{ "data_version": "1", "schema": "https://whatledto.com/data", "slug": "us-tariff-refund-litigation", "title": "IEEPA Tariff Refunds: From the Supreme Court Ruling to the Console Lawsuits", "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation", "markdown": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation.md", "feed": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation/feed.xml", "vertical": "economy", "topic": "Economy", "status": "live", "tags": [ { "slug": "supreme-court", "name": "Supreme Court", "url": "https://whatledto.com/tags/supreme-court" }, { "slug": "tariffs", "name": "Tariffs", "url": "https://whatledto.com/tags/tariffs" }, { "slug": "trade-policy", "name": "Trade policy", "url": "https://whatledto.com/tags/trade-policy" } ], "created_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.469569+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-09-09T06:17:02.471101+00:00", "last_researched_at": "2026-09-05T04:45:40.539072+00:00", "tldr": "President Trump used IEEPA in February and April 2025 to impose trafficking and reciprocal import tariffs. The Court of International Trade and the Federal Circuit held that IEEPA did not authorize them, and the Supreme Court affirmed 6-3 on February 20, 2026. The trade court then ordered broad refunds, while CBP built the CAPE system to process them; DOJ is appealing whether importers that did not sue can receive relief, and older liquidated entries remain a central issue. Companies including Nintendo, Sony, Apple and Tapestry have sought or reported refunds, while console buyers have sued Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft claiming tariff-related price increases should be repaid if the companies recover duties.", "hero_image": "https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1688417486375-3508bc17b941?ixid=M3w5OTg1Nzd8MHwxfGFsbHx8fHx8fHx8fDE3ODg1ODQyNDB8&ixlib=rb-4.1.0&w=1600&q=80&auto=format&fit=crop", "hero_credit": { "source": "unsplash", "photo_id": "3Xl3lI5gjqg", "photographer": "Tim Mossholder", "photographer_url": "https://unsplash.com/@timmossholder?utm_source=whatledto&utm_medium=referral", "photo_url": "https://unsplash.com/photos/a-large-building-with-a-flag-on-top-of-it-3Xl3lI5gjqg?utm_source=whatledto&utm_medium=referral", "description": "US Supreme Court Building", "license": "", "license_url": "" }, "entities": [ { "name": "Apple", "kind": "company", "role": "Disclosed that it applied through CBP for tariff refunds and said refunds aided product gross margin." }, { "name": "Atmus Filtration", "kind": "company", "role": "Importer plaintiff in the case producing the March 2026 broad refund order." }, { "name": "Basic Fun", "kind": "company", "role": "Toymaker granted plaintiff-specific relief in the Section 122 case." }, { "name": "Burlap and Barrel", "kind": "company", "role": "Plaintiff in the successful trade-court challenge to the Section 122 surcharge." }, { "name": "Coach", "kind": "company", "role": "Tapestry brand named in the company's filing." }, { "name": "Euro-Notions Florida", "kind": "company", "role": "Party in litigation containing CBP's CAPE refund declaration." }, { "name": "Kate Spade", "kind": "company", "role": "Tapestry brand named in the company's filing." }, { "name": "Learning Resources", "kind": "company", "role": "Was the named party in Learning Resources v. Trump, one of the consolidated Supreme Court tariff cases." }, { "name": "Liberty Justice Center", "kind": "company", "role": "Represented the importer plaintiffs led by V.O.S. Selections in the trade-court challenge." }, { "name": "Microsoft", "kind": "company", "role": "Faces a proposed Xbox consumer class action alleging a tariff-refund double recovery and has sought dismissal." }, { "name": "Nintendo", "kind": "company", "role": "Sued the government for its refund in March 2026; sued by Switch buyers in April." }, { "name": "Nintendo of America", "kind": "company", "role": "Sued for its own IEEPA-duty refunds and is defending a proposed consumer class action over console pricing and refunds." }, { "name": "Sony", "kind": "company", "role": "Expects about $508 million in refunds; sued by PS5 buyers." }, { "name": "Sony Interactive Entertainment", "kind": "company", "role": "Reported an expected tariff refund largely tied to PlayStation and moved to dismiss consolidated PS5 buyer claims." }, { "name": "Tapestry", "kind": "company", "role": "Recorded a $114.7 million estimated IEEPA refund receivable in its annual filing." }, { "name": "V.O.S. Selections", "kind": "company", "role": "Lead importer plaintiff in the trade-court litigation that produced the ruling against the IEEPA tariffs." }, { "name": "IEEPA tariffs", "kind": "other", "role": "The February and April 2025 emergency duties that the Supreme Court found unauthorized and that are now subject to refund proceedings." }, { "name": "Oregon and allied states", "kind": "other", "role": "Brought one of the principal challenges to the IEEPA tariffs and later challenged the Section 122 surcharge." }, { "name": "Section 122 surcharge", "kind": "other", "role": "The 10% temporary replacement import surcharge, struck down by the trade court but collected under an appellate stay until its statutory expiration." }, { "name": "Donald Trump", "kind": "person", "role": "Issued the 2025 IEEPA tariff orders and the February 2026 Section 122 replacement surcharge." }, { "name": "Gregory Hoffert", "kind": "person", "role": "Proposed class representative suing Nintendo." }, { "name": "John Roberts", "kind": "person", "role": "Wrote the Supreme Court opinion holding that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs." }, { "name": "John Sauer", "kind": "person", "role": "Argued for the government that regulating importation embraces tariffs." }, { "name": "Neal Katyal", "kind": "person", "role": "Argued for the businesses that IEEPA never mentions tariffs, duties or taxes." }, { "name": "Prashant Sharan", "kind": "person", "role": "Proposed class representative suing Nintendo." }, { "name": "Richard K. Eaton", "kind": "person", "role": "Judge identified in Court of International Trade refund proceedings." }, { "name": "Susan Thomas", "kind": "person", "role": "Testified that CAPE had accepted claims and that CBP had transmitted refund funds to Treasury." }, { "name": "Trevor Hastings", "kind": "person", "role": "Named