LinkedInFacebookInstagramXYouTube
305-456-3830|info@diaztradelaw.com

tariffs

Call 305-456-3830 or email info@diaztradelaw.com.

The Latest on Potential IEEPA Tariff Refunds

On November 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) held oral argument for Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., regarding the legality of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Since the oral argument, companies, including giants such as Costco, have filed their own preemptive lawsuit in the Court of International Trade (CIT) to preserve their rights to potential refunds.

The following key question is when the SCOTUS will issue its decision. The normal  term of the SCOTUS starts on the first Monday of October and ends in late June or early July. Below is a calendar of the current SCOTUS term.

After oral argument, the Justices always hold a Justices’ Conference to discuss the case among themselves. During the Justices’ Conference, the Justices will cast their preliminary votes, as well as assign which Justice will write the majority, concurring, or dissenting opinion.   These draft opinions will be circulated as Justices seek to bring others to their position.

All opinions of the SCOTUS are normally issued by the last day of the SCOTUS term. However, there are no rules governing when decisions and opinions must be issued. According to the U.S. Courts website, “{t}ypically, decisions that are unanimous are released sooner than those that have concurring and dissenting opinions. While some unanimous decisions are handed down as early as December, some controversial opinions, even if oral argument is held in October, may not be handed down until the last day […]

By |2026-01-09T16:57:59-05:00January 9, 2026|tariffs|0 Comments
Read More

Act NOW to Preserve Potential Tariff Refunds

Tariff policy is changing overnight, and all indicators signal that the Trump Administration will continue to impose tariffs to achieve its trade agenda. There are several lawsuits pending that may eventually invalidate some of the Administration’s tariffs. However, importers should not sit around and wait for the dust to settle. Importers must act NOW and take proactive measures to protect their ability to seek refunds if tariffs are ultimately found to be unlawful. 

IEEPA Tariffs at the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump on November 5, 2025. The case challenges whether the President has the authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Administration relied heavily on IEEPA to impose new tariffs – including fentanyl tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico, and global reciprocal tariffs. Many trade lawyers are predicting that the Court will rule in favor of importers and find that IEEPA does not grant the President the authority to impose sweeping tariffs. 

Potential Refunds & What Importers Should Do

Although it remains unclear how CBP will handle refunds (should SCOTUS agree with the lower courts), it is likely that once an entry is liquidated and the liquidation becomes final, CBP may not grant a refund of duties paid, regardless of SCOTUS’s outcome. It will likely be the position that CBP only has to grant refunds to those parties that have a Court […]

By |2025-11-17T09:01:16-05:00November 17, 2025|International Trade, Pre-compliance, tariffs|0 Comments
Read More

Tariffs at the Supreme Court!

Yesterday was a big day for trade law! The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. The case challenges whether the President has the authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). 

There’s been a lot of back and forth among trade lawyers about how the court will rule. 

Here are our predictions:

After today’s hearing, we’re confident that the Supreme Court will side with the importers and uphold the lower court’s ruling. 

Several justices asked very pointed questions and seemed to express skepticism that IEEPA grants the President broad authority to impose tariffs. At one point, Justice Roberts, a key vote, even called the Administration’s reading of the law a “misfit.”

Importantly, Justice Coney Barrett discussed recovