9/19/26 — CAPE Phase 3 Opens October 6 for CIT Plaintiffs
U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Phase 3 of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system remains scheduled to open on Monday, October 6, 2026. Phase 3 will be the first CAPE functionality to reach finally liquidated entries, but the opening is limited to a defined group of Court of International Trade plaintiffs. As of publication, CBP has not issued a CSMS message setting out Phase 3 filing instructions. We will report on any such guidance and on the October 6 launch.
If your company is not yet a plaintiff, and wishes access to the Phase 3 refunds, please feel free to contact us.
Who can file on October 6. In a declaration filed with the Court of International Trade on September 15, 2026, Brandon Lord, Executive Director of CBP's Trade Programs Directorate, stated that "Plaintiffs who submitted a valid importer of record number to CBP by July 30, 2026, will be able to file CAPE declarations for Phase 3 as of October 6, 2026." Phase 3 covers finally liquidated entries filed by those plaintiffs for which the court has ordered reliquidation. Those orders trace to the reliquidation orders Judge Richard K. Eaton began issuing on July 15, 2026, which supplied CBP the legal authority to refund IEEPA duties on finally liquidated entries of importers that had filed refund actions.
Phase 3 will not provide refunds to non-litigants. The government has appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit the portion of the trade court's ruling that would require refunds on finally liquidated entries for importers that did not file suit, arguing that such relief amounts to an impermissible universal injunction under Trump v. CASA, Inc. That appeal remains pending.
9/15/26 — CBP Confirms CAPE Phase 3 Will Open October 6
CBP has announced a date for CAPE Phase 3.
In a declaration filed with the Court of International Trade on September 15, 2026, Brandon Lord, Executive Director of CBP’s Trade Programs Directorate, stated that Phase 3 of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system will launch on October 6, 2026. In Lord’s words: “Plaintiffs who submitted a valid importer of record number to CBP by July 30, 2026, will be able to file CAPE declarations for Phase 3 as of October 6, 2026.” Phase 3 covers finally liquidated entries subject to IEEPA duties (entries more than 80 days past liquidation) for importers who filed suit at the CIT and obtained reliquidation relief.
The date ends a delay CBP has been explaining to the court since August. On August 19, the agency told the court it could not launch Phase 3 and offered no opening date. On August 25, Lord attributed the delay to new validations designed to ensure that no duty adjustments other than IEEPA refunds are made to refunds on finally liquidated entries.
This October 6 access is limited to litigation plaintiffs whose importer of record submissions were submitted by counsel of record to CBP by July 30, 2026; later IOR submissions gain CAPE access on CBP’s biweekly cadence rather than on opening day.
Also note that Phase 3 eligibility appears to carry the same entry-level requirements as Phase 1, so entries covered by an open or suspended protest may still be rejected, due to the manual processing otherwise required against protests (where the IEEPA refund issues may overlap with other legal claims). Importers who filed protective protests on finally liquidated entries before CBP announced how those entries would be handled should think through the consequences and sequencing of any protest withdrawals.
8/29/26 — Allegations Abound: Customs is Offsetting IEEPA Refunds Against Disputed Debts and Rate Advances
Multiple customs attorneys report that CBP is offsetting International Emergency Economic Powers Act refunds against debts that are disputed or not yet fixed, and separately using the IEEPA refund process to retroactively apply full Section 232 duty rates to entries with dutiable metal content.
This issue had also surfaced in a recent Court of International Trade litigation case, where an importer asked Judge Richard Eaton in July to modify his earlier order authorizing CBP to reliquidate finally liquidated entries so that it would also bar CBP from offsetting IEEPA refunds. CBP told the court it was not offsetting refunds with disputed or non-fixed debts; the importer disputed that, citing multiple instances where offsets were applied to debts still in dispute.
Examples include an IEEPA refund offset against a New York State tax bill, and another offset against CBP bills that remained under protest and unpaid. Under 19 C.F.R. 24.72, offsets are limited to amounts that are “legally fixed and undisputed” — a limitation CBP itself acknowledged in its brief opposing the importer’s motion, adding that disputed debts cannot form the basis for an offset until a final judgment is entered and the appeal period has run. In one case, a refund was reduced for a state debt that had already been resolved before the federal offset was applied. 31 U.S.C. 3701(d) excludes claims or debts under U.S. tariff laws from the administrative offset statute, 31 U.S.C. 3716(a).
