promising the availability of reliquidation judicially estopped it from reversing that position later.
Second, the CIT rejected the contention that it lacks the authority to order reliquidation of entries, stating that it ?nanimously agreed?that it ?as the explicit power to order reliquidation and refunds where the government has unlawfully exacted duties.?As such, reliquidation will be available to plaintiffs where residual jurisdiction is proper.
The CIT also offered an explanation as to jurisdiction. It reasoned that challenges to the IEEPA tariffs brought before the Supreme Court issues a decision can be heard under the CIT? residual jurisdiction, without the need to file a protest, because CBP cannot rule on the constitutionality of those tariffs. However, the CIT did not resolve what should occur after the Supreme Court decision, meaning the CIT? conclusion as to its jurisdiction may change in the future.
|
|
|
|
