Your importing supplier has probably already been paid its IEEPA tariff refund, with interest — and since September 18, one wrong address on a CBP form can stop its imports altogether

1. Your supplier has probably already been paid your tariff refund — with interest

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court held in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.” The 6–3 decision covered both sets of IEEPA tariffs that were challenged: the drug-trafficking tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, and the “reciprocal” tariffs on trading partners.

The duties are being refunded, with interest, to whoever paid them: the importer of record. CBP opened its CAPE refund portal on April 20. In a sworn declaration filed October 6 at the Court of International Trade, CBP said that as of October 2, about $126 billion in refunds, “duties plus interest,” had been completed and sent to the Treasury for payment. In an October 8 opinion, the court put the original total at about $166 billion owed to roughly 330,000 importers of record, and said more than 75% of it, plus interest, has been refunded.

That changes the question for most buyers. If your importing supplier filed, it probably already has the money.

• The refund does not follow the surcharge. In 2025, suppliers that imported passed IEEPA duties on to buyers as tariff surcharges, price increases or “tariff adjustment” line items. If your supplier was the importer, the refund goes to your supplier — not to you, even though you paid the surcharge.
• Most recipients plan to keep at least some of it. In the Atlanta Fed’s survey of business executives (1,156 responses, fielded August 10–21), 70% of firms said they expect to keep at least some of their refunds as cash. 17.2% expect to give customer rebates and 14.8% to lower prices. The average refund was 1.7% of annual revenue. The mechanism that sends money back to a buyer is the buyer asking.
• $1.1 billion is sitting unpaid for a clerical reason. CBP reports 20,362 refunds, about $1.1 billion, that it has not sent to the Treasury because the importer never gave CBP its bank (ACH) account details. A supplier that says “we’re still waiting” should be asked whether that is done.
• Suppliers that never filed are now in a class action. On October 8 the court certified a class of every importer of record that paid the challenged duties between February 1, 2025 and February 19, 2026 and has not brought its own suit. Membership is mandatory: there is no opting in or out. The court said the importers that have not used CAPE are believed to be “overwhelmingly small importers,” and that about $30 billion would stay on deposit at the Treasury if CAPE stopped today. Nothing has been paid through the class yet; the parties owe the court a proposed schedule by October 22, and the government is appealing part of the court’s refund order at the Federal Circuit. Treat it as a path to a refund, not a date.
• Know what was not refunded. Section 232 (steel, aluminum, copper), Section 301 (including the forced-labor tariffs below), the Section 122 import surcharge proclaimed the day of the ruling, and antidumping/countervailing duties were not part of the IEEPA decision. Asking a supplier to return those is asking for something that was never refunded.

So what — four questions per importing supplier, answerable from your AP data: (1) Which suppliers added a tariff surcharge or a tariff-attributed price increase in 2025, and how much did you pay on it? (2) Was it attributed to IEEPA duties specifically, rather than 232, 301 or AD/CVD? (3) Has the supplier received its CAPE refund? Most filers have, with interest. Ask in writing for a credit proportional to the IEEPA surcharge you paid. If it says it is still waiting, ask whether CBP has its ACH details. If it never filed, it is in the October 8 class, so put the pass-back term in writing now, before any class payout. (4) Does your contract’s tariff-adjustment clause run both ways? If it only lets the supplier raise prices when duties rise, add the reverse at renewal. If you were the importer of record, the refund is your own CAPE claim, not a supplier conversation. None of this is legal advice; confirm entry-level eligibility with your customs broker.

The next refund fight is already in court. Since July 24, 2026, USTR has charged an additional 10% or 12.5% duty on goods from 60 economies, on findings that each fails to ban, or to enforce a ban on, imports made with forced labor. China and Vietnam pay 12.5%; Mexico, Canada and India pay 10%; goods from the EU and Taiwan are topped up to a 10% total with their normal duty, and goods from Japan, South Korea and Switzerland to 12.5%. Importers including Learning Resources, which brought the IEEPA case, have challenged the action at the Court of International Trade. A three-judge panel heard argument on September 30 and on October 2 ordered further briefing, due October 16. No ruling date has been set.

We make no call on the outcome. The point is timing. If this duty is struck and refunded, the IEEPA precedent is that the money goes to the importer of record. Question (4) is cheapest to settle now, while neither you nor your supplier knows which way the court will go: ask importing suppliers to show the Section 301 forced-labor duty as its own line, and put refund pass-back in writing before the ruling, not after.

2. One form can now stop your supplier’s imports

In June (Issue 4) we said the customs rules were changing and the time to re-audit your importer-of-record arrangements was before the changes landed. The first one has landed.

Every importer has an importer of record (IOR) number, and behind it a CBP Form 5106 with the importer’s name, tax ID, address, phone and email. Under a CBP notice published August 19 (91 FR 53627), enforcement began September 18, 2026. If CBP determines that the Form 5106 information is inaccurate or incomplete, it “will void the IOR number, rendering it invalid for any purpose, including entering imported merchandise into the United States.”

