As hundreds of companies bring suit in the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) for refunds of tariffs imposed by the President under claimed authority of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), a recent Court decision illuminates importers’ pathway for seeking tariff refunds.

In AGS Co. Auto Solutions v. United States, Slip Op 25-154 (December 15, 2025), the CIT denied importers’ request for an injunction against liquidation of Customs entries on which IEEPA tariffs were about to be finally assessed. But in denying the importers’ bid for an injunction the Court did them a great favor, indicating that if they were to prevail in their actions, the Court would grant relief in the form of an order directing Customs to reliquidate their entries without assessment of the tariffs – guaranteeing the importers not only a refund of their duties, but statutory interest as well.

The CIT also indicated that, as long as President Trump’s Executive Orders imposing the IEEPA tariffs (fentanyl/immigration tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico and “reciprocal” tariffs against most other countries), the Customs’ “protest” remedy was futile, and importers could proceed directly to court using the Court’s 28 U.S.C. §1581(i) “residual” jurisdiction.

The rush of lawsuits asserting the right to refunds follows the November 5, 2025 Supreme Court arguments in V.O.S. Selections v. United States, during which most of the Justices expressed skepticism that the President had authority to impose tariffs under IEEPA.

While importers had sought injunctions against liquidation of entries, it was unclear whether the CIT had the power to enjoin liquidations, and whether any injunction would withstand appellate scrutiny. Moreover, Customs has indicated that it considers the assessment of IEEPA tariffs in liquidation of entries “ministerial”, and not a “Customs decision” that is protestable, suggesting that importers who rely on protests alone to get refunds of IEEPA tariffs may face an extended battle.

The window to invoke the CIT’s “residual” jurisdiction may close when or if the President’s IEEPA Executive Orders are set aside. Accordingly, importers wishing to assert a right to refunds are likely best served by filing judicial demands for refunds now.

If you have questions about this matter, please feel free to reach out to a Neville Peterson professional.