plaintiff in the proposed class action against Microsoft." }, { "name": "ACE", "kind": "product", "role": "CBP trade-processing system used for CAPE reporting and declarations." }, { "name": "CAPE", "kind": "product", "role": "CBP's ACE-based bulk filing tool for consolidated IEEPA-duty refunds with interest." }, { "name": "PlayStation 5", "kind": "product", "role": "Sony console line whose price increases and anticipated tariff refund are central to the consolidated consumer litigation." }, { "name": "Xbox", "kind": "product", "role": "Microsoft console line at issue in the proposed consumer refund case." }, { "name": "Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Affirmed en banc in 2025; hears the government's appeal of the universal refund orders." }, { "name": "Court of International Trade", "kind": "regulator", "role": "First court to strike the tariffs; now runs the refund docket under Judge Richard Eaton." }, { "name": "King County Superior Court", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Court where the Microsoft consumer complaint was filed." }, { "name": "State of Oregon", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Plaintiff in Oregon's IEEPA tariff challenge." }, { "name": "Supreme Court", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Held on February 20, 2026 that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs." }, { "name": "U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Affirmed that IEEPA did not authorize the tariffs, stayed adverse tariff rulings during appeal, and is hearing the refund and Section 122 disputes." }, { "name": "U.S. Court of International Trade", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Invalidated the IEEPA and Section 122 measures at trial and issued the principal refund and reliquidation orders." }, { "name": "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Collects the duties and is operating CAPE and other processes to calculate and disburse IEEPA refunds." }, { "name": "U.S. Department of Justice", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Appealed the trade court's orders requiring refunds beyond the importers that brought lawsuits." }, { "name": "U.S. Department of the Treasury", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Receives refund funds from CBP for disbursement to importers." }, { "name": "U.S. Supreme Court", "kind": "regulator", "role": "Held in Learning Resources v. Trump that IEEPA does not delegate tariff authority to the President." } ], "nodes": [ { "id": 338, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n338", "date": "2025-02-01", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Trump invokes IEEPA for the first tariffs: 10% on China, 25% on Canada and Mexico over fentanyl", "summary": "Three executive orders signed on February 1, 2025 used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a 1977 sanctions statute never before used for tariffs, to impose duties on the three largest U.S. trading partners, citing fentanyl trafficking and migration as a national emergency. The China order took effect February 4; the Canada and Mexico duties were paused for a month and then imposed in March. These trafficking tariffs became one of the two sets of IEEPA duties later struck down.", "type": "regulatory", "entities": [ "Donald Trump", "IEEPA", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477500+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/07/2025-02408/imposing-duties-to-address-the-synthetic-opioid-supply-chain-in-the-peoples-republic-of-china", "outlet": "Federal Register", "published": "2025-02-07", "quote": "This national emergency requires decisive and immediate action, and I have decided to impose, consistent with law, ad valorem tariffs on articles that are products of the PRC as set forth in this order." } ] }, { "id": 339, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n339", "date": "2025-04-02", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Executive Order 14257: a 10% worldwide tariff and higher reciprocal rates on dozens of countries", "summary": "On what the White House called Liberation Day, Executive Order 14257 declared a national emergency over the $1.2 trillion goods trade deficit and used IEEPA to impose a 10% duty on imports from nearly every country from April 5, with country-specific rates of up to about 50% for around 60 trading partners from April 9. Rates were then repeatedly modified: the higher rates were suspended for 90 days, China's rate was raised to 125% and later cut, and the pause was extended into August. These are the reciprocal tariffs at the centre of the litigation.", "type": "regulatory", "entities": [ "Donald Trump", "IEEPA" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477656+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/07/2025-06063/regulating-imports-with-a-reciprocal-tariff-to-rectify-trade-practices-that-contribute-to-large-and", "outlet": "Federal Register", "published": "2025-04-07", "quote": "I have declared a national emergency arising from conditions reflected in large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits, which have grown by over 40 percent in the past 5 years alone, reaching $1.2 trillion in 2024." } ] }, { "id": 354, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n354", "date": "2025-04-23", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Oregon and allied states file IEEPA tariff challenge", "summary": "Oregon and allied states filed a complaint in Oregon v. Trump at the Court of International Trade. The case challenged executive orders increasing tariffs under IEEPA.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "State of Oregon", "U.S. Court of International Trade", "Donald Trump" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The page states that the case was filed on April 23, 2025 and describes it as a lawsuit challenging executive orders increasing tariffs under IEEPA. It includes the quoted update verbatim.