The Refund Clock: You Won. Now Prove You Were on Time.
The Supreme Court struck down the emergency tariffs, but for shipments whose customs entries had already closed, getting the money back turned on a 180-day clock and on whether you had sued.
Maren and Abe · 22 min · 13 Oct 2026
Verified to the FactUnion StandardChecked 13 Oct 2026
About this episode
On October 6, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection opened the third phase of its tariff refund system for entries that had already gone final. When it opened, CBP accepted 425,517 entries, and every one of them belonged to an importer that had sued at the Court of International Trade. This episode starts with that day and works back through the Supreme Court's February 2026 ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump, the customs step called liquidation, the 180-day protest window in 19 U.S.C. 1514, Judge Eaton's reliquidation orders, and the July 30 importer-of-record cutoff.
We give the government's case in full: finality is what lets customs law close out billions of transactions, and Trump v. CASA limits relief to the parties in a case. We go back to Nixon's 1971 import surcharge, when importers won at trial and lost on appeal. We also ask who actually paid the tariffs and who has no claim at all. It closes with the next effective date to watch, the pending appellate ruling on whether the CIT can give relief to people who never sued. That ruling is described only by what would settle it.
Hosted by Maren and Abe, performed by synthetic voices. Verified to the FactUnion Standard. Supported by STELQ.
Fact sheet
Every fact used in this episode, with the source it was checked against. Download the fact sheet
187 of 187 recorded lines matched the checked script.
The Supreme Court decided Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (No. 24-1287) on February 20, 2026.
24-1287 Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (02/20/2026)LEARNING RESOURCES, INC. v. TRUMP | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Insti24-1287 Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (02/20/2026)
CBP's CAPE Phase 3, covering finally liquidated entries subject to the invalidated IEEPA tariffs, launched on October 6, 2026.
Tariff Refunds: Third Wave Began Oct. 6 | National JewelerCAPE Phase 3 Deployed; Hundreds of Declarations Already AcceptedCustoms opens tariff refunds on old imports, for importers that sued · CrossAssetData
CBP accepted 425,517 finally liquidated entries across 477 declarations when Phase 3 opened, and all belong to CIT plaintiffs whose entries are covered by court-ordered reliquidation.
Declaration of Brandon Lord Responding to September 17, 2026 Court OrderCAPE Phase 3 Deployed; Hundreds of Declarations Already AcceptedCAPE Phase 3 Deployed Oct. 6: Opening-Day Filings — and the Surety Exclusion — Global Guar
Press coverage, citing a CBP court filing reported September 17, put the finally liquidated entries covered by the October 6 Phase 3 expansion at about $11.4 billion, while CBP's October 6 declaration reported 477 accepted declarations covering 425,517 entries without a dollar figure.
Refunds of Trump's struck-down tariffs expand Oct. 6 to about $11.4 billion in older closeCustoms opens tariff refunds on old imports, for importers that sued · CrossAssetDataCBP sets October 6 for IEEPA refunds on finally liquidated entries
Plaintiffs who gave CBP a valid importer-of-record number by July 30, 2026 got initial access to file Phase 3 declarations, while those who submitted later must wait for further CBP instructions with no timeline given.
CBP starts paying out IEEPA tariff refunds for finally liquidated entries | Supply Chain DDECLARATION OF BRANDON LORD RESPONDING TO AUGUST 27, 2026 COURT ORDERCBP Sets October 6 Deployment Date for CAPE Phase 3 | RSK
Importers who are not named plaintiffs in the relevant CIT cases are ineligible for Phase 3 and must look at other avenues, such as individual litigation.
Who Is Entitled to Keep IEEPA Tariff RefundsTo Sue or Not to Sue: That Is the Question for IEEPA Tariff Refunds - Troutman Pepper LockCAPE Phase 3 Set for October 6 After Data-Validation Delay
19 U.S.C. 1514 provides that a protest 'shall be filed with the Customs Service within 180 days after but not before, (A) date of liquidation or reliquidation.'
