President Trump’s 10 percent worldwide tariff, in force from February 24 to July 24, has produced no court-ordered refunds for importers. A May ruling that the tariff was unlawful has been frozen since June 11 by a stay pending appeal at the Federal Circuit.
That leaves a tariff that has already expired and money that has not moved. Troutman Pepper Locke’s October 12 update reports that the appeal is still waiting for a decision on whether the tariff exceeded the president’s authority.
What the surcharge was and when it ran
Proclamation 11012, issued February 20, imposed a 10 percent tariff on imports from every country under Section 122 of the Trade Act. The tariff took effect February 24 and ran for 150 days, the maximum the statute allows without Congress, ending July 24, according to the Wiley tariff tracker.
The White House turned to Section 122 after the Supreme Court held that the emergency law behind the earlier tariffs does not authorize them. Energy, pharmaceuticals, certain electronics, goods covered by Section 232 duties and USMCA-compliant goods were exempt from the surcharge.
The May 7 ruling that went nowhere
On May 7, a divided three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 in Oregon v. United States, Slip Op. 26-47, that the surcharge exceeded the president’s authority. The challengers were a 24-state coalition led by Oregon and two private importers, Burlap and Barrel, Inc. and Basic Fun, Inc.
The win was narrow. Only Washington state, through the University of Washington, and the two importers were found to have standing, so the relief reached just those three plaintiffs. Every other importer who paid the surcharge received nothing from the ruling.
Retirement deadlines, in your inbox: Miss an enrollment or claim deadline and the money can be gone. Join the Retirement Money Brief and we’ll send you our Open Settlements & Refund Tracker as a welcome gift.
Get the Brief + the settlements tracker →
We may earn a commission from links on this page.
How the appeal court froze it
The government appealed the next day. The trade court denied a stay on May 20, but the Federal Circuit had already entered an administrative stay on May 12 and then granted a stay pending appeal on June 11. Steptoe reported that the appeals court found the government likely to succeed on the merits, while stopping short of a final conclusion.
In its June ruling, the appeals court said the trade court’s reading of the law “may be incorrect,” and that the legislative history “strongly call[s] into question” whether the trade court’s way of measuring the tariff was the only one Congress intended. It called the public interest factor “neutral.” Those comments came at the stay stage and are not a final decision.
The timing also worked against the challengers. Steptoe noted the government’s opening brief was due in July and that the case was unlikely to be resolved before the tariff expired on July 24. By the time the surcharge ended, the only court ruling against it had been on hold for six weeks.
The two appeals, Nos. 2026-1804 and 2026-1805, were consolidated. Troutman’s update gives no argument date, and no merits decision has been issued. The stay also means the injunction that protected the three plaintiffs no longer blocks collection.
That is why no court has ordered a Section 122 refund. Even a win for the importers at the Federal Circuit would only reopen the question of who gets paid, and any further appeal to the Supreme Court would take longer still.
Why other tariff refunds look so different
The contrast with the earlier tariffs is stark. Customs has accepted about $136.6 billion in refunds on the struck-down emergency-law duties and sent $126 billion to the Treasury Department for payment, Supply Chain Dive reported October 8. Those refunds exist because the Supreme Court ruled and a trade court ordered them.
The trade court also certified a class of importers who never sued on October 8, Davis Wright Tremaine reported, but that class covers the earlier emergency-law duties paid between February 1, 2025, and February 19, 2026. The Section 122 surcharge started February 24, so it falls outside that window.
The result is two separate refund tracks. One is paying out billions. The other, for the surcharge, has a lower court ruling that is on hold.
What importers and shoppers should watch
Steptoe advised importers to keep entry documents organized, track protest deadlines and watch the appeal, and to be ready to file refund complaints at the trade court if the Federal Circuit upholds the ruling.
Shoppers face a different position. The refunds go to the importer of record, and no law makes a retailer pass any of them on. Consumer pass-through lawsuits are pending, but they have not produced a claim process.
The trade court posts orders and documents in the refund litigation on its own website, including a notice on the IEEPA refund class action dated October 8. Steptoe also noted that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer had suggested the Section 122 tariffs could be reauthorized for another 150-day period, though the tariff expired July 24 and was followed by separate forced-labor tariffs on 60 trading partners.
What happens to refund money if the appeal fails?
If the Federal Circuit reverses the May ruling, the surcharge refunds stay at zero. If it upholds it, claims could open with several dates attached, and the one that governs a refund is easy to misread.
The Settlement & Refund Recovery System walks through the four-date rule for reading a settlement notice and includes a claim log and payment tracker for keeping every notice, receipt and deadline in one place. Its scam-proof rules also help separate a real court notice from a refund text that asks for a fee.
More Financial Reading
- 21 Ways to Stretch a $2,087 Social Security Check
- 15 Places to Find Your Share of the $4.25 Billion States Give Back
- The New $6,000 Senior Deduction and 14 More Tax Moves for Retirees
This article was produced with AI assistance and edited for accuracy against the sources linked above.