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.doj.state.or.us/oregon-department-of-justice/federal-oversight/federal-litigation-tracker/tariffs-oregon-v-trump-u-s-court-of-international-trade-125-cv-00077/", "outlet": "Oregon Department of Justice", "published": "2025-04-23", "quote": "On 4/23/25, the plaintiff filed their complaint." } ] }, { "id": 340, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n340", "date": "2025-05-28", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Court of International Trade rules the IEEPA tariffs unlawful in V.O.S. Selections and the states' case", "summary": "A three-judge panel granted summary judgment to five small importers led by V.O.S. Selections, represented by the Liberty Justice Center, and to twelve states led by Oregon, holding that IEEPA's power to regulate importation does not confer unbounded tariff authority and that the trafficking tariffs did not deal with the emergencies declared. The court set aside both sets of tariffs and enjoined them nationwide. The Federal Circuit stayed the judgment the next day while the government appealed.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of International Trade", "V.O.S. Selections", "State of Oregon", "Liberty Justice Center" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477725+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/25-66.pdf", "outlet": "Court of International Trade", "published": "2025-05-28", "quote": "The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder." }, { "url": "https://www.doj.state.or.us/oregon-department-of-justice/federal-oversight/federal-litigation-tracker/tariffs-oregon-v-trump-u-s-court-of-international-trade-125-cv-00077/", "outlet": "Oregon Department of Justice", "published": "2025-05-29", "quote": "On 5/29/25, the Federal Circuit issued an administrative stay order, temporarily pausing the injunction to allow the court to review the government’s stay motion." } ] }, { "id": 356, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n356", "date": "2025-06-10", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Federal Circuit grants stay pending appeal in Oregon case", "summary": "The Federal Circuit granted the government's motion for a stay pending appeal. It scheduled expedited oral argument on the merits for July 31, 2025.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "State of Oregon" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The page states that on 6/10/25 the Federal Circuit granted the government's motion for a stay pending appeal and scheduled expedited merits argument for 7/31/25. The update is listed under 06/10/2025.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.doj.state.or.us/oregon-department-of-justice/federal-oversight/federal-litigation-tracker/tariffs-oregon-v-trump-u-s-court-of-international-trade-125-cv-00077/", "outlet": "Oregon Department of Justice", "published": "2025-06-10", "quote": "On 6/10/25, the Federal Circuit issued an order granting the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal and scheduled an expedited oral argument on the merits for 7/31/25." } ] }, { "id": 341, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n341", "date": "2025-08-29", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, affirms 7 to 4 that IEEPA does not authorize the tariffs", "summary": "The full Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed that IEEPA's grant of authority to regulate imports does not authorize tariffs that are unbounded in scope, amount and duration, while vacating the trade court's nationwide injunction for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's CASA decision on universal relief. The court stayed its mandate until October 14 so the government could seek Supreme Court review, and the tariffs stayed in force.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "V.O.S. Selections", "IEEPA" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477776+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1812.OPINION.8-29-2025_2566151.pdf", "outlet": "Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "published": "2025-08-29", "quote": "Because we agree that IEEPA’s grant of presidential authority to “regulate” imports does not authorize the tariffs imposed by the Executive Orders, we affirm." } ] }, { "id": 342, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n342", "date": "2025-11-05", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Supreme Court hears the consolidated tariff cases and sounds skeptical of the government", "summary": "After granting certiorari on September 9 and expediting the cases, the Court heard nearly three hours of argument in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections. Solicitor General John Sauer argued that regulating importation plainly embraces tariffs; Neal Katyal for the businesses and Oregon's Benjamin Gutman for the states argued that IEEPA never mentions tariffs, duties or taxes. Justices across the spectrum pressed the government to point to statutory text authorising tariffs.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Supreme Court", "Learning Resources", "V.O.S. Selections", "John Sauer", "Neal Katyal" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477820+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/court-appears-dubious-of-trumps-tariffs/", "outlet": "SCOTUSblog", "published": "2025-11-05", "quote": "The Supreme Court on Wednesday seemed skeptical of President Donald Trump’s authority to impose sweeping tariffs in a series of executive orders earlier this year. During more than two-and-a-half hours of oral arguments, a majority of the justices appeared to agree with the small businesses and states challenging the tariffs that they exceeded the powers given to the president under a federal law providing him the authority to regulate commerce during national emergencies created by foreign threats." } ] }, { "id": 343, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n343", "date": "2026-02-20", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Supreme Court holds 6 to 3 that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs", "summary": "Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the Court in Learning Resources v. Trump: the taxing power belongs to Congress, and when Congress has delegated tariff authority it has done so explicitly and with limits, so IEEPA's words regulate and importation cannot carry a delegation of unbounded tariff power. The Federal Circuit was affirmed and the D.C. district-court case was sent back to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. By then CBP had collected roughly $166 billion in IEEPA duties from about 330,000 importers on 53 million entries, all of it now potentially refundable.