Importers start refunding duties from struck‑down 10% global tariffs

Import tariffs are turning into a paperwork fight. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 7 that President Donald Trump’s 10% global tariff was unlawful, but the practical effect is much narrower than the headline makes it sound. Three plaintiffs — Washington state, Burlap & Barrel, and Basic Fun! — got relief. Almost everyone else is still in limbo. ### What got struck down? This was Trump’s backup tariff plan. After the Supreme Court killed his earlier worldwide tariffs in February, he used Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a 10% surcharge on nearly all imports starting February 24, 2026. Section 122 does let a president use temporary import surcharges, but only for a specific kind of balance-of-payments crisis and only for up to 150 days unless Congress extends it. (politico.com) ### Why did the court say no? Basically, the judges said the administration used the wrong legal trigger. Trump’s proclamation pointed to trade deficits and other international-account imbalances, but the court said those are not the same thing as the “balance-of-payments deficits” the statute actually requires. The panel split 2-1, with Judges Mark Barnett and Claire Kelly in the majority and Judge Timothy Stanceu dissenting. (politico.com) ### So are importers getting money back now? Some are — but not because of a broad refund program for this tariff. The court ordered refunds for the plaintiffs that actually won the case. That matters for those companies right away. But for the wider universe of importers, there is no automatic Section 122 refund pipeline yet, and trade lawyers are warning companies not to assume this works like the earlier IEEPA tariff refunds. (politico.com) ### Why is everyone comparing this to the earlier refunds? Because the federal government already built a refund system for the earlier IEEPA tariffs that the Supreme Court struck down in February. Customs opened its CAPE portal on April 20, and court filings said the first payments could start landing around May 11. The White House was estimated to owe importers about $166 billion from that earlier tariff round. But that portal applies to IEEPA tariffs, not this newer Section 122 tariff. (dorsey.com) ### Why does that distinction matter so much? Because “tariff refund” sounds like one bucket, but turns out there are two separate legal fights. One bucket already has a claims process. The other does not. So a company that got money back from the IEEPA case might still be paying the 10% Section 122 tariff today unless it was one of the named plaintiffs or takes its own legal steps. (cbsnews.com) ### What should procurement teams look at first? Start with the importer of record and the contract. If your supplier paid the tariff, the supplier may get any eventual refund — not you. If your contract let the supplier pass through tariff costs, the next question is whether it also requires credits, rebates, or price resets if those costs disappear later. Trade lawyers are explicitly telling companies to review tariff pass-through and refund-entitlement clauses now, before the disputes start. (cbsnews.com) ### Does the tariff stay in place? For most importers, yes — at least for now. The court declined to issue nationwide relief, and legal analysts expect the administration to appeal. That means Customs is expected to keep assessing and collecting the 10% duty from companies outside the plaintiff group while the case moves through the Federal Circuit, and maybe beyond. (swlaw.com) ### Bottom line The news is not “everyone gets a refund.” The real news is messier. One court just said the 10% global tariff was illegal, but only a few parties are immediately cashing in. Everyone else now has a contract problem, a legal-strategy problem, or both. (politico.com)