According to the Court of International Trade's July 15 order, CBP will be directed to reliquidate with IEEPA refunds certain finally liquidated entries in connection with the anticipated launch of CAPE Phase 3. The order affects approximately 3,700 companies that filed IEEPA-related cases currently before the Court of International Trade.

Importers that have not yet pursued a CIT claim may wish to consult counsel regarding available legal options to preserve potential refund opportunities.

The court also noted ongoing discussions regarding additional CAPE functionality that would allow CBP to process refunds for entries with open protests. At this time, the status and timing of refunds for finally liquidated entries with open protests remain uncertain.

Additionally, Judge Richard Eaton reported that 9,837 approved refunds have not yet been issued because Automated Clearing House (ACH) account information has not been provided by the importer of record or its authorized representative. Importers expecting refunds should confirm that ACH information is on file with CBP to avoid delays in receiving payment.

CBP is scheduled to provide the court with another update on CAPE development and implementation on August 14.

If you have questions regarding your IEEPA refund status or need assistance reviewing your entries, please contact your Deringer representative.

The rebuttal comment period is now officially open for both the Section 301 Forced Labor Investigation and the U.S.-China Board of Trade Review.

Stakeholders may now submit rebuttal comments addressing issues and positions raised by other parties during the initial comment period.

Key Deadlines

Section 301 Forced Labor Investigation: Rebuttal comments due July 16

U.S.-China Board of Trade Review: Rebuttal comments due July 27

Section 301 Forced Labor Investigation

This investigation is being conducted under Section 301 and could result in additional tariffs of 10% or 12.5% on products from 61 economies. Interested parties have the opportunity to provide comments explaining why specific products should be excluded from the proposed tariff measures.

U.S.-China Board of Trade Review

As part of the Administration’s commitment to reduce tariffs on approximately $30 billion worth of Chinese goods, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is seeking input to identify non-sensitive products imported from China that may be appropriate for tariff removal.

Businesses that may be impacted by either initiative should consider reviewing the proposals and submitting rebuttal comments where appropriate.

If you have questions regarding these proceedings, please contact your Deringer representative.

Ultimate Outcome Remains Uncertain 

The 10% Section 122 surcharge that went into effect February 24, 2026, is currently scheduled to expire on July 24, 2026. At this time, no official announcement has been made regarding whether the surcharge will expire, but we expect it will expire and be replaced by the new 301 duties. The proposed Section 301 duties are outlined in the Federal Register notice linked here. However, these measures have not yet been finalized, as the hearing and review process is still underway.

While the situation remains uncertain, importers with products currently impacted by Section 122 should be aware of the upcoming deadline and continue to monitor developments closely. Changes to the current tariff structure could affect entry planning, sourcing decisions, and landed costs.

Deringer is actively monitoring developments and will provide updates as additional information becomes available.

If you have questions regarding your shipments or potential business impacts, please contact your Deringer representative.

Don't Fall for Fraudulent Schemes

As CBP rolls out the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) process for IEEPA duty refunds, importers should be aware of an increased risk of fraud and phishing attempts targeting companies seeking refunds. Deringer has received reports from clients that they have been targeted with fraudulent notices related to IEEPA refund claims.

The official process for requesting an IEEPA refund is through a CAPE Declaration filed in the ACE Secure Data Portal using a verified ACE account. Importers should work directly with the customs broker who filed the original entries to determine the appropriate refund filing process and avoid unauthorized third-party solicitations.

Red Flags to Watch For

Be cautious of anyone who:

• Offers to obtain an IEEPA refund on your behalf in exchange for personal, company, or banking information

• Requests sensitive information such as bank account details, passwords, or Social Security numbers

• Sends unsolicited emails, calls, or text messages regarding IEEPA refunds

• Creates a sense of urgency or pressure to act immediately

• Uses suspicious links, poor grammar, or unofficial websites

Protect Your Organization

• Verify that your ACE account information is accurate and up to date.

