Strategic Considerations for Companies Affected by the IEEPA Tariff Termination

Written by Stephen Von Hagel, CPA, CGMA

In Summary:

The Supreme Court’s termination of IEEPA tariffs has created unprecedented opportunities for businesses to recover previously paid duties but the path forward is far from clear. With the Administration implementing replacement Section 122 tariffs and no formal refund guidance yet issued, companies face critical decisions about whether to wait for direction or begin building their recovery cases now. Understanding the jurisdictional complexities and documentation requirements could mean the difference between substantial refunds and missed opportunities in this rapidly evolving trade landscape.

---

The recent Supreme Court decision to terminate tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) has sent ripples through the international trade community, creating both immediate compliance challenges and potential financial recovery opportunities for businesses. While this development initially appeared straightforward, the Administration’s swift response with replacement Section 122 tariffs, combined with silence on refund procedures, has left many companies uncertain about their next steps.

Understanding what has changed is essential for strategic planning. The Supreme Court’s decision definitively ended the IEEPA tariff regime, but the Administration quickly countered with Section 122 tariffs as a replacement measure. However, these new tariffs come with a critical limitation: they can only remain in effect for 150 days. This temporary nature creates a fundamentally different landscape than the open-ended IEEPA framework. Meanwhile, existing Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs remain fully in force, meaning companies must continue navigating multiple overlapping tariff regimes simultaneously.

The most significant uncertainty surrounds the refund process for tariffs paid under the now-invalidated IEEPA authority. The Supreme Court decision itself did not establish any mechanism for recovering these payments, leaving that responsibility to other entities. Critically, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), not the Treasury Department or the Administration, will define the process and provide guidance on how companies can pursue refunds. This jurisdictional reality means businesses cannot simply submit refund requests through normal customs channels. Instead, they face a more complex legal process with a two-year window for filing CIT actions.

Given this environment, leadership teams face a strategic choice: wait for formal guidance or begin preparing now. While patience may seem prudent, proactive businesses are already assembling documentation and analyzing potential exposure.

Companies should consider taking the following steps:

• Review import history under the IEEPA tariff period
• Quantify potential refund exposure
• Preserve and organize supporting documentation, including import records, payment evidence, product classifications, and relevant customs correspondence
• Evaluate exposure to the temporary Section 122 tariffs before their 150-day expiration

Preparation does not obligate a company to file, but it positions leadership to act decisively once clearer guidance emerges.

Through our various connections, the BMSS team of professionals can help companies navigate these complex transitions by assisting with assessing tariff exposure, preparing comprehensive documentation for potential refunds, and developing strategic approaches to minimize future impacts. Our team brings specialized expertise, helping clients understand their options while positioning them to maximize recovery opportunities in this evolving environment. In a landscape where timing and preparation can mean the difference between substantial refunds and missed opportunities, expert guidance has never been more valuable.

Contact BMSS by calling (833) CPA-BMSS or visit our website for more information.