Separately, CBP is applying full Section 232 duty rates — 50 percent on steel, aluminum and copper content under President Trump’s April proclamation — to the entire value of some entries rather than only the metal content, then netting the resulting duty increase against the IEEPA refund on the same entry. Importers affected this way must file a protest to recover the difference. The practice is inconsistent with CBP’s regulations, which are meant to reach only finalized liabilities, not rate advances an importer hasn’t yet had a chance to dispute.
A narrower view distinguishes offsets against unrelated third-party debts from adjustments within the same entry, such as reconciling IEEPA duty against Section 232 duty on the same line, noting that CBP retains broad authority to review value, classification and origin during its 90-day voluntary reliquidation window.
The offsets may also generate fee disputes between importers and counsel working on contingency, since a diverted refund could leave a client arguing a fee should be based on the amount actually owed rather than the amount received.
CBP did not respond to a request for comment. The dispute could prompt a new wave of CAPE-related litigation at the Court of International Trade absent a court order addressing the offset practice directly.
8/25/26 — CBP Explains the CAPE Phase 3 Delay; Stranded Refunds Climb to $1.7 Billion
On August 25, 2026, Brandon Lord, Executive Director of CBP’s Trade Programs Directorate, filed his declaration in the new lead case, Freestyle World, Inc. v. United States (CIT No. 26-01088), in response to Judge Eaton’s August 5 order.
On Phase 3, Lord explains that the delay on the release date exists because the agency is building new validations to ensure that no duty adjustments other than the IEEPA refunds are made to refunds on finally liquidated entries. In Lord’s words, this is to account for certain improper reportings of IEEPA duties on original entries. No opening date was offered. Meanwhile, Phases 1 and 2 are unaffected and are still operational.
Approximately $132.5 billion in potential and certified refunds has been accepted for processing in CAPE. Of that, roughly $106.6 billion in duties plus interest has been completed.
Stranded refunds continue to accumulate. Now in August, approximately $1.7 billion (for almost 10,000 importers) has not transmitted to Treasury simply because the importer of record, (or its authorized CBP Form 4811 designee), failed to add banking information into ACE.
8/19/26 — CBP Tells the Court It Cannot Launch CAPE Phase 3 and Offers No Opening Date
CBP has informed the Court of International Trade that it is unable to roll out Phase 3 of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) refund system. The agency says it has allocated all available resources to resolving the problem, but it cannot provide a date when Phase 3 will open. More should be known at the upcoming status conference before Judge Richard Eaton.
Phase 3 is the final planned stage of CAPE and covers refunds of IEEPA duties on finally liquidated entries, a category CBP has estimated at roughly $11.4 billion. At the June 9 hearing, CBP told the court that Phase 3 would be ready by the end of July. That target has now come and gone without a launch, and the agency’s latest statement removes any timetable at all.
The first two phases deployed on schedule. Phase 1 opened on April 20 for standard entry summaries, and Phase 2 followed on June 29 for entries flagged for reconciliation where no Type 09 reconciliation entry was filed. Through those phases CBP has accepted more than 250,000 CAPE declarations covering roughly 25 million import entries, and as of the end of July approximately $100 billion in refunds had been certified and sent to Treasury for disbursement.
The Phase 3 delay does not stop everything. Under Judge Eaton’s July orders in V.O.S. Selections v. United States (CIT No. 25-00066) and the related CAPE cases, CBP is already directed to reliquidate finally liquidated entries and return IEEPA duties for the litigating plaintiffs across more than 3,700 individual cases through case specific procedure orders. What remains unbuilt is the broader Phase 3 functionality that would process finally liquidated entries for importers outside that litigation, the same group whose position is at issue in the pending class certification motion argued August 6 and in the government’s Federal Circuit challenge to universal relief for non parties.
The status conference should clarify what is actually broken, whether the obstacle is technical or budgetary, and whether Judge Eaton is prepared to set a deadline rather than wait for CBP to offer one. We will report on the conference when it occurs.
8/10/26 — Eaton Weighs Class Certification for Importers Locked Out of CAPE, and Asks Whether CBP Deleted Entry Data
At an August 6 oral argument, Judge Richard Eaton heard argument on Terry Precision Cycling’s motion to certify a class of IEEPA tariff payers who lack access to CBP’s CAPE system (V.O.S. Selections v. United States, CIT No. 25-00066). Plaintiffs’ counsel Colleen Sinzdak argued that certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is the “perfect solution,” because a single class wide order would direct reliquidation of all finally liquidated entries without thousands of separate suits.
Eaton opened by calling CAPE a “remarkable success” but noted that some small importers cannot absorb the cost of filing suit to access it, leaving room for “other avenues” to relief. That follows his July order directing CBP to reliquidate finally liquidated entries in over 3,700 CAPE linked cases.