• What CBP counts as inaccurate. The physical address must be where the business actually is. The notice says it “cannot be a registered agent, customs broker, freight forwarder, P.O. box, a business service center, or an address of another person or entity.” The email and phone must belong to the importer; a broker or other third party may not substitute its own.
• How the paperwork got signed matters too. A customs broker filing the form must hold a power of attorney executed directly with the importer.
• You find out by email. CBP voids the number immediately and sends written notice to the email address the importer most recently gave it, copying the broker that last filed an entry. The notice describes no warning or cure period before the void. If the address on file is an old mailbox or a forwarder’s, the notice goes there.
• Getting the number back. The notice CBP sends explains how to request reestablishment, including what the importer must submit to prove its identity. The Federal Register notice gives no timeline.
• More is coming. CBP calls this an initial step under Executive Order 14411 and says it is revising its importer eligibility regulations.

This reaches you two ways. If you import under your own number, it is your form. If a supplier imports and sells to you delivered, it is the supplier’s form, and you learn its number was voided when the delivery is late.

So what — four checks: (1) Ask your broker for the Form 5106 on file for your company. Is the address a place you operate from? Is the email a monitored company mailbox, and the phone yours? (2) Ask the broker whether its power of attorney was signed directly with you or came through a forwarder. (3) For each supplier that ships to you duty-paid, ask who the importer of record is and whether that party has checked its Form 5106 since August 19. A number registered to a forwarder’s or agent’s address is the pattern the notice names. (4) For the suppliers where the answer is slow or vague, decide now what you would do for a month without their inbound freight.

3. A 50% duty list became a ban list

At 12:01 a.m. Eastern on September 29, certain Canadian products became excluded from importation into the United States. Three proclamations signed September 8 did it, one each covering alcoholic beverages, dairy and motor vehicles, under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The annexes list the goods by HTS code: beer, wine, vermouth and other alcoholic beverages (some lines only when packaged for direct consumption); whey products, molasses and non-alcoholic beer; and motorcycles with engines over 800 cc. AP cites an American Action Forum estimate of about $967 million in 2025 imports, 87% of it alcohol.

Most procurement teams do not buy Canadian beer or motorcycles. What travels is how the goods got there:

• They were on a 50% list first. These products had carried a 50% additional duty since 12:01 a.m. Eastern on August 22, when a three-day suspension lapsed. AP puts the goods under those 50% duties at about $20 billion.
• Retaliation moved them. The alcohol proclamation cites Canada maintaining or increasing its measures against U.S. alcohol after the duty took effect — including a Saskatchewan levy announced August 27 — and moves the goods from duty to ban.
• The list itself moves. Two companion proclamations changed which alcohol and motor-vehicle products carry the 50% duty, adding some and removing others, effective September 15. They also say the 50% applies on top of any Section 232 duty. A check you ran in August is out of date.
• The ban has a fallback. If a court strikes it, the text puts the 50% duty back. Goods already imported but not entered or withdrawn from warehouse before September 29 stay at 50%.

So what: (1) Run your Canadian-origin purchases against the current annexes by HTS code, not by product description, and check both lists: banned, and 50%. (2) If you make food or beverages, check ingredient suppliers for Canadian whey and molasses. (3) For anything you buy that sits on the 50% list, price a non-Canadian source now, while it is a cost question and not a supply question. (4) Read the change-in-law clause in those contracts. It should say who carries the cost if the goods can no longer be imported.

The calendar beat: two dates, and only one is on paper. In late September, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US–China trade truce, due to lapse November 10, stays in effect to January 10, 2027. As of October 14, no executive order or Federal Register notice documenting that extension had been published. What is documented is narrower and closer: USTR’s suspension of its Section 301 fees on China-built and China-linked vessels runs through 11:59 p.m. Eastern on November 9, 2026, and no notice extending it has been published. The fee attaches to the ship, not the cargo, so it can reach any ocean shipment as a carrier pass-through. Separately, the US–China Board of Trade recommended lower tariffs on roughly $30 billion of goods each way; the White House documents give neither the new rates nor a start date.

So what: (1) Ask your ocean carriers and forwarders, in writing, whether their terms let them pass Section 301 vessel fees through on sailings after November 9, and on how much notice. (2) Before you accept a Q4 landed-cost quote or fixed rate, check that it says who bears that fee. (3) Do not re-price China-origin goods on the Board of Trade list until rates and dates are published.

On the radar. CBP starts a test of electronic export manifests for truck cargo on October 23. It is voluntary, open to nine participants, and runs about two years: limited manifest data at least 24 hours before departure, and the full manifest no later than two hours before arrival at the port of export. Today truck carriers file no export manifest at all. Nothing to do yet unless you ship to Canada or Mexico by truck with a carrier that joins; if so, ask how the 24-hour cutoff changes your tender deadline.