• Only use the ACE Secure Data Portal for CAPE-related refund submissions.

• Confirm that any communication from CBP comes from an official @cbp.dhs.gov email address.

• Never share sensitive company or financial information with unverified parties.

• Avoid clicking links or opening attachments from suspicious emails.

Reporting Suspicious Activity

If you receive a suspicious communication related to IEEPA refunds or CAPE reports:

• Report it to IEEPAFraud@cbp.dhs.gov

• Submit a complaint through the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) Hotline

For additional guidance on protecting your information and avoiding refund-related scams, review CBP's recent message: CSMS # 68569567 - Best Practices for Protecting Your Information Regarding IEEPA Refunds

If you have questions regarding CAPE filings, IEEPA refunds, or ACE account security, please contact your Deringer representative before responding to any unsolicited requests for information. 

On June 3, 2026 President Trump issued the executive order “Strengthening Customs Enforcement”. In the executive order the President has ordered Customs to take steps to revise eligibility regulations, guidance and policies with regards to those wishing to act in the capacity of an importer of record. The President stated that importers will need to “provide additional data and identification information”. Similarly, CBP’s current POA best practices document states that a customs broker should “To the greatest extent possible, have POA’s completed in person so the grantor’s unexpired government issued photo identification (driver’s license, passport, etc.) can be reviewed.”

Both CBP and surety companies have stated that identity theft and fraud are increasing and Customs is taking a closer look at importers Right to Make Entry (RTME). Shipments are being held at ports of entry while RTME exams are being conducted. This may involve a request to the broker for a copy of the power of attorney used to execute the release and entry as well as transactional documents from the importer to prove they own or have a financial interest in the goods. CBP is asking brokers to provide documents to support the review and authenticity of the power of attorney including government issued photo identification. Customs views RTME as a condition of release and will not release cargo until the review is concluded. This has resulted in additional storage and demurrage charges for many importers.

In light of the executive order and CBP’s own best practices document, effective July 1, 2026, A.N. Deringer will require positive identification in the form of an unexpired government issued photo ID (driver’s license, passport, etc.) for the party or parties signing any new power of attorney. Over time we will reach out to our clients which currently have a power of attorney on file without positive identification.

We would like to share the following update from the law firm Roll & Harris LLP, which offers a thorough analysis of the current developments:

"On Friday (May 29^th), the government made clear that it intends to appeal the Court of International Trade’s (“CIT’s”) sweeping IEEPA tariff refund order. While the government has yet to officially file its notice of appeal and the outcome of any such appeal remains to be seen, the implication from Friday’s government announcement is that any importer who (1) has entries that were ineligible for, or that failed, CAPE “Phase 1” processing and (2) has not yet filed an IEEPA tariff refund lawsuit, should strongly consider filing an IEEPA tariff refund lawsuit.

According to the government’s Friday filing, there are 3 groups of importers/entries:

• Group 1: Importers with entries that are unliquidated or not “finally liquidated.”

• Group 2: Importers with “finally liquidated” entries but who have filed refund lawsuits.

• Group 3: Importers with “finally liquidated” entries but who have NOT filed refund lawsuits.

We note that importers can be in both groups 1 and 2 OR in both groups 1 and 3 since the same importer can have some entries that are unliquidated and some that are "finally liquidated."

Regarding Group 1, the government believes such entries remain within U.S. Customs & Border Protection's ("CBP") authority to refund and can, therefore, be processed via CBP’s CAPE existing refund module.

For Group 2, the government believes that tariffs paid on “finally liquidated” entries cannot be refunded absent a court order and that the court must issue an importer specific refund order as a condition for CBP to be able to refund the tariffs paid by that importer. We note that while the court has not yet issued import specific refund orders, the CIT could issue such orders since this group of importers already has refund lawsuits on file.