Government counsel Claudia Burke countered that the motion is “far too late,” coming after the Supreme Court had already ruled against the IEEPA tariffs, and that class wide relief would deprive defendants of notice of the scope of their exposure. Burke also argued the refunds are not the “incidental” monetary relief that Rule 23(b)(2) permits, and that a class wide reliquidation order would upend decades of Federal Circuit finality doctrine, under which CIT relief runs entry by entry.
Sinzdak responded that refunds are an incident of the relief sought rather than the relief itself, and that CAPE already calculates refunds mechanically, so the court would not need individualized damages determinations. Eaton signaled agreement with that framing, observing that “if the provision of money is mechanical, then it is incidental.” No ruling issued from the bench. A written order on certification is expected.
Separately, in Freestyle World v. United States, CIT No. 26-01088, Eaton filed a letter on August 7 asking the DOJ attorney handling the case whether CBP “has a protocol, of any kind, that would result in the deletion of any information relating to any entry” that entered the United States between February 1, 2025 and February 25, 2026, the period running from the first estimated deposits to the date collection ceased. Importers whose entry data may be incomplete in ACE should preserve their own records now rather than assume CBP’s data is intact.
In the same case, Eaton ordered the government to file another CAPE progress report by August 25 at 5 p.m. ET and set a closed settlement conference for August 26 at 2 p.m. ET. He also urged CAPE declaration filers to confirm that their Automated Clearing House account information is on file with Customs, because refunds cannot be disbursed without it.
The timing matters. CAPE Phase 3 is scheduled to go live on August 20, at which point CBP will be able to process refunds of finally liquidated entries for all importers who have filed litigation and whose counsel have registered the company with CBP for eligibility in the program. Two consequences follow. An importer that has filed suit but whose counsel has not completed the CBP registration will not be reached by Phase 3, and an importer that is registered but has no ACH information on file will have its refund calculated but not paid. Both are fixable before August 20, and both should be confirmed now. The certification motion matters precisely because it addresses the importers Phase 3 cannot reach, those who never filed suit at all.
7/20/26 - Judge Eaton Orders Refunds for Finally Liquidated Entries in Over 3,000 CAPE Cases
Judge Eaton has issued a significant new order authorizing refunds of IEEPA duties on finally liquidated entries in more than 3,000 CAPE cases.
The order gives U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) explicit authority and direction to reliquidate entries that have already reached finality and to return IEEPA tariff amounts in thousands of lawsuits filed under the CAPE umbrella.
In the order, Eaton noted that importers must provide their IOR numbers and submit declarations through CBP’s Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system, but emphasized that CBP will send detailed instructions directly to plaintiffs’ attorneys and that plaintiffs “need not take any further action” beyond following those instructions.
While the order is intended to provide “complete relief” for plaintiffs, the judge acknowledged that some plaintiffs may still need further assistance from the court to obtain all refunds owed. To preserve flexibility, the court issued an order rather than a final judgment, signaling that plaintiffs who do not receive full refunds through CAPE may move to lift the stay on their case, seek reconsideration of the order, or pursue other relief consistent with CIT rules and applicable time periods. Eaton further directed plaintiffs who have already received their refunds via CAPE to voluntarily dismiss their cases, underscoring the court’s expectation that resolved matters should be taken off the docket as the CAPE process plays out.
7/15/26 — Next CAPE Phase Will Target Finally Liquidated Entries in CIT Cases
CBP is developing the next phase of its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) platform to handle entries filed on behalf of plaintiffs whose Court of International Trade cases have reached final liquidation, CBP's Elena Ryan said during a July 15 webinar. Ryan said CBP is also examining other entry types that are not currently eligible for CAPE refunds.
CBP launched CAPE phase two on June 29 for entries flagged for reconciliation, provided the reconciliation entry was not already on file. CBP has not confirmed a timeline for phase three, though CBP's Susan Thomas previously told the CIT that phase-three development would be ready at the end of July.
CBP's Daniel Collier encouraged importers to run reports and track their entries, including through the CAPE Entry Summary Report (ES-022), which shows the principal and interest refund amounts that may be payable to the importer.
In a separate Flexport webinar on July 15, Senior Trade Advisory Associate Calum Coulter noted CBP's position that it is required to issue refunds on finally liquidated entries only where a specific court order exists, while observing that Judge Richard Eaton has been clear he does not want to manage individual cases. Coulter added that filing a lawsuit is not necessary to obtain a refund at this stage, because a two-year statute of limitations runs from the date of the challenged action — a mark he placed at around February 2027. As he put it, the matter is not terribly urgent yet.
