DOJ Stalls on $175B Tariff Refunds: What the Four-Month Delay Means for Importers
In a late Friday filing, the Justice Department asked the Court of International Trade for 120 days before scheduling refund proceedings — directly contradicting its earlier agreement to refund IEEPA tariffs. Here's what changed, what it means for your claim, and what to do now.
The Friday Night Filing
Late on Friday, February 27, the Department of Justice filed a motion with the Court of International Trade requesting a 120-day delay before the court schedules any proceedings on IEEPA tariff refunds. The filing came after the government had already missed its own February 27 deadline to propose a schedule for administering refunds.
The timing is telling. Friday evening filings are a well-worn Washington tactic to minimize press coverage. And the substance is more telling still: just days earlier, the government had stipulated — formally agreed — that it would refund IEEPA tariffs to "all current and future similarly situated plaintiffs." Now it wants four months before even discussing how.
What the Government Is Arguing
The DOJ's motion argues that the administrative complexity of processing refunds for over 2,000 companies across millions of customs entries requires substantial time to coordinate between agencies — primarily CBP, Treasury, and Commerce. They're framing this as a logistics problem, not a legal one.
Separately, President Trump posted on Truth Social signaling his desire to fight the refunds entirely, suggesting the administration might seek Supreme Court rehearing. However, the DOJ has stated it will not file for rehearing — creating a visible gap between political rhetoric and legal strategy.
Key point: The Supreme Court's ruling is final. The government is not contesting the legal obligation to refund — it's contesting the timeline. This is a delay tactic, not a reversal.
Plaintiffs Are Already Fighting Back
Importers' counsel didn't wait long to respond. Plaintiffs have counter-filed at CIT seeking injunctive relief — essentially asking the court to order the government to begin processing refunds immediately, with interest accruing on the delayed payments.
The injunctive relief motion argues that the government's own stipulation created a binding commitment, and that a four-month delay without justification causes ongoing financial harm to importers who have already been waiting since the Supreme Court ruling on February 20.
The FedEx Domino
In a significant parallel development, FedEx publicly committed to passing any tariff refunds through to its customers. This matters for two reasons:
- • It establishes a precedent for downstream recovery — if your goods moved through FedEx, your refund path just got clearer
- • It signals that major corporations are treating refunds as a when, not an if — and structuring their operations accordingly
Meanwhile, class-action lawsuits have been filed against both FedEx and EssilorLuxottica (maker of Ray-Ban) by retail customers seeking tariff-related refunds, expanding the litigation from importers to the broader supply chain.
The Section 122 Clock
There's another pressure point working in importers' favor. The replacement tariffs imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 have a statutory expiration date of July 24, 2026 — just 150 days from when they were signed. Section 122 only permits temporary tariffs to address balance-of-payments emergencies.
Congressional extension is considered unlikely given the current political dynamics. If the replacement tariffs expire without a new authority in place, the administration loses significant leverage — making the IEEPA refund question even more politically charged.
In other words: the government is asking for 120 days of delay on a timeline that already has a 150-day fuse burning on the replacement tariff structure. The math doesn't favor stalling.
What This Means for Your Refund Timeline
Let's be direct about what's happening:
- • Your legal right to a refund is unchanged. The Supreme Court ruling stands. The DOJ is not challenging it.
- • The timeline just got pushed. If the CIT grants the 120-day delay, the earliest proceedings would begin in late June 2026. More realistically, initial refunds for unliquidated entries could start in Q4 2026.
- • Interest should accrue. Plaintiffs are arguing — correctly — that delayed refunds should carry interest from the date of the ruling. This is standard in customs refund cases.
- • The claim market will adjust. Litigation finance buyers pricing IEEPA claims will factor in the longer timeline, which could temporarily lower offers. If you're considering selling your claim, understand that the delay doesn't reduce the value — it increases the discount rate.
What You Should Do Right Now
1. Don't panic. The delay is frustrating but predictable. Every major government payout faces procedural resistance. The legal foundation for your refund is as strong as it was on February 20.
2. File your claim if you haven't. The DOJ's stipulation covers "all current and future similarly situated plaintiffs." But being on record matters. If you haven't filed a protest with CBP or joined the CIT litigation, now is the time — not after the 120-day window closes.
3. Document your downstream costs. With class actions expanding to logistics companies and retailers, the refund chain is getting longer. Keep records of exactly what you paid in IEEPA tariffs, on which entries, and through which brokers or carriers.
4. Be cautious with claim sales. If a litigation finance buyer approaches you with an offer this week, understand they're pricing in the delay. Your claim isn't worth less — they're just offering less because they have to wait longer. If you can afford to hold, the full recovery (potentially with interest) will be larger.
5. Watch the CIT docket. The court's response to the injunctive relief motion will set the tone. If the CIT rejects the 120-day delay or shortens it significantly, timelines could accelerate quickly. We'll be tracking this closely.
Bottom line: The government agreed to pay. Now it's asking for more time before it has to write the check. This is gamesmanship, not a legal threat. Your claim is valid. The only question is when — not whether — you get paid.
We're Watching This Daily
TariffRefundIQ monitors CIT filings, CBP guidance, and legislative developments every day. When the court rules on the injunctive relief motion or the government's delay request, we'll break it down immediately.
Have questions about your specific situation? Join the waitlist — our tools are designed to help importers track and maximize their IEEPA refund recovery.