Lastly, and most importantly, for Group 3, the government believes that there is no legal authority for such importers to obtain refunds on the “finally liquidated” entries and that the government will appeal any CIT order requiring CBP to refund such tariffs.

Friday’s filing does not explicitly say there will be no CAPE “Phase 2” for “finally liquidated” entries, but given the government’s stated intent to appeal and its categorization of the 3 groups of importers, it seems clear, at least to us, that the government will not be creating a CAPE “Phase 2” for such entries.

Per CBP’s filings in the CIT, there are approximately 330,000 importers who have paid the illegal IEEPA tariffs. At the same time, a review of the CIT case management system reveals that there are only between 3,000 and 4,000 importers who have filed tariff refund lawsuits. Measured as a percentage of the total number of importers who have paid the illegal tariffs, this means only about 1% of all importers have filed tariff refund lawsuits. Only this 1% group of importers is, therefore, on the path to receiving FULL refunds of ALL IEEPA tariffs they have paid. The other 99% of all importers may receive full refunds, but only if they are in Importer Group 1 and not in Importer Groups 2 or 3. This is a minority of importers since most importers will have at least some entries that are “finally liquidated.”

To be sure, the government is refunding a significant amount of money via CAPE. Per government statistics submitted to the court, the government has received and accepted CAPE refund claims on approximately $85 billion out of the over $166 billion in IEEPA tariffs it has collected. See here and here. But, for those importers who (1) have filed in CAPE and received error messages for some of their entries, (2) are not eligible to file in CAPE (e.g., importers in CBP’s reconciliation program), (3) have entries that are too old to file in CAPE (and more entries “time out” of CAPE with each passing day), or (4) are small importers unfamiliar with ACE, CAPE or how to obtain refunds, there remain billions of dollars of refunds that the government will not refund absent an importer specific court order to do so.

Finally, there remains a lack of clarity from the government over what it believes the phrase “finally liquidated” means in the context of IEEPA entries. The government does agree that entries liquidated less than 80 days ago are not “finally liquidated” because 19 USC 1501 gives the government the authority to reliquidate any such liquidations. However, it remains an open question, at least for now, as to whether the government agrees that entries that are the subject of an administrative protest against the assessment of IEEPA tariffs are also not “finally liquidated.” Since a protest can reach back to liquidations that occurred 180 days prior to the protest filing date, approval of such protests would drastically lessen, and in many cases eliminate, the need for importers to file individual refund lawsuits. Conversely, denial of such protests would require importers to file refund lawsuits in order to preserve their rights to refunds on such entries.

In sum, Friday’s filing makes it clear that the government does not intend to voluntarily or easily refund ALL IEEPA tariffs to ALL importers. Given Friday's developments and the continued clarity from the government regarding what "finally liquidated" means, each importer should speak with its customs counsel to determine the best way to maximize chances for a full and complete IEEPA tariff refund."

Disclaimer: The information provided in this notice is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Importers are encouraged to consult with their customs counsel. For additional information or questions, please contact Michael Roll at (310) 294‑9501 or michael.roll@thetradelawfirm.com, or Brett Harris at (845) 255‑1850 or brett.harris@thetradelawfirm.com.

We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as appropriate. For questions regarding your shipments, please contact your Deringer representative or customs attorney.

New requirements for importers of record, foreign IOR restrictions, and increased enforcement actions expected 

On June 3, President Trump issued an Executive Order, “Strengthening Customs Enforcement,” signaling a broad tightening of U.S. Customs enforcement that will impact all importers and parties involved in import transactions.

The Order emphasizes increased importer accountability, enhanced vetting, expanded disclosure requirements, and stronger enforcement, particularly affecting importers of record (IORs), with heightened implications for foreign IORs.

Although the changes are not immediate, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are expected to implement them through the rulemaking process, including the issuance of future Federal Register notices seeking public comment.