In a companion development, Judge Eaton's July 15 order in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States (CIT No. 25-00595) states that, in connection with the anticipated launch of CAPE phase three, the court will enter a reliquidation order — with a procedure to be set out in that order — in each of the approximately 3,700 IEEPA cases assigned to the court. The order follows the July 14 closed settlement conference and the July 13 Declaration of Brandon Lord (ECF No. 45), which reported roughly $121.75 billion in potential and certified refunds accepted for processing in CAPE and approximately $86.3 billion in refunds (duties plus interest) sent to Treasury for disbursement. The order notes that 9,837 refunds have not been transmitted to Treasury because the importer of record or its designee has not provided ACH account information, and it urges filers to supply it. The court indicated it will lift the stay in Freestyle World, Inc. v. United States (CIT No. 26-01088), where a class-certification motion is pending, once Euro-Notions voluntarily dismisses. A government CAPE progress report is due by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 4, 2026, and a closed settlement conference is set for August 5, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. EDT before Judge Eaton.
7/15/26 — CIT Confirms CAPE Phase 3 IEEPA Refunds Across 3,700 Cases
On July 15, 2026, Judge Richard K. Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade issued an order in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States, Court No. 25-00595, confirming how CBP's CAPE program will handle the next phase of IEEPA tariff refunds. At a July 14 closed conference, the Court reviewed CBP's latest figures: roughly $121.75 billion in potential and certified CAPE refunds accepted for processing, and about $86.3 billion in duty and interest refunds already transmitted to Treasury.
The order announces CAPE "Phase 3," which will reliquidate IEEPA entries that have already been finally liquidated. Judge Eaton states the Court will enter an order that directs Customs to reliquidate certain finally liquidated entries under a procedure to be set out in a forthcoming order. Critically, the same Phase 3 reliquidation order will be entered in each of the approximately 3,700 IEEPA cases assigned to the court, meaning CBP will be required to issue Phase 3 IEEPA refunds across the entire litigation docket.
The Court also flagged a practical bottleneck: at least 9,837 approved CAPE refunds have not reached Treasury because the importer or its designee has not provided ACH account information. Current CAPE participants should confirm CBP has their correct ACH banking details so refunds can be disbursed.
What this means for importers: If your company already has a CAPE declaration on file in one of the roughly 3,700 IEEPA cases, CBP will be ordered to reliquidate your eligible finally liquidated entries and issue refunds of duties plus interest under Phase 3—so confirm your ACH information is current. If your company has not yet filed, there is still a path: because the Court will enter the Phase 3 order in each IEEPA case on its docket, companies can still access Phase 3 by filing their own IEEPA refund litigation in the CIT.
7/13/26 — Nearly 2 Million Reconciliation Entries Covered by CAPE; $86.3 Billion Submitted to Treasury for IEEPA Refunds
Just 10 days after CBP expanded the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) tool to cover entries flagged for reconciliation, nearly 2 million such entries have been successfully covered by filings requesting refunds of International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs.
CBP reported the progress in a July 13, 2026 court filing submitted by Brandon Lord, executive director of the trade programs directorate in CBP's Office of Trade. The filing updates Court of International Trade Judge Richard Eaton on the agency's progress returning $166 billion in illegally collected IEEPA tariffs.
As of 3 p.m. ET on July 10, $86.3 billion in duties and interest had moved through the CAPE process and was submitted to Treasury, which disburses the refunds. More than $60 billion of that total cleared CAPE verification in the last month alone. Treasury withdrew $15.1 billion for CBP in July through July 9, the bulk of it IEEPA refunds.
About 70% of CAPE declarations passed file validations, covering 24.4 million entries. Roughly 20% of those entries failed verification — because IEEPA was not owed, the entry duplicated a previously filed one, or it fell outside the 90-day reliquidation authority. Finally liquidated entries have not yet been accepted in CAPE; the Cato Institute estimated last week that those account for $11.4 billion, or about 7% of the total.
Through Friday afternoon, approximately $121.75 billion in potential and certified refunds had been accepted for processing in CAPE — more than 70% of all IEEPA duties paid.
One recurring obstacle is missing banking information: CBP issues no paper checks for tariff refunds, and 9,837 refunds cannot be issued because the importer of record or its broker has not provided wire transfer information — an increase of about 4,300 since the beginning of June.
6/29/26 — CBP Outlines Process to Re-Activate a Deactivated Importer of Record (IOR) in ACE
In response to the "Strengthening Customs Enforcement" Executive Order, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) advised the trade in a June 26 message that it is using its legal authority to deactivate Importer of Record (IOR) numbers in ACE that have not been used to file an entry for one or more years and that have no outstanding post-entry transactions.