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Supreme Court", "John Roberts", "Learning Resources", "IEEPA" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477862+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf", "outlet": "Supreme Court of the United States", "published": "2026-02-20", "quote": "Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs." } ] }, { "id": 344, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n344", "date": "2026-02-20", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Same day, Trump imposes a 10% Section 122 surcharge for 150 days to replace the struck-down tariffs", "summary": "Hours after the ruling Trump signed Proclamation 11012 under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a balance-of-payments authority that allows an import surcharge of up to 15% for at most 150 days without Congress. The 10% surcharge applied to imports from all countries from February 24 with product exceptions, and by statute expired on July 24, 2026. Trump called the Court's decision extraordinarily anti-American and briefly raised the rate to 15%, drawing a new suit from 24 states.", "type": "regulatory", "entities": [ "Donald Trump", "Section 122" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477904+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/25/2026-03824/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems", "outlet": "Federal Register", "published": "2026-02-25", "quote": "Specifically, my advisors have determined that an import surcharge in the form of ad valorem duties is required to deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits." } ] }, { "id": 345, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n345", "date": "2026-03-04", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Trade court orders CBP to refund IEEPA duties to every importer, not just those who sued", "summary": "Judge Richard Eaton of the Court of International Trade, in a case brought by importer Atmus Filtration, ordered Customs to liquidate unliquidated entries without IEEPA duties and to reliquidate entries whose liquidation was not yet final, and held that the relief reaches all importers because the trade court's exclusive nationwide jurisdiction is not subject to the limits on universal injunctions in Trump v. CASA. The government, which had argued that only the 2,000-plus companies with claims on file should be refunded, was denied a stay and said it would appeal.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of International Trade", "Richard K. Eaton", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477943+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2026/03/court-of-international-trade-orders-nationwide-tariff-refunds", "outlet": "Holland & Knight", "published": "2026-03-06", "quote": "Most notably, the CIT stated that its Refund Order applies to all importers, not only those that filed lawsuits." } ] }, { "id": 346, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n346", "date": "2026-03-06", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Nintendo sues the U.S. government at the trade court for a refund of its IEEPA duties with interest", "summary": "Nintendo of America filed at the Court of International Trade seeking every IEEPA duty it had paid, with interest and fees, joining more than a thousand companies that had already sued. Its complaint put total IEEPA collections above $200 billion. The tariffs had pushed console makers to raise prices in 2025, which is what later turned the refunds into consumer class actions.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "Nintendo", "U.S. Court of International Trade" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.477980+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/nintendo-sues-the-u-s-government-for-a-refund-on-tariffs/", "outlet": "TechCrunch", "published": "2026-03-06", "quote": "Nintendo filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government on Friday over its extraction of tariffs from global businesses." } ] }, { "id": 357, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n357", "date": "2026-04-17", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Trade court orders final entries reliquidated without IEEPA duties", "summary": "The Court of International Trade ordered that finally liquidated entries be reliquidated without regard to IEEPA duties. The order concerned entries for which liquidation was final.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of International Trade", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "V.O.S. Selections", "Richard K. Eaton" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The order expressly directs that liquidated entries for which liquidation is final be reliquidated without regard to IEEPA duties. It is dated April 17, 2026.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cit.17080/gov.uscourts.cit.17080.82.0.pdf", "outlet": "U.S. Court of International Trade, V.O.S. Selections", "published": "2026-04-17", "quote": "Any liquidated entries for which liquidation is final shall be reliquidated without regard to the IEEPA duties." } ] }, { "id": 347, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n347", "date": "2026-04-20", "date_precision": "day", "title": "CBP launches CAPE, the bulk refund tool in ACE, for the first phase of IEEPA refunds", "summary": "Customs and Border Protection opened the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries tool inside the Automated Commercial Environment so importers and brokers could file a CSV list of entries and receive consolidated refunds with interest by ACH instead of entry-by-entry claims. Phase 1 covered unliquidated entries and entries within 80 days of liquidation; reconciliation-flagged entries followed on June 29, and finally liquidated entries were left to a later phase. By mid-May more than 126,000 declarations covering 15 million entries had been accepted.", "type": "regulatory", "entities": [ "U.S. Customs and Border Protection" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478019+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.cbp.gov/trade/programs-administration/trade-remedies", "outlet": "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "published": "2026-04-20", "quote": "On April 20, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) launched the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) tool in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)." } ] }, { "id": 358, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n358", "date": "2026-04-21", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Consumers sue Nintendo over tariff refunds and consumer prices", "summary": "Gregory Hoffert and Prashant Sharan filed a proposed class action against Nintendo of America. They alleged Nintendo could recover tariff payments from consumers through higher prices and from the federal government through refunds.