The first refund checks for tariffs a federal court declared illegal have started hitting importers’ bank accounts. But the money is reaching far fewer businesses than anyone anticipated, and the process to claim it has proved so technical that most small importers cannot do it alone.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has approved roughly 21% of refund claims submitted through its CAPE electronic filing portal, a figure widely cited by trade practitioners and derived from processing updates referenced in guidance documents tracked by the U.S. Court of International Trade. CBP has not independently confirmed this approval rate, and the exact methodology behind the estimate is not publicly documented. Among the claims that did clear, the vast majority were filed with the help of a licensed customs broker, according to multiple trade attorneys and brokers who have handled IEEPA refund filings but declined to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss client matters publicly. That dynamic has created a two-tier system: businesses with broker relationships are recovering money, while smaller importers who handled their own customs paperwork are largely shut out.
The refunds trace back to a ruling by the Court of International Trade that struck down certain tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as IEEPA. The court found the duties lacked proper legal authority and ordered CBP to return the collected funds. CBP’s official IEEPA duty refund page outlines eligibility and filing steps, but the gap between those instructions and what a small business owner can realistically execute without professional help is wide. Neither CBP nor the Court of International Trade has published figures on the total dollar value of duties collected under the struck-down IEEPA tariffs, the aggregate amount refunded so far, or the average size of individual claims, making it difficult to gauge the full financial scope of the program.
Why four out of five claims are failing
CBP has not published a breakdown of denial reasons, which has left importers and their advisors piecing together patterns from individual cases. The CAPE system demands that each claim match a specific entry number, tariff classification code, and payment record in CBP’s import database. One wrong digit, one mismatched code, and the system rejects the filing.
That level of precision is routine for customs brokers, who maintain detailed entry records for their clients and file through CAPE regularly. For an importer who shipped a container of goods through a freight forwarder 18 months ago and never saw the underlying customs paperwork, reconstructing those records can be nearly impossible.
Hiring a broker solely to file a refund claim typically costs several hundred dollars in fees. When the refund itself might be $2,000 or $3,000, the math gets uncomfortable fast. And for importers whose claims were already rejected, the path forward is murky. As of a review of CBP’s public communications in early June 2026, the agency has not announced a formal appeals process for IEEPA refund denials, leaving filers unsure whether a corrected resubmission is even an option.
The refund money is landing with middlemen, not always with the businesses that paid
Approval is only half the problem. When a claim does go through, the refund check is issued to whoever CBP has on record as the payer of the duties. In many cases, that is not the importer. Carriers, freight forwarders, and logistics companies routinely pay duties on behalf of their clients as part of bundled shipping services. So the refund goes to the intermediary.
FedEx has publicly pledged to pass refund payments through to the customers who originally bore the tariff cost, as reported by the Associated Press. As of June 2026, it is not clear from public reporting whether FedEx has begun distributing those funds or whether the commitment remains a forward-looking pledge. That distinction matters because, without actual disbursements, refund dollars could sit in a carrier’s accounts indefinitely. UPS, DHL, and smaller freight forwarders have not issued comparable public statements, and the contract language governing who owns a duty refund varies wildly across the industry.
For a small importer who shipped through a third party, the question is blunt: Will the company that received the check actually send the money along? The answer depends on individual contracts and business relationships, not on any government requirement.
Congressional and oversight attention remains limited
Despite the low approval rate and widespread confusion, there has been no publicly announced congressional hearing, Government Accountability Office review, or formal legislative proposal specifically targeting the IEEPA refund process as of June 2026. Several members of Congress have referenced IEEPA tariffs in broader trade policy statements, but the refund rollout itself has not drawn the kind of focused oversight that importers and trade groups have called for. The absence of dedicated legislative or watchdog scrutiny means that, for now, the Court of International Trade’s continued monitoring of CBP’s guidance updates is the primary external check on the program.
The court is not walking away
The Court of International Trade has taken the unusual step of continuing to monitor and publish CBP’s guidance updates on the refund rollout. That kind of sustained judicial attention is not standard for an administrative refund program. It signals the court is aware the process carries real risk of uneven outcomes and wants to keep pressure on CBP to follow through on its order.
For importers still waiting, the timeline is open-ended. CBP has not set a public deadline for completing all refund processing, and filers have almost no visibility into where their claims sit in the queue. That uncertainty is hardest on cash-strapped businesses that fronted tariff payments months ago and have been budgeting around the assumption that the money was coming back.
The CAPE system also faces unresolved questions about complex filings: entries with multiple importers of record, shipments split across ports, or goods reclassified after entry. CBP has not published guidance or examples for these scenarios, which may be discouraging some eligible businesses from filing at all.
How importers can improve their odds before CBP closes the filing window
Businesses that paid IEEPA-related duties and have not yet filed should start with CBP’s official refund page to confirm current eligibility requirements. Before touching the CAPE portal, gather every original entry summary, duty payment receipt, and tariff classification record available. Data mismatches are the most commonly cited reason for rejections, according to customs brokers and trade attorneys who have reviewed denied filings, and having clean documentation upfront is the single best defense.
Importers who used a freight forwarder or carrier for the original shipment should contact that company directly. Ask whether the intermediary has already filed a claim, whether a refund check has arrived, and when the funds will be forwarded. Get any commitment in writing.
For refund amounts above a few thousand dollars, hiring a licensed customs broker to handle the CAPE filing is likely worth the fee, given the stark difference in approval rates between broker-assisted and self-filed claims observed by practitioners. For smaller amounts, the cost-benefit calculation is tighter, but a broker consultation, even a brief one, can flag errors before they trigger a rejection.
The 21% approval rate, as estimated by trade practitioners, reflects a system that was designed for trade compliance professionals, not for the small businesses that actually absorbed the tariff costs. Until CBP offers clearer explanations for denials, a workable resubmission process, and a firm timeline for completing the rollout, thousands of importers will remain stuck between a court order that says they are owed money and a bureaucratic process that makes collecting it extraordinarily difficult.