CBP reminded importers that an IOR number can be reactivated, and recommended doing so in ACE in coordination with a customs broker to avoid potential processing delays.
To reactivate an inactive IOR, an Automated Broker Interface (ABI) broker should submit a Transaction Processing (TP) message with Action Code A to change the status from "20-Inactive" to "10-Active." All required CBP Form (CBF) 5106 data elements must be included with the TP message.
Importers unable to reactivate via ABI may instead submit a revised CBF 5106, with all mandatory data elements completed, to a Center Entry Specialist Team for manual reactivation. The email must include "IOR reactivation request" in the subject line and explain in the body that the form is being submitted to reactivate an existing IOR currently in "20 - Inactive" status. The IOR will then be reactivated based on the Center's workload.
Before requesting CBP assistance, the agency recommended querying and verifying the current status of the IOR in the ACE Portal Account.
6/24/26 — FedEx to Return Approximately $800 Million in IEEPA Tariff Refunds to Customers Beginning in August
FedEx Corporation disclosed on Tuesday that it will begin returning approximately $800 million in tariff refunds to customers starting in August. The announcement accompanied the company's fiscal fourth-quarter earnings report, which topped Wall Street expectations on both revenue and profit.
The refunds stem from duties FedEx collected on behalf of customers after the Trump administration imposed tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Supreme Court struck down those tariffs in a 6-3 ruling on February 20, 2026, holding that IEEPA did not authorize the President to impose them. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has since launched an online refund portal to process the resulting claims.
FedEx had pledged in April to pass these refunds along to customers as soon as the funds were received from CBP. The August timeline now disclosed by the company indicates that CBP disbursements through its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) refund mechanism are reaching carriers and importers of record who collected and remitted the duties.
The disclosure came alongside strong financial results. FedEx reported fiscal fourth-quarter adjusted earnings of $6.31 per share, exceeding the analyst consensus of $5.97, on quarterly revenue of $25.01 billion. Total revenue for the full fiscal year rose to $94.7 billion, and international export package yields increased 10% during the quarter, aided by fuel surcharges and strong demand.
For importers who used FedEx as the importer of record or who paid IEEPA duties through the carrier, the announcement signals a concrete path to recovery of overcollected duties. Companies expecting refunds should confirm the entries at issue, verify that the duties were collected under the IEEPA tariff actions invalidated by the Supreme Court, and coordinate with FedEx regarding the timing and method of the pass-through payments.
6/23/26 — CBP: Only Recon-Flagged Entries Without a Filed Recon Entry Accepted in Next CAPE Phase
CBP has announced that only entries flagged for reconciliation that do not yet have a reconciliation entry (type 09) on file will be accepted in the next phase of its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) tariff refund tool, set to launch June 29, according to a CSMS message. Entries flagged for reconciliation that already have a reconciliation entry on file will not be included in the June 29 phase and will instead be handled in a later phase of CAPE development.
CAPE will accept reconciliation-flagged entries of types 01, 02 and 06 for which the type 09 reconciliation entry has not yet been filed. Only unliquidated entries, and those within 80 days of liquidation, will be accepted.
Once flagged entries are accepted on a CAPE declaration, the trade may file the reconciliation entry. The process removes the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) duties from the flagged entries before the reconciliation entry is filed, thereby separating the refunds from the calculations on the entry. Once the entry is filed, CBP will assume that all CAPE declarations associated with the entries were filed and accepted.
If a reconciliation filing deadline expires in fewer than 30 days, the trade will need to prioritize filing the reconciliation, CBP said. All filing and processing requirements from the first phase of CAPE remain in effect.
6/10/26 — CBP Reports $94.94 Billion in Refunds Accepted for Processing and $23.68 Billion Completed Through CAPE
On June 10, 2026, CBP's Executive Director of the Trade Programs Directorate, Brandon Lord, filed his declaration in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States (Ct. No. 25-00595, CIT) providing a status report in response to the court's May 27, 2026 order. The declaration provides the latest hard numbers on the agency's IEEPA refund effort through its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system as of Friday, June 5, 2026.