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "Gregory Hoffert", "Prashant Sharan", "Nintendo", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The complaint identifies Gregory Hoffert and Prashant Sharan as plaintiffs in a proposed class action against Nintendo of America and alleges that Nintendo passed tariff costs to consumers while seeking federal tariff refunds. It was filed on 2026-04-21.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585.1.0.pdf", "outlet": "U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Hoffert v. Nintendo of America", "published": "2026-04-21", "quote": "Unless restrained by this Court, Nintendo stands to recover the same tariff payments twice—once from consumers through higher prices and again from the federal government through tariff refunds, including interest paid by the government on those funds." } ] }, { "id": 348, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n348", "date": "2026-05-06", "date_precision": "day", "title": "PS5 buyers file a class action demanding a share of Sony's tariff refunds", "summary": "Walker v. Sony Interactive Entertainment, filed in the Northern District of California, argued that Sony's $50 price increase on every PS5 model in August 2025 was a response to the tariffs and that keeping the refunds would be a double recovery windfall, on behalf of everyone who bought a PlayStation console from August 1, 2025. Similar suits had been filed against Nintendo in April and would follow against Microsoft in July; the PlayStation cases were later consolidated.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "Sony", "PlayStation 5" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478056+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.player.one/ps5-buyers-file-class-action-lawsuit-against-sony-over-price-hikes-163113", "outlet": "Player.One", "published": "2026-05-06", "quote": "The case, titled Walker et al v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, was filed on May 6, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California." } ] }, { "id": 349, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n349", "date": "2026-05-07", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Trade court strikes down the Section 122 surcharge; Federal Circuit stays the ruling five days later", "summary": "In Oregon v. United States and Burlap and Barrel v. United States the Court of International Trade held Proclamation 11012 invalid because trade and current-account deficits are not the balance-of-payments deficits Section 122 was written for. Relief was limited to the plaintiffs, the State of Washington, Burlap and Barrel and toymaker Basic Fun, and on May 12 the Federal Circuit issued an administrative stay, so collection of the 10% surcharge continued while the appeal proceeded.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of International Trade", "Section 122", "U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478093+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.wardandsmith.com/article/court-of-international-trade-rejects-10-section-122-tariff-what-businesses-should-know-while-the-appeal-proceeds", "outlet": "Ward and Smith", "published": "2026-05-13", "quote": "On May 7, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade held that Proclamation 11012, which imposed a temporary 10% import surcharge under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, was invalid because the proclamation did not identify the type of “balance-of-payments deficits” required by the statute." } ] }, { "id": 360, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n360", "date": "2026-05-22", "date_precision": "day", "title": "CBP reports $20.6 billion in CAPE refunds completed", "summary": "CBP reported that approximately $20.6 billion in duty and interest refunds had been completed using CAPE. The declaration was filed in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States. Four days later CBP corrected an earlier estimate of refunds in process to $25.46 billion, clarifying that a prior figure of about $35.46 billion had been overstated.", "type": "financial", "entities": [ "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "U.S. Department of the Treasury", "CAPE", "Euro-Notions Florida" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The declaration in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States states that, as of 3 p.m. Eastern on May 22, 2026, approximately $20.6 billion in duty-plus-interest refunds had been completed using CAPE. The document was filed on May 26, 2026, but the reported refund status is explicitly dated May 22, 2026.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rC05nIffCOAI/v0", "outlet": "CBP declaration in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States", "published": "2026-05-26", "quote": "Of this total amount, refunds (duties plus interest) of approximately $20.6 billion have been completed using the CAPE Refund component." } ] }, { "id": 350, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n350", "date": "2026-06-03", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Justice Department appeals the universal refund orders; CBP says $23 billion has gone to Treasury", "summary": "DOJ filed notices of appeal at the Federal Circuit arguing the trade court cannot order refunds to importers who never sued, the CASA argument it had flagged in March. At a June 9 hearing CBP's trade chief Susan Thomas testified that CAPE had accepted claims covering about $90 billion of the $166 billion collected and transmitted about $23 billion to Treasury, having processed refunds on nearly 8.5 million entries in six weeks. Entries liquidated more than 80 days earlier, worth perhaps $30 billion, remained contested.