What happened at the March 6 IEEPA tariff refund conference?

CBP filed a declaration stating it needs approximately 45 days to build new system functionality to process refunds across more than 53 million entries from over 330,000 importers. Judge Eaton paused the refund portion of his March 4 order based on these difficulties. The order's legal holdings were not withdrawn, but refunds are not being processed yet. The government has indicated it intends to appeal.

Do I need to file a lawsuit to get my IEEPA tariff refund?

The court and the government currently disagree on this. According to reports from the March 4 hearing, Judge Eaton stated that importers should not need to file individual lawsuits. However, the government's reported position is that importers must file at the CIT. The government's January 2026 stipulation to refund 'all current and future similarly situated plaintiffs' only covers importers who have actually filed. As of now, having your own case on file at the CIT is the path that has the government's own commitment behind it.

When will IEEPA tariff refunds be processed?

CBP indicated it needs approximately 45 days from March 6, 2026 to build the system functionality to process refunds, putting the earliest possible start around mid-to-late April 2026. However, the refund order has been paused and the government has indicated it intends to appeal. If the Federal Circuit grants a stay, the timeline could extend further.

After the March 6 Conference: IEEPA Tariff Refunds Paused

Jeff Chang
35 minutes ago
4 min read

Red traffic light with no turn on red sign in a storm representing paused IEEPA tariff refund order — The CIT's IEEPA tariff refund order is paused, but importers who wait for the light to change risk falling behind those who are already taking action.

The IEEPA tariff refund situation moved quickly last week, and then it slowed down. Here is what happened, what it means, and how it relates to our earlier recommendation to take affirmative steps.

What Happened

On March 4, Judge Richard Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade issued an order in Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States directing CBP to liquidate and reliquidate entries without applying IEEPA duties. The order was notable for its breadth: it stated that all importers of record are entitled to the benefit of the Supreme Court's Learning Resources decision, not just those who filed lawsuits. Judge Eaton distinguished the Supreme Court's CASA limits on universal injunctions by pointing to the CIT's exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over import claims.

Two days later, at a closed conference on March 6, the refund portion of the order was paused.

CBP's Executive Director of Trade Programs filed a declaration laying out the scale of the challenge: over 330,000 importers, more than 53 million entries, and approximately $166 billion in IEEPA duties collected. CBP stated that its existing systems are "not well suited to a task of this scale" and requested 45 days to build new ACE functionality to process refunds. Judge Eaton paused the refund portion of his order based on these difficulties, though the order's legal holdings, including the finding that all importers are entitled to the benefit of Learning Resources, were not withdrawn.

The government has indicated it intends to appeal and may seek a stay from the Federal Circuit. If a stay is granted, the 45-day timeline would become irrelevant until the appeal is resolved.

The Key Takeaway: The Court and the Government Are Telling Importers Two Different Things

The March 4 hearing revealed a fundamental disagreement between the court and the government about what importers need to do to receive their IEEPA tariff refunds.

According to reports from the hearing, Judge Eaton's position is that importers should not need to file individual lawsuits. He reportedly told the government: "We don't want to require people who have a claim to file suit. We want to work out a method by which those importers can make a claim." When the government argued it needed time to finalize its "position," Eaton reportedly responded: "Your position is clear. The duties were unlawful from the first moment they were imposed."

The government's position, as reported from the same hearing, goes in the opposite direction. Government counsel reportedly stated: "It is not our position that every single importer will get a refund. Our position is that you have to file a claim in this court."

Judge Eaton's order attempted to resolve this in importers' favor. But the refund portion of that order is now paused, and the government has indicated it plans to appeal. The government has not changed its position.

What This Means For Your IEEPA Tariff Refund

As of today, the path to an IEEPA tariff refund that currently has the government's own commitment behind it is filing at the CIT. The January 8, 2026 stipulation in which the government agreed to refund IEEPA tariffs for "all current and future similarly situated plaintiffs" applies to importers who are actually plaintiffs.

The Atmus order may ultimately deliver refunds to all importers without requiring individual lawsuits. Judge Eaton's statements suggest that is his intent. But the refund portion of the order is paused, the systems to process refunds do not yet exist, and the government has indicated it plans to challenge the order's scope on appeal.

Given the ongoing uncertainty, our recommendation to file at the CIT as a protective measure has not changed.

For importers who have not yet taken steps to preserve their refund rights, our earlier article covers what CIT filing involves, what it realistically costs, and how it compares to selling your refund rights to litigation funders. Importers should also ensure they are registered for an ACE Portal account with ACH refund authorization set up, as CBP will only issue refunds electronically.

What to Watch For

The 45-day window. CBP indicated it needs approximately 45 days to build ACE functionality for processing refunds. That puts the earliest possible start around mid-to-late April 2026, assuming the paused order is lifted by then.

The government's appeal. The government has 60 days to appeal to the Federal Circuit and may seek a stay. How the Federal Circuit handles a stay request will be a significant indicator. The same court denied the government a stay on March 2, though that involved a different procedural question.

Further CIT proceedings. Judge Eaton has indicated he intends to move quickly. The tension between his approach and the government's position that every importer must file individually will continue to play out in subsequent proceedings.

We will continue to update our analysis as the situation develops.

About Chang Law Group

Chang Law Group represents importers and businesses engaged in U.S.-Asia trade. Attorney Jeff Chang is admitted to practice before the U.S. Court of International Trade, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and Massachusetts state courts. The firm assists clients with IEEPA tariff refund claims, customs disputes, and cross-border commercial matters.

If you have questions about whether your business may be eligible for an IEEPA tariff refund, contact Chang Law Group for a consultation.

Contact:

Phone: (617) 307-1238
Email: info@jchanglaw.com
WeChat: ChangLawGroupLLC

Chang Law Group LLC: One Marina Park Drive, Suite 1410 Boston, MA 02210

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. The IEEPA tariff refund process involves rapidly evolving legal and administrative developments, and the information above reflects the state of affairs as of the publication date. It may not reflect subsequent court rulings, regulatory changes, or government actions. Importers should consult with Chang Law Group regarding their specific circumstances before taking any action based on this information.