In summary, as of June 5, 181,155 CAPE declarations had been submitted, of which 125,576 passed the file validations. The most common reasons for failing the file validations were importer-of-record or filer mismatches, entry number validation errors, and .CSV files not matching the ACE portal template. The validated declarations cover 16.74 million entries with IEEPA duties that passed the entry-specific validations and were accepted for removal of IEEPA duties through CAPE. Of those, 10.60 million entries have since been liquidated and/or reliquidated without IEEPA duties. Another 3.99 million entries failed the entry-level validations—primarily because the entry date was past CBP's 90-day reliquidation authority, the entry did not contain a Chapter 99 HTS number used to assess IEEPA duties, or the entry was already filed on a prior CAPE declaration. Approximately $94.94 billion in both potential and certified refunds (duties plus interest) has been accepted for processing in CAPE. Of that total, approximately $23.68 billion in refunds has been completed using the CAPE Refund component, certified by CBP, and sent to the U.S. Department of the Treasury for disbursement. CBP reports that its financial accounting system receives updates from Treasury indicating these certified refunds are being regularly disbursed, and the agency continues to review and finalize the remaining potential refunds through CAPE's Review and Liquidation/Reliquidation component. As of June 5, 5,535 consolidated refunds had not been transmitted to Treasury because the importer of record (or its authorized CBP Form 4811 designee) had not provided Automated Clearing House (ACH) account information. Importers expecting refunds should confirm that they have active ACE accounts with ACH banking activated so that disbursements are not held up.
Economic caveat: The scale of these refunds is now showing up in the federal fiscal data. According to Reuters, the Treasury Department reported that customs collections turned net-negative for the first time on record in May 2026, with customs duty refunds of $21.97 billion exceeding gross customs collections of $21.93 billion—a net customs outflow of roughly $42 million for the month. The refunds stem from CBP's effort to return an estimated $166 billion in IEEPA tariffs collected before the Supreme Court declared those tariffs unconstitutional in its February 21 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. Importers should keep in mind that as more refunds are certified and disbursed through CAPE, the government's tariff revenue picture—and the broader budget impact—will continue to shift.
6/9/26 — CBP Begins CAPE Work for Finally Liquidated Entries, but No Refunds of Them Authorized Unless the Importer has filed a Lawsuit Seeking Refunds
At a June 9, 2026 hearing before the Court of International Trade (CIT), the government took the position that CBP is authorized to continue preparing its Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system for phase three, but is not authorized to process refunds on finally liquidated entries. DOJ counsel asserted that CBP cannot reliquidate finally liquidated entries with refunds unless the affected importer has individually filed suit at the CIT, suggesting the court might, for example, create a list of importers who have sued so that CBP could refund those companies via CAPE.
Rather than the CBP Commissioner, Susan Thomas, Executive Assistant Commissioner of CBP's Office of Trade, provided the agency's testimony. She told the court that Phase Two of CAPE (covering reconciliation entries) remains scheduled to launch June 29, and that programming for Phase Three should be ready in late July. Thomas explained that attempting to refund every entry type at once would significantly slow implementation, and that Phase Three will require importer of record numbers to ensure refunds reach the correct importers.
Plaintiffs, led by V.O.S. Selections, argued that no statute requires a court order to issue refunds on finally liquidated entries, and that limiting refunds to importers who file suit improperly lets the government pick and choose who receives refunds. Judge Eaton also pressed Thomas on CBP's failure to extend liquidation deadlines following the Supreme Court decision invalidating the IEEPA tariffs, noting that this inaction has caused additional entries to become finally liquidated, and asked her to consider extending those deadlines.
The judge also questioned why the government appealed if it appears willing to issue refunds, suggesting it could stipulate that the decision apply only to this case to avoid setting precedent. Burke responded that the outcome could affect the parallel litigation in the Adminstration’s defense of Section 122 tariffs. In its petition for a writ of mandamus to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the government argued that the CIT's order amounts to an unlawful universal injunction under Trump v. CASA. Plaintiffs then argued that if the government were committed to refunds but still concerned about CASA, then it should not oppose Terry Precision Cycling's motion for class certification. During this discussion, Judge Eaton reportedly stated, “[i]t would be disappointing to me if we go into the world of class actions”.
6/3/26 — DOJ Appeals CIT's IEEPA Refund Order, Sparking Uncertainty; Judge Eaton Voices Frustration Over Refund Process
On June 2, 2026, the U.S. government appealed the Court of International Trade's April 17 order directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to refund duties collected under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (V.O.S. Selections v. United States, CIT No. 25-00066). The appeal has injected fresh uncertainty into the refund process for the remainder of 2026. It takes three coordinated actions in V.O.S. Selections v. United States, CIT No. 25-00066, and represents the most aggressive Executive Branch pushback to date against the Court of International Trade's universal IEEPA refund regime:
1. Notice of Appeal: The government appealed Judge Richard K. Eaton's April 17, 2026 injunction order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
2. Petition for Writ of Mandamus. DOJ separately petitioned the Federal Circuit for mandamus relief, focused principally on quashing Judge Eaton's order compelling CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott to testify in person at the CIT on June 9.