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Department of Justice", "U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "Susan Thomas" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478132+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2026/06/ieepa-tariff-refund-update-government-appeals", "outlet": "Holland & Knight", "published": "2026-06-15", "quote": "On June 3, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed notices of appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." } ] }, { "id": 362, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n362", "date": "2026-06-17", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Consumer sues Microsoft over Xbox tariff charges and refunds", "summary": "Trevor Hastings filed a proposed consumer class action against Microsoft. The complaint alleged Microsoft could collect tariff-related costs from consumers and also receive federal tariff refunds.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "Trevor Hastings", "Microsoft", "Xbox", "King County Superior Court" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The complaint identifies Trevor Hastings as the plaintiff in a proposed class action against Microsoft and alleges Microsoft passed tariff costs to consumers while seeking federal refunds for the same duties. It was filed in King County Superior Court on 2026-06-17.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.366003/gov.uscourts.wawd.366003.1.1.pdf", "outlet": "Hastings v. Microsoft Corporation complaint", "published": "2026-06-17", "quote": "If unchecked, Microsoft will reap those tariff payments twice – once in the form of pass-through costs imposed on consumers like Plaintiff, and then again from the federal government through its tariff refund program, including interest." } ] }, { "id": 363, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n363", "date": "2026-06-27", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Tapestry records $114.7 million IEEPA refund receivable", "summary": "Tapestry estimated that its probable tariff refund was $114.7 million and recorded that amount as a receivable. It reported receiving $2.1 million in fourth-quarter cash refunds.", "type": "financial", "entities": [ "Tapestry", "Coach", "Kate Spade", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 2026-06-27 states that Tapestry estimated a probable IEEPA tariff refund of $114.7 million and recorded it as a receivable. It also reports $2.1 million of cash refunds received during the fourth quarter.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1116132/000111613226000018/tpr-20260627.htm", "outlet": "Tapestry, Inc. Form 10-K", "published": "2026-06-27", "quote": "We estimate the amount of the probable refund to be $114.7 million, which was recorded as a receivable." } ] }, { "id": 364, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n364", "date": "2026-07", "date_precision": "month", "title": "Apple says it applied for CBP tariff refunds", "summary": "Apple disclosed that it had applied for refunds of tariffs paid through CBP processes. It said tariff refunds contributed to product gross-margin improvement during the quarter.", "type": "financial", "entities": [ "Apple", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "IEEPA" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The filing states that Apple applied for refunds of tariffs paid through U.S. Customs and Border Protection processes and recognized refunds received as reductions of products cost of sales. It also says tariff refunds contributed to products gross-margin improvement, but it does not give a July 2026 date for the application or disclosure.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/320193/000032019326000020/aapl-20260627.htm", "outlet": "Apple Inc. Form 10-Q", "published": null, "quote": "The Company has applied for a refund of tariffs paid, following the processes established by U.S. Customs and Border Protection." } ] }, { "id": 367, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n367", "date": "2026-07-10", "date_precision": "day", "title": "CBP sends $86.3 billion in refunds to Treasury", "summary": "CBP had sent approximately $86.3 billion in refunds to the Department of the Treasury for disbursement. The Court of International Trade recited that status in its July 15 order.", "type": "financial", "entities": [ "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "U.S. Department of the Treasury", "CAPE", "U.S. Court of International Trade" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The July 15, 2026 order states that, as of July 10, 2026, approximately $86.3 billion in refunds had been sent to the U.S. Department of Treasury for disbursement. The quoted language appears on the page.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cit.17092/gov.uscourts.cit.17092.25.0.pdf", "outlet": "U.S. Court of International Trade, In re Tariffs Collected in Reliance on IEEPA", "published": "2026-07-15", "quote": "To date, approximately $86.3 billion in refunds have been sent to the U.S. Department of Treasury for disbursement." } ] }, { "id": 368, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n368", "date": "2026-07-15", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Trade court authorizes CAPE path for older plaintiffs' entries", "summary": "The Court of International Trade ordered CBP to reliquidate plaintiffs' entries that had been liquidated for more than 80 days without regard to IEEPA duties. The order applied after CBP accepted a plaintiff's CAPE declaration.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "U.S. Court of International Trade", "U.S. Customs and Border Protection", "Richard K. Eaton" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The order directs CBP to reliquidate plaintiffs’ IEEPA-duty entries liquidated for more than 80 days, conditioned on counsel’s required submission and CBP’s acceptance of plaintiffs’ CAPE declarations. The order is dated and filed July 15, 2026.