19 USC 1514: Protest against decisions of Customs Service19 U.S.C. § 1514 - U.S. Code Title 19. Customs Duties § 1514 | FindLaw19 U.S.C. § 1514 — Protest Against Decisions of Customs Service | LexFed
Under 19 U.S.C. 1514, a liquidation that is not protested in time is 'final and conclusive upon all persons,' including the United States.
19 U.S.C. § 1514 | Protest against decisions of Customs Service19 USC 1514: Protest against decisions of Customs ServiceUS JVC Corp. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 906
Practitioner guidance describes the liquidation date as the date the Bulletin Notice of Liquidation is posted on CBP.gov, and warns that importers often count deadlines from the entry date or rely on informal courtesy notices that carry no legal effect.
CBP Protest Guide: Form 19, Deadlines & Records | Federal Claims Advisors19 CFR § 159.9 - Notice of liquidation and date of liquidation for formal entries. | ElectFederal Register :: Electronic Notice of Liquidation
CAPE processes refunds by removing IEEPA tariff provisions from entry summaries, which triggers a recalculation of duties and interest, and pays by ACH typically 3 to 5 weeks after reliquidation.
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) Duty Refunds | U.S. Customs and BorderCAPE Has Arrived: A Guide to Navigating the Next Phase of IEEPA Duty Refunds | Insights | CBP CSMS Guidance: CAPE Declarations for IEEPA Refunds - V. Alexander & Co., Inc.
CBP may offset IEEPA refunds against an importer's other unpaid debts to the United States under 19 C.F.R. 24.72.
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) Duty Refunds | U.S. Customs and Border19 CFR § 24.72 - Claims; set-off. | Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) | US La19 C.F.R. § 24.72 — Claims; Set-off | LexFed
Judge Richard K. Eaton of the Court of International Trade issued a reliquidation order dated July 15, 2026 in Case 1:25-cv-00078-RKE and an order dated July 17, 2026, filed on July 21, 2026, in Case 1:26-cv-00219-RKE.
Case 1:25-cv-00078-RKE Document 25 Filed 07/15/26Case 1:26-cv-00219-RKE Document 10 Filed 07/21/26 Page 1 of 4CIT Orders CBP to Process IEEPA Tariff Refunds for Phase 3 “Finally Liquidated” Entries
The Justice Department, citing Trump v. CASA, Inc., argues that the CIT lacks authority to give relief to non-litigants and that CBP cannot reliquidate entries after the 180-day protest period without an individual court order.
Tariff Refund Battle Continues: Government Appeals OrderThe U.S. Government pushes back on judicial authority to order some IEEPA tariff refundsTo Sue or Not to Sue: That Is the Question for IEEPA Tariff Refunds - Troutman Pepper Lock
On June 2, 2026, trade counsel reported that the government planned to appeal the CIT's universal IEEPA tariff refund order.
Government Plans to Appeal Universal IEEPA Tariff Refund Order - Troutman Pepper LockeUS Appeals Trade Court Order for Broad IEEPA Tariff Refunds - BloombergUS Appeals CIT Order for IEEPA Tariff Refunds, Seeks to Block CBP Commissioner Testimony
On September 9, 2026, InsideTrade reported that a group of 10 House Democrats were pressing CBP to speed approval of IEEPA refund claims.
House Democrats press CBP to speed up approval of IEEPA refund claims | InsideTrade.com
A CBP paperwork notice in the Federal Register on October 5, 2026 (FR Doc. 2026-20228) estimates 330,000 respondents and 495,000 IEEPA refund declarations a year.
Federal Register notice 2026-20228Federal Register :: Agency Information Collection Activities; Court-Ordered Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 191 (Monday, October 5, 2026)
Learning Resources and hand2mind, led by CEO Rick Woldenberg, sued over the IEEPA tariffs on April 22, 2025.
How a Family Toy Business Is Fighting Donald Trump's Tariffs | The New YorkerLearning Resources, Inc. v. Trump 1:25-cv-01248 (D.D.C.) | Civil Rights Litigation ClearinEducational Product Businesses Challenge Tariff Executive Orders
Woldenberg said the tariffs raised his company's import duties by roughly 4,000 percent and forced him to cancel a warehouse expansion and abandon hiring plans; CBS headlined his explanation 'This path is catastrophic.'