3. Motion for Stay. The government also sought a stay of the testimony order pending resolution of the mandamus petition, and signaled it will seek a stay of the universal injunctions from the Federal Circuit "if necessary."
The Universal-Injunction Challenge
In its mandamus petition, the government argues that Judge Eaton ordered universal injunctions covering all entries subject to IEEPA duties even though no importer-plaintiff had moved for preliminary injunctive relief. The government contends that the injunctions are "plainly unlawful under Trump v. CASA."
The CIT had reasoned that it was not bound by CASA because it was created under a different statute and granted exclusive national jurisdiction over particular categories of claims. DOJ rejects that view, noting that Congress expressly vested the CIT with "all the powers in law and equity of, or as conferred by statute upon, a district court of the United States," and arguing that the CIT therefore "cannot wield an equitable power to grant universal injunctions that district courts do not possess."
The Mandamus Petition: Blocking Commissioner Scott's Testimony
The centerpiece of the mandamus petition is the June 9 testimony order. DOJ argues Judge Eaton's order compelling Commissioner Scott's appearance is unlawful and violates settled precedent from multiple courts of appeals, citing the Federal Circuit's decision in In re United States.
Key points from the petition:
- High-ranking Executive Branch officials cannot be compelled to testify absent "extraordinary circumstances," where the official has "first-hand knowledge" unavailable from "other persons" and "essential to the case."
- Federal courts have issued mandamus to block compelled testimony of officials including the Vice President's chief of staff, the CFTC chairman, three FDIC directors, and the Railroad Retirement Board's inspector general, among others.
- Compelling Commissioner Scott's testimony would "take time away" from his duties and creates the very risks of "disrupting significant ongoing government activities" that warrant mandamus.
- The CIT failed to identify any extraordinary circumstance, any factual question on which Scott possesses unique firsthand knowledge, or any reason testimony from alternative witnesses would be insufficient.
- DOJ had offered to substitute Susan Thomas (CBP's Executive Assistant Commissioner for Trade) and Brandon Lord (CBP's Executive Director of the Trade Programs Directorate). Judge Eaton denied the substitution motion without explanation.
- The government warns that the trial court's apparent intent to "hector" the agency head over perceived shortcomings in IEEPA refund administration underscores serious separation-of-powers concerns.
DOJ also argues that Scott's testimony "is in no sense 'essential'" to the V.O.S. Selections plaintiffs' actual claims, and notes the plaintiffs themselves never sought it. Tellingly, the CIT's denial of the substitution motion stated the court was seeking information about CBP's intentions regarding "small importers" and other importers whose duties "currently cannot be processed by the CAPE program" — subjects DOJ says are untethered from the plaintiffs' pleaded claims.
In response, Judge Richard K. Eaton voiced his perspective in a June 3 letter to the government, noting that the progress CBP has made in refunding unlawful IEEPA duties — including the development of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) portal — resulted directly from the trade court's order, a version of which the government now appeals. Judge Eaton sent a companion letter regarding the need for testimony from CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott and asked that both letters be added to the record of the government's appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
5/31/26 — DOJ Notifies Court It Will Appeal CIT's Universal IEEPA Refund Order
On May 29, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice formally notified the Court of International Trade (CIT) that it intends to appeal Judge Richard Eaton's universal IEEPA refund order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The DOJ's filing also signaled that it will appeal the related order requiring CBP Commissioner Rodney S. Scott to appear personally before the court, and that it will seek mandamus relief from the Federal Circuit if its motion to substitute another official is denied.
The DOJ's principal argument, previewed in its May 29 filing and echoed in CBP's contemporaneous motion to amend, is that the CIT exceeded both its jurisdiction and its equitable authority when it directed CBP to reliquidate and refund IEEPA duties on finally liquidated entries belonging to importers who never filed suit. Relying heavily on the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. CASA, the government contends that a single CIT judge cannot grant universal relief to non-parties, and that any importer seeking a refund on a finally liquidated entry must obtain an importer-specific judgment under 28 U.S.C. 1581(i). The government has indicated it will seek a stay of the universal injunction pending appeal, except as applied to the named plaintiffs in each case.
As a result of the appeal, it is possible that U.S. Customs could take the position that it is obligated to stop processing CAPE refund requests.
For importers, who have already obtained all refund needed via CAPE refunds, there may be nothing further to do at this time.
For all other importers seeking IEEPA tariff refunds who have not already filed a litigation action, this appeal could represent yet another reason to consider promptly filing a litigation claim.
