Tariffs move into procedure

U.S. tariff fights are moving off the podium and into forms, filings, and court hearings. On April 10, judges at the Court of International Trade pressed the Trump administration on whether its 10% global tariff fits the narrow law it used. (reuters.com) (usnews.com) The tariff at issue was imposed on February 20 under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and took effect on February 24. That statute lets a president impose surcharges of up to 15% for up to 150 days to address a “large and serious” United States balance-of-payments deficit or an imminent dollar depreciation. (whitehouse.gov) (congress.gov) (law.cornell.edu) At the April 10 hearing in New York, a three-judge panel questioned whether a broad trade deficit is the same thing as the balance-of-payments problem Congress described in 1974. The cases were brought by 24 mostly Democratic-led states and by small businesses challenging the 10% tariff. (reuters.com) (chicagotribune.com) This is the second legal track importers are now watching. On February 20, the Supreme Court struck down the administration’s earlier tariff program under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and the White House shifted to Section 122 for a narrower replacement. (thompsonhinesmartrade.com) (nbcnews.com) At the same time, U.S. Customs and Border Protection is building the machinery to return some of the older International Emergency Economic Powers Act duties. The agency says Phase 1 of its refund tool, called Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries, will launch on April 20 in the Automated Commercial Environment portal. (cbp.gov 1) (cbp.gov 2) Phase 1 is limited. Customs says it covers certain unliquidated entries and certain entries within 80 days of liquidation, and the electronic process is for claims made under court order and other statutory authority. (cbp.gov 1) (cbp.gov 2) The Court of International Trade is supervising that refund rollout too. On April 1, Senior Judge Richard Eaton wrote that Customs was making “satisfactory progress” and was on track for the April 20 deadline in the lead refund case, *Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States*, according to a filing summary by Thompson Hine. (thompsonhinesmartrade.com) The result is a trade policy that now turns on two procedural clocks at once: one in court for whether Section 122 can sustain the new 10% tariff, and one in customs systems for how quickly importers can recover duties from the old one. The next concrete date on the refund side is April 20. (reuters.com) (cbp.gov)