Key Takeaways

• Heightened enforcement expected across CBP operations

• Increased bonding and proof of tangible domestic assets in the U.S. for IORs

• Expanded data reporting and supply chain disclosure obligations

• Stricter rules and limitations on foreign IORs

• Higher penalties and reduced mitigation flexibility

Importer of Record (IOR) Requirements

Within 180 days, CBP will revise IOR requirements to include:

• Minimum U.S. assets and/or increased bonding thresholds

• Expanded disclosures (ownership, affiliations, assets, and import volumes)

• A new “good standing” requirement; noncompliant IORs may be barred from importing

Foreign IOR Restrictions

• Foreign IORs will be prohibited from filing informal entries

• Formal entries will be permitted only if additional requirements are met, including:

  • Sufficient bonding is provided to protect revenue

  • Compliance standards are met

  • Participation in CTPAT (if eligible), or use of a CTPAT-validated broker

  • The Order also introduces a substance-over-form test to prevent the use of shell companies or artificial structures to qualify as a U.S. IOR

Enhanced Vetting and Oversight

CBP will expand oversight of the importing community by:

• Updating the IOR registry (removing inactive IORs and verifying compliance)

• Creating risk-based tiers based on compliance history

• Expand vetting to IORs, their affiliates, brokers, forwarders, and bonded operators

New Reporting Requirements

The Order directs CBP to implement expanded import reporting requirements, including:

• Certifying compliance with critical supply chain requirements like the Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act Compliance certifications

• Foreign tax and business identifiers

• Detailed supply chain and product information

• Within 90 days, importers may also be required to submit export-related documentation filed with foreign governments

Increased Enforcement and Penalties

CBP is directed to expand enforcement activities, including:

• Increased audits and investigations

• More aggressive bond enforcement and liquidated damages claims and penalties

• Restrictions on in-bond shipments

Priority Enforcement Areas: forced labor, undervaluation, misclassification, transshipment, and AD/CVD evasion (EAPA).

Penalty Changes

Within 90 days, CBP will revise mitigation policies to include:

• A minimum penalty floor of at least 50% of assessed penalties

• Minimum liquidated damages thresholds

• No mitigation for repeat offenders

Implementation Timeline for CBP

• 45 days: Legislative recommendations for additional Customs enforcement legislation

• 90 days: New reporting, penalty, and enforcement measures

• Within 180 days: New IOR rules, registry updates, and vetting requirements

• Within 1 year: Implementation Report to the President

   

This Executive Order effectively lays the groundwork for a comprehensive modernization of U.S. Customs enforcement.

Importers, particularly those using foreign IOR structures, should anticipate increased scrutiny, higher compliance costs, and more extensive reporting obligations. Begin evaluating current import practices in advance of forthcoming rulemaking.

We will continue to monitor developments and provide updates. For questions, please contact your Deringer representative or Customs Attorney. 

 Seeking Public Comment on Proposed Additional Tariffs 

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has published a Federal Register notice seeking public comment on proposed additional tariffs under Section 301 related to forced labor concerns. The proposed action follows USTR’s investigation into 60 countries, which found that many trading partners have failed to adequately prohibit or enforce restrictions on imports of goods produced with forced labor.

As a result of these findings, USTR has proposed additional tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on imports from the affected countries. These measures are not yet final and are subject to change based on public feedback.

Proposed Tariff Structure

• 10% Tariff would apply to countries that:

  • Currently enforce forced labor import prohibitions (e.g., Canada, EU, Mexico, Indonesia, Pakistan)

  • Have committed to such prohibitions under trade agreements (e.g., Bangladesh, Cambodia, Malaysia, Taiwan)

  • Maintain partial regimes restricting certain forced labor goods (e.g., United Kingdom)

• 12.5% Tariff would apply to the remaining 44 countries that USTR determined have failed to adequately implement or enforce such prohibitions.

These duties would apply broadly to all products from the affected countries, with limited exclusions outlined in the forthcoming Federal Register notice.