5/27/26 — CBP Reports $20.6 Billion in IEEPA Refunds Disbursed via CAPE, Concedes $10 Billion Error; Judge Eaton Summons Commissioner for Next Status Conference
On May 26, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) filed an updated declaration in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States, Ct. No. 25-00595 (CIT), describing the agency's progress in administering refunds of IEEPA duties through its new Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) functionality in ACE. The declaration reports meaningful progress but concedes a significant prior misstatement of refund figures. Click here to read the full status report.
According to the declaration of Brandon Lord, as of May 22, 2026, approximately $85 billion in potential and certified IEEPA refunds had been accepted for processing through CAPE, and roughly $20.6 billion (duties plus interest) had been certified by CBP and transmitted to Treasury for disbursement. The declaration concedes that CBP's earlier May 12, 2026 refund figure was overstated by approximately $10 billion due to an “inadvertent error in the data query.”
Judge Richard K. Eaton then ordered the Commissioner of CBP to appear personally before the Court of International Trade. That order signals dissatisfaction the overall pace of refunds and requiring accountability from the agency head. The Commissioner is likely to be further questioned about CBP’s plans to ensure all eligible importers receive timely duty and interest refunds in compliance with the court's prior orders.
In the interim, importers owed IEEPA refunds can seek to (1) confirm that all eligible entries have been or will be covered by a CAPE declaration within CBP's 90-day reliquidation window, (2) verify that Chapter 99 HTSUS coding and other entry data align with CAPE validation requirements, (3) ensure ACH banking information and any CBP Form 4811 designations are current so that completed refunds are not delayed, and (4) continue to monitor developments.
5/4/26 — CBP Launches Comprehensive IEEPA Refunds Page; CAPE Refund Payments Could Begin as Soon as May 11
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has rolled out a comprehensive webpage dedicated to IEEPA duty refunds, consolidating filing instructions, FAQs, CSMS messages, and program updates in a single location. CBP has indicated it will update the page regularly and is encouraging importers and customs brokers to monitor it for new guidance.
The page provides detailed information on the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) functionality in ACE, which CBP launched in phases to streamline IEEPA refund processing. CAPE is designed to consolidate refunds, including interest, rather than handle them entry-by-entry.
After Atmus Filtration, Inc. voluntarily dismissed its CIT case, Judge Eaton designated Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CIT No. 25-00595) as the new lead IEEPA refund case and reissued the refund order to that case.
Most notably, CBP reports that CAPE refunds are progressing on schedule, with actual payments expected to begin issuing as soon as May 11, 2026. Under CBP's stated timeline, valid refunds will generally be issued within 60 to 90 days after acceptance of a CAPE Declaration, with liquidated entries reliquidating the next business day after acceptance. Because Phase 1 opened on April 20, 2026, the earliest CAPE Declarations are now reaching the payment stage.
4/27/26 — No IEEPA Refunds Have Yet Been Issued, However, Consumer Class Actions Are Already Here
Two putative class actions are now pending against FedEx in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee (where FedEx is headquartered) with the parties moving toward consolidating them into a single case.
Anastopoulo v. FedEx Corporation (W.D. Tenn. # 2:26-02334) was originally filed in South Carolina on February 20 and transferred to the Western District of Tennessee in late March. It alleges FedEx breached its shipping contracts by charging fees tied to unlawful IEEPA tariffs and then failing to refund those charges. Then Reiser v. Federal Express Corporation and FedEx Logistics (W.D. Tenn. # 2:26-02410) was filed shortly later, in Miami on February 27 and transferred to the same Tennessee court in early April. The Reiser case also alleges that FedEx billed customers for IEEPA duties while "merely facilitating" payment of those duties to CBP. Both complaints argue FedEx was unjustly enriched because it positioned itself as importer of record to keep all IEEPA refunds which were ultimately recovered from the government.
Chief Judge Sheryl Lipman has given FedEx until June 1 to respond and has stated that "no further extensions will be granted." The parties told the court that they "reasonably anticipate filing a motion to consolidate” and want to "realize the efficiencies of a single, centralized action." Similar potential exposures exists for other couriers, carriers, and brokers who may have acted as an importer of record on IEEPA shipments.
As class actions, these cases are built around consumers and small shippers who are unable to sustain individual litigation themselves. As such, class action attorneys tend to resolve such cases via settlements agreements which disproportionately benefit class counsel via fee awards, with individual class members typically seeing only minor recoveries. Parties with a larger individual claims can avoid having these rights adjudicated and settled within a class action, but doing so requires separately preserving a timely cause of action through in independent litigation action. With FedEx's response due June 1 and consolidation already in motion, the window to do so may be a narrow one.