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cit.17092/gov.uscourts.cit.17092.25.0.pdf", "outlet": "U.S. Court of International Trade, In re Tariffs Collected in Reliance on IEEPA", "published": "2026-07-15", "quote": "U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall reliquidate, without regard to IEEPA duties, any and all of Plaintiffs’ entries that have been liquidated for more than 80 days." } ] }, { "id": 369, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n369", "date": "2026-07-20", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Nintendo moves to dismiss consumer tariff-refund class action", "summary": "Nintendo moved to dismiss the proposed consumer class action brought by Hoffert and Sharan. It argued that plaintiffs were not entitled to a rebate based on legal developments related to tariffs.", "type": "response", "entities": [ "Nintendo", "Gregory Hoffert", "Prashant Sharan", "U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.296941+00:00", "note": "The document is Nintendo's motion to dismiss in the Hoffert and Sharan proposed class action. It was filed on 2026-07-20 and expressly argues that plaintiffs are not entitled to a rebate because of intervening legal developments related to tariffs.", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585/gov.uscourts.wawd.361585.21.0.pdf", "outlet": "Hoffert v. Nintendo of America motion to dismiss", "published": "2026-07-20", "quote": "Plaintiffs are not entitled to a rebate simply because of intervening legal developments related to tariffs." } ] }, { "id": 351, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n351", "date": "2026-07-24", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Section 122 surcharge lapses after 150 days; Section 301 duties on some 60 economies take its place", "summary": "The temporary 10% surcharge expired as the statute required, and the same day a Section 301 tariff on goods made with forced labour took effect across about sixty economies, two days after a Section 301 tariff on Brazil. Global Trade Alert calculated that the trade-weighted average U.S. tariff barely moved, from 11.0% to 11.2%, but the structure shifted from a near-uniform surcharge back to country-specific duties, with China's average rising to 27.2%.", "type": "regulatory", "entities": [ "Section 122", "Section 301", "Office of the U.S. Trade Representative" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478173+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://globaltradealert.org/blog/us-import-tariffs-24-july-2026", "outlet": "Global Trade Alert", "published": "2026-07-24", "quote": "On 22 July the Section 301 tariff on Brazil entered force; on 24 July the temporary Section 122 surcharge lapsed and a Section 301 tariff on goods made with forced labour took effect across some sixty economies." } ] }, { "id": 352, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n352", "date": "2026-08-04", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Sony expects ¥80 billion, about $508 million, in tariff refunds, most of it to the PlayStation business", "summary": "In its first-quarter results Sony said it expected to have received ¥80 billion in U.S. tariff refunds, about 70% of it already collected in the April to June quarter, with most going to the games division, and cited the refund as one reason for raising its full-year operating income forecast by 10%. The base PS5 had gone from $500 in early 2025 to $550 in August 2025 and $650 in April 2026. Consolidated PlayStation class actions were pending and Sony was due to respond in August.", "type": "financial", "entities": [ "Sony", "PlayStation 5", "Lin Tao" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478211+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.gamefile.news/p/playstations-big-tariff-refund", "outlet": "Game File", "published": "2026-08-04", "quote": "Sony estimates it will have received ¥80 billion ($508 million) in tariff refunds from the United States government, in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling in February that the global levies imposed by the Trump administration were illegal." } ] }, { "id": 353, "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/us-tariff-refund-litigation#n353", "date": "2026-08-31", "date_precision": "day", "title": "Sony and Microsoft ask courts to dismiss the console refund suits: buyers got what they paid for", "summary": "Sony moved to dismiss the consolidated PS5 case in the Northern District of California on August 31, after Microsoft's August 21 motion in the Western District of Washington and Nintendo's on July 20, all arguing that paying an advertised price for a voluntarily purchased console is not a legal injury and that the price rises reflected inflation, component costs and demand rather than tariffs alone. Sony noted its second, $100 increase came after the tariffs were struck down. Costco and Walmart said refunds would flow to customers as lower prices; Nintendo's refund was put at about $300 million.", "type": "legal", "entities": [ "Sony", "Microsoft", "Nintendo", "PlayStation 5", "Xbox" ], "published_at": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.478247+00:00", "note": "", "image": "", "image_credit": { "credit": "", "source_url": "", "image_url": "", "terms_url": "", "mode": "licensed" }, "sources": [ { "url": "https://www.slashgear.com/2251381/sony-playstation-5-tariff-refund-lawsuit-details/", "outlet": "SlashGear", "published": "2026-09-04", "quote": "Several companies, including Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo, are facing lawsuits over the issue, but Sony wants its lawsuit dismissed." } ] } ], "relations": [ { "from": 338, "to": 340, "kind": "follows", "note": "The trafficking tariffs were the first IEEPA duties and the first struck down." }, { "from": 339, "to": 340, "kind": "follows", "note": "V.O.S. Selections sued twelve days after Liberation Day." }, { "from": 340, "to": 341, "kind": "follows", "note": "The en banc court affirmed on the statute but pulled back the nationwide injunction." }, { "from": 341, "to": 343, "kind": "follows", "note": "Affirmed again, six months later." }, { "from": 343, "to": 344, "kind": "follows", "note": "The replacement surcharge was signed the same day as the ruling." }, { "from": 343, "to": 345, "kind": "follows", "note": "Twelve days from the ruling to a universal refund order." }, { "from": 344, "to": 349, "kind": "follows", "note": "The replacement was struck down too, though the stay kept it alive to its expiry." }, { "from": 345, "to": 350, "kind": "follows", "note": "The appeal the government promised in March was filed in