A CEO with 500 workers explains why he's suing Trump over tariffs: "This path is catastropA CEO with 500 workers explains why he's suing Trump over tariffs: "This path is catastropI Scrapped a 600,000 Sq. Ft. Investment for My Business Due to Tariffs - Business Insider
ABC7 Chicago reported on June 1, 2026 that Learning Resources received more than $10 million back, a full refund of its tariffs plus interest.
Vernon Hills toy company Learning Resources gets over $10M back for tariffs imposed by PreVernon Hills Toy Company Wins $10M Tariff Refund After Supreme Court Ruling | Vernon Hills
Victor Schwartz of V.O.S. Selections said the tariffs cost his company a six-figure sum and that the requirement to post prices a month in advance hindered his ability to plan shipments.
Complaint, V.O.S. Selections v. TrumpA U.S.-based wine importer reacts to his Supreme Court victory against Trump's tariffs : NVOS Selections owner Victor Schwartz risked his business to challenge Trump’s tariffs | CN
Victor Schwartz received a $110,000 tariff refund from the government in May 2026.
Trump tariff challenger gets six-figure refund after Supreme Court rulingTariff Refund Update: American Business Owners Start Receiving Six-Figure Checks - Newswee
Terry Cycling, another Liberty Justice Center client, projected $1.2 million in tariff costs for 2026 and called the situation an existential threat.
Complaint, V.O.S. Selections v. TrumpFacing an ‘Existential Threat,’ this Vermont Company Decided to Fight Back Against Trump’sThe Vermont business that helped take on Trump’s tariffs
Nixon's Proclamation 4074, imposing a supplemental duty for balance-of-payments purposes, was signed on August 15, 1971 and took effect at 12:01 a.m. on August 16, 1971.
Proclamation 4074—Imposition of Supplemental Duty for Balance of Payments Purposes | The ATexts of Nixon's Orders on Freeze and Surcharge - The New York Timeshttps://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20190624_IN11129_b3be8a068571a20ee193d9ff6d5149a8a5ef
Proclamation 4098, signed December 20, 1971 and effective immediately, terminated the 10% import surcharge.
Proclamation 4098—Termination of Additional Duty for Balance of Payments Purposes | The AmAlcan Sales, Div. of Alcan Aluminum Corp., Appellant, v. the United States, Appellee, 693
On July 9, 1974, the New York Times reported the U.S. Customs Court ruling against the surcharge under the headline 'Court Says Nixon Exceeded Power on Import Surtax,' and thousands of importers filed refund claims.
COURT SAYS NIXON EXCEEDED POWER ON IMPORT SURTAX - The New York TimesYoshida International, Inc. v. United States, 378 F. Supp. 1155 (United States Customs Cou
In United States v. Yoshida International (1975), the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals reversed and upheld the surcharge under the Trading with the Enemy Act, so no refunds were issued.
United States v. Yoshida Intern., Inc.United States v. Yoshida International, Inc., 63 C.C.P.A. 15 (Court of Customs and Patent 1975: Challenging Presidential Authority to Impose Tariffs | Trade Lawyers - Barnes Richar
According to the Congressional Research Service, Congress kept the language of Section 5(b)(1)(B) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, the provision upheld in Yoshida, in Section 203(a)(1)(B) of IEEPA of 1977, but IEEPA was designed to give the President narrower powers than TWEA.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (NEAThe International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use | Congress.goThe International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use - EveryCRSRep
Bloomberg Law commentary argues that downstream buyers seeking tariff refunds face the Hanover Shoe and Illinois Brick bar on pass-on theories, because tracing tariff incidence through a supply chain is treated as too speculative.
Downstream Tariff Refund Suits Face Hurdles From Antitrust LawWhat Antitrust's Indirect-Purchaser Doctrine Can Teach Tariff Refund Litigants | CorporateWho gets the $166bn tariff refund? - The Lombard Review
Removed during checking (2)
MicroKits founder David Levi said the tariffs forced him to cut a part-time employee's hours and that revenue fell from a projected $1 million to $400,000.
As of September and October 2026, no specific named importer has gone on the record about missing the 180-day protest window or the July 30 importer-of-record deadline.