Additional Considerations

• Tariff stacking: These new duties would be imposed on top of existing tariffs, including most favored nation (MFN) rates, current Section 301 tariffs on China, and any other applicable trade actions.

• Textile mechanism: USTR also proposed a potential quota-based mechanism allowing a limited volume of apparel and textiles from certain countries to enter at a reduced tariff rate.

Timeline

• June 22: Deadline to request participation in public hearings

• July 6: Written comments due

• July 7: Public hearings scheduled

This timeline could allow implementation of new tariffs before the expiration of current Section 122 duties on July 24. USTR is also expected to release findings from a separate Section 301 investigation into excess manufacturing capacity involving 16 economies, including China, the EU, Vietnam, India, and Mexico.

We will continue to monitor this closely and provide updates as more information becomes available. If you have questions about how this may affect your imports, please reach out to your Deringer representative or consult your Customs Attorney.

Update on Refunds, Enforcement Trends, and What to Do Next

On June 1, the Trump Administration released a proclamation announcing adjustments to Section 232 tariffs on certain metal-based products, effective 12:01 a.m. ET on June 8, 2026.

The administration is lowering 232 tariffs on agricultural equipment, Industrial Equipment, and HVAC. Tariffs on agricultural machinery, such as combines and harvesters, as well as residential HVAC systems, will drop from 25% to 15% from certain countries of origin. The proclamation also introduces a new incentive tied to U.S. sourcing. As stated by the White House, it “encourages foreign companies to use more U.S. steel and aluminum” by allowing them to qualify for a reduced 10% duty rate if their equipment contains at least 85% down from 95% U.S. melted and poured steel or smelted and cast aluminum or U.S. copper by weight. These tariff changes are temporary and will remain in effect through December 31, 2027.

On the other hand, the proclamation also adds steel racks under subheadings 9403.20.0075, 9403.20.0082, and 9403.99.9040 and aluminum lithographic plates under subheading 3701.30.00 to the list of goods subject to 25% Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum derivatives, respectively. Those changes also take effect June 8.

Eligibility for a reduced or modified tariff rate depends on whether the product is specifically listed in the annexes to the proclamation, linked below.

Key Details

• Effective June 8, 2026, HTSUS provisions and product lists under prior proclamations will be modified as outlined in Annexes I‑A, I‑B, I‑C, II, III, and IV to the proclamation.

  • Importers must review the annexes to determine whether their specific products and HTS numbers are affected.

• A 25% tariff remains at the baseline rate unless a lower rate applies.

• For certain countries (including the EU, UK, Japan, and others), imports of products listed in Annex I-C:

  • If the chapter 1-97 HTS duty rate is below 15%, total duties will equal 15%.

  • If the chapter 1-97 duty rate is 15% or higher, no additional Section 232 tariff applies.

• A 10% tariff applies where steel or aluminum content is entirely sourced and processed in the U.S. under the proclamation’s rules.

• For imports from Canada and Mexico under USMCA of products listed in Annex I-C:

  • The 25% tariff applies only to non-U.S. content.

  • Total effective duty cannot be less than 15%.

  • CBP will issue guidance on calculating U.S. content.

  • Penalties may apply for misrepresentation.

• If multiple tariff rates apply, the lowest applicable rate will be used.

• A product is considered U.S.-sourced for tariff purposes if at least 85% of its metal content by weight is produced in the U.S.

• Beginning January 1, 2028, tariff rates will revert to those established under prior proclamations.

What This Means for You

• These changes may impact your imports depending on product type, country of origin, trade agreement eligibility, and the percentage of U.S. steel or aluminum content.

• Additional guidance from CBP is expected, particularly regarding content calculations and enforcement.

We will continue to monitor this closely and provide updates as more information becomes available. If you have questions about how this may affect your imports, please reach out to your Deringer representative or consult your Customs Attorney.