June." }, { "from": 345, "to": 347, "kind": "follows", "note": "CAPE is how CBP executes the refund order at scale." }, { "from": 346, "to": 348, "kind": "follows", "note": "Company refund suits begot consumer refund suits." }, { "from": 348, "to": 353, "kind": "follows", "note": "Sony answered the class action with a motion to dismiss." }, { "from": 352, "to": 353, "kind": "follows", "note": "The size of the refund is what the plaintiffs point to." }, { "from": 343, "to": 357, "kind": "follows", "note": "The April 17 order specified that final liquidations were to be reliquidated without IEEPA duties after the Supreme Court's IEEPA ruling." }, { "from": 347, "to": 358, "kind": "responds_to", "note": "The Nintendo complaint alleged that the company's consumer price increases and federal tariff refunds could produce two recoveries." }, { "from": 358, "to": 362, "kind": "follows", "note": "The Microsoft complaint advanced a consumer double-recovery allegation like the earlier Nintendo complaint." }, { "from": 367, "to": 368, "kind": "responds_to", "note": "The trade court created a path for plaintiffs' entries older than 80 days amid continuing CAPE refund processing." }, { "from": 358, "to": 369, "kind": "responds_to", "note": "Nintendo's motion sought dismissal of the consumer class action filed by Hoffert and Sharan." } ], "links": [], "key_node_ids": [ 338, 339, 340, 341, 343, 344, 345, 347, 350, 351, 352, 353 ], "catalysts": [ { "date": "2026-09-08", "title": "CBP IEEPA refund worksheet comments close", "why": "The comments concern the administrative worksheet importers and brokers may use to seek IEEPA-duty refunds.", "source_url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-07-08/pdf/2026-13771.pdf" }, { "date": "2026-09-18", "title": "CBP enhanced Form 5106 enforcement begins", "why": "Importer-of-record numbers may be voided for inaccurate data, which could affect ACE and CAPE refund access or payments.", "source_url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-08-19/pdf/2026-16911.pdf" }, { "date": "2026-11-05", "title": "Sony announces FY2026 second-quarter earnings", "why": "Sony may update investors on tariff-refund receipts, remaining claims, or exposure from the PlayStation consumer litigation.", "source_url": "https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/IR/news/IR_Schedule2026_E.pdf" }, { "date": "2027-02-04", "title": "Sony announces FY2026 third-quarter earnings", "why": "This is Sony's next scheduled reporting date for updates on IEEPA refund proceeds or related consumer litigation.", "source_url": "https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/IR/news/IR_Schedule2026_E.pdf" } ], "open_questions": [ "Whether the Federal Circuit will uphold the trade court's conclusion that all importers, rather than only plaintiffs, can obtain refunds under the trade court's nationwide jurisdiction.", "How CBP will process and pay refunds for entries liquidated more than 80 days earlier or finally liquidated, particularly for importers outside the plaintiff group.", "How much of the IEEPA duties collected will ultimately be refunded, including statutory interest, after CBP's staged CAPE processing and the pending appeal.", "Whether console buyers can establish that tariff-related price increases give them a legal right to a portion of Nintendo's, Sony's, or Microsoft's federal refunds.", "Whether the Section 122 ruling will be resolved on appeal even though the 150-day surcharge expired on July 24, 2026." ], "metrics": [ { "key": "collected", "name": "IEEPA duties collected", "unit": "$B", "kind": "line", "points": [ { "node_id": 343, "date": "2026-02-20", "value": 166, "quote": "By then CBP had collected roughly $166 billion in IEEPA duties from about 330,000 importers on 53 million entries, all of it now potentially refundable." }, { "node_id": 346, "date": "2026-03-06", "value": 200, "quote": "Its complaint put total IEEPA collections above $200 billion." }, { "node_id": 350, "date": "2026-06-03", "value": 166, "quote": "At a June 9 hearing CBP's trade chief Susan Thomas testified that CAPE had accepted claims covering about $90 billion of the $166 billion collected and transmitted about $23 billion to Treasury, having processed refunds on nearly 8.5 million entries in six weeks." } ] }, { "key": "refunded", "name": "IEEPA refunds completed", "unit": "$B", "kind": "line", "points": [ { "node_id": 360, "date": "2026-05-22", "value": 20.6, "quote": "Of this total amount, refunds (duties plus interest) of approximately $20.6 billion have been completed using the CAPE Refund component." } ] } ], "related": [ { "slug": "nvidia-china-export-controls", "url": "https://whatledto.com/events/nvidia-china-export-controls", "json": "https://whatledto.com/events/nvidia-china-export-controls.json" } ], "changelog": [ { "date": "2026-09-07T06:16:05.991949+00:00", "kind": "summary", "summary": "Chart data refreshed: 4 point(s) across 2 metric(s).", "node_ids": [] }, { "date": "2026-09-07T05:33:20.547425+00:00", "kind": "summary", "summary": "Summary, key players and catalysts refreshed.", "node_ids": [] }, { "date": "2026-09-05T04:48:06.464292+00:00", "kind": "summary", "summary": "Summary, key players and catalysts refreshed.", "node_ids": [] }, { "date": "2026-09-05T04:47:45.330095+00:00", "kind": "publish", "summary": "Added 11 node(s): 2025-04-23 Oregon and allied states file IEEPA tariff challenge; 2025-06-10 Federal Circuit grants stay pending appeal in Oregon case; 2026-04-17 Trade court orders final entries reliquidated without IEEPA duties; 2026-04-21 Consumers sue Nintendo over tariff refunds and consumer prices and 7 more.", "node_ids": [ 354, 356, 357, 358, 360, 362, 363, 364, 367, 368, 369 ] }, { "date": "2026-09-05T04:47:15.146930+00:00", "kind": "research", "summary": "Research run found 16 candidate node(s).", "node_ids": [ 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369 ] }, { "date": "2026-09-05T04:40:59.489044+00:00", "kind": "seed", "summary": "Seeded 16 hand-verified node(s) from us-tariff-refund-litigation.yaml.", "node_ids": [ 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353 ] } ], "license": { "holder": "What Led To", "terms": "https://whatledto.com/methodology#reuse", "summary": "Quote entries with attribution and a link to the entry; do not republish whole timelines or train models on the text." } }