Importers Flood Court to Preserve Refund Claims if High Court Strikes Tariffs

Scores of large U.S. importers are racing to the U.S. Court of International Trade this week to protect the ability to seek refunds of emergency tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Plaintiffs named in court filings include Costco, which filed its complaint on November 28, 2025, as well as Revlon, Bumble Bee Foods, Kawasaki Motors and a broad array of retailers, manufacturers and parts suppliers. Court records and trade legal trackers show more than 70 companies have filed suits, while other reports indicate the universe of concerned firms could exceed 100.

The suits ask the CIT to declare the IEEPA tariffs unlawful and to order refunds of duties already paid. Many complaints seek injunctions to halt further duty collection and seek suspension of liquidation of import entries, a procedural step plaintiffs say is essential to preserve later refund claims. Legal advisers have warned that liquidation can extinguish or severely limit the ability to recover duties, creating a narrow window for procedural protections even as the substantive constitutional and statutory challenge to the tariffs awaits resolution at the Supreme Court.

The tariffs at issue cover goods from multiple trading partners, including Canada, China and Mexico. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on related challenges in early November and is now expected to issue a decision that could either validate the administration’s authority to use IEEPA for broad trade measures or strip that power from the executive. Observers noted that justices appeared skeptical at oral argument, but regardless of the eventual ruling, refunds will not be automatic. Plaintiffs and law firms have emphasized that timely protests, injunctions and CIT judgments will likely be required to secure repayments.

The procedural urgency is driven by liquidation deadlines set by U.S. Customs and Border Protection and by agency refusals to grant extensions, according to filings. Costco and other plaintiffs flagged a December 15 deadline as particularly pressing. If entries are liquidated before legal protections are secured, importers risk losing the administrative and judicial pathways that support recovery of duties, a risk that could translate into billions in unrecoverable costs. Coverage has described aggregate exposure across affected industries as tens of billions of dollars.

Market implications are immediate. Firms facing potential unpaid duties have an incentive to seek refunds to restore margins and working capital. Retailers who paid tariffs may avoid passing higher costs fully onto consumers if refunds are obtainable. Conversely, prolonged uncertainty will weigh on inventories, supplier contracts and pricing strategies through the holiday season and into next year. For the federal government, a ruling that requires billions in refunds would create a significant fiscal liability and spark renewed debate over the scope of presidential powers in trade policy.

What happens next hinges on two tracks. The Supreme Court’s ruling on the legality of the IEEPA tariffs will decide the substantive question. Meanwhile the CIT will grapple with expedited requests to enjoin liquidations and to issue individualized judgments preserving refund claims. In the short term companies will press for swift hearings and administrative maneuvers to avoid having their entries finalized before the high court resolves the underlying legal question.