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.
4/21/26 — CAPE Phase One IEEPA Refunds Move Forward
CAPE Phase 1 is now live in ACE for IEEPA-related refund claims, and uptake has been strong, with more than 55,000 trade users logging in on the first day and refund requests covering over 4 million entries. CAPE declarations are subject to ACE file-level validations, and once a declaration is accepted and assigned a claim number, CBP will systematically remove the applicable IEEPA Chapter 99 provisions at the entry summary level and issue duty refunds with interest under 19 U.S.C. 1505 within roughly 60-90 days. CBP has clarified that customs brokers may only submit CAPE declarations for entries that they themselves filed, though a single broker declaration may cover multiple importers of record so long as all underlying entries were broker-filed by that same filer.
CAPE Phase 1 is only a partial solution that was create to respond as quickly as possible to a court order, and does not pretend to encompass all IEEPA-paid entries. According to CBP's deployment materials, Phase 1 entries does not cover many categories. For example, CAPE will reject entry summaries that are flagged for reconciliation, the subject of a pending protest, subject to drawback refunds, or subject to a court injunctions, as well as where the entry is within a final liquidation phase, in trade control, cancelled or rejected, or otherwise suspended (e.g., ADCVD entries) or under review.
On the April 21 webinar, CBP officials said there is currently no firm timetable for “Phase 2” of CAPE that would address these shortcomings. CBP also clarified that PSCs are not a pathway to initiate IEEPA refunds and must instead be used, if at all, before a CAPE claim—for example, to adjust a notify party.
In addition, the scope of Phase 1 involves only unliquidated entries and those entries which have liquidated within the last 80 days. Therefore, for entries that are rejected or are ineligible for CAPE Phase 1, importers would need to pursue other traditional remedies to preserve refund rights (rather than waiting for an indefinite Phase 2 release)— such as by filing a timely protest under 19 U.S.C. 1514 (due within 180 days of liquidation) or, where appropriate, by initiating litigation at the Court of International Trade.
4/13/26 — As CAPE Nears Completion, Polls Emerge on the Impact of Tariff Policy
With CBP's CAPE refund portal set to go live on April 20, two new surveys published this week offer a snapshot of how the business world is thinking about tariffs and the road ahead.
PwC surveyed 633 U.S. executives and found that 86% now treat tariffs as a permanent planning assumption — a sharp shift from just a few years ago, when most expected trade barriers to come and go with administrations. After bipartisan continuity on tariff policy across both the Biden and Trump presidencies, executives have largely stopped waiting for relief and have built duties into their operating models. Notably, 90% said their company is in a stronger position than two years ago, though PwC cautioned that most firms are pursuing similar strategies around AI, risk management, and supply chain diversification.
Separately, the CNBC CFO Council quarterly survey polled 25 CFOs at major U.S. companies on whether they expect to pass IEEPA refunds along to consumers. None said they would. Twelve plan to apply for refunds, six said they would not pass any portion downstream, and seven were undecided. Moody's chief economist Mark Zandi characterized the results as expected, noting that companies absorbed significant costs during the tariff period and view potential refunds as recovery of those losses.
As CAPE's first phase rolls out next week for straightforward entry types, importers should be organizing documentation and preparing to file. The broader policy environment — and these survey results — underscore why pursuing refunds promptly remains important.
4/10/26 — April 20 Launch: CBP's CAPE System Promises Consolidated IEEPA Refunds
CBP states that on April 20, it will launch the first phase of its new Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) tool in ACE to handle IEEPA duty refunds.
CAPE is designed to replace the current entry‑by‑entry approach with consolidated refunds of IEEPA duties and interest by importer (or designated party) and liquidation date. Phase one of CAPE will be limited in scope to processing (1) unliquidated entries and (2) entries that liquidated within the past 80 days.
To use CAPE, the importer of record or authorized broker must have an ACE portal account, submit a CAPE Declaration in ACE, and ensure bank account information is on file for electronic refunds. After the CAPE Declaration is filed, CBP will remove the IEEPA HTS number, recalculate duties, create a new version of the entry, and then liquidate or reliquidate it, with CAPE consolidating the resulting refunds for payment.
For more detail, please review CBP's Bulletin announcement: PBRB #5517-0426.
See also, ACE CAPE instructions document.
4/9/26 — Euro-Notions Florida Becomes New Lead IEEPA Refund Case
Euro-Notions Florida Becomes New Lead IEEPA Refund Case
On April 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade granted Atmus Filtration, Inc.’s notice of voluntary dismissal of its lead IEEPA tariff refund case, Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, Court No. 26‑01259.
To keep the IEEPA refund framework in place, Senior Judge Richard K. Eaton promptly lifted the stay in Euro‑Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States, Court No. 25‑00595, and on April 7, 2026 issued an order that mirrors his prior Atmus order by directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to: (1) liquidate all unliquidated entries subject to IEEPA duties without those duties; (2) reliquidate any liquidated but not‑final entries without those duties; and (3) reliquidate even finally liquidated entries without those duties.
As a practical matter, the “refund machinery” still remains in motion, but Euro‑Notions Florida has now replaced Atmus as the lead case subject to Judge Eaton’s IEEPA refund orders. Given that the new Euro‑Notions Florida order was reissued on April 7, 2026, practitioners generally expect the government’s 60‑day deadline to notice an appeal to hit on around June 8, 2026, absent tolling or further motion practice.
Meanwhile, assuming the CAPE build remains on track it would be completed on about April 20. CAPE incorporates a 45-day processing window that is separate from the 45-day build window, putting the earliest refunds at about June 4th.
4/7/26 — Atmus Filtration Dismisses Lead IEEPA Refund Suit
Importer Atmus Filtration has dismissed its case seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Until now, Atmus' case was treated as the lead lawsuit on the provision of IEEPA refunds by Judge Richard Eaton, who the Court of International Trade has tasked with overseeing all refund matters.
In the Atmus case, Judge Eaton issued an order compelling CBP to liquidate unliquidated entries without the tariffs, as well as reliquidate both finally and not finally liquidated entries without the tariffs. That order was suspended while CBP developed an administrative system for refunds.
In the case, Eaton also rejected efforts by Atmus to establish a plaintiffs' steering committee.
With the dismissal of Atmus, the Court will need to identify a new lead case to continue overseeing IEEPA refund litigation. Importers with pending refund claims should monitor developments closely, as the transition to a new lead case could affect the timeline and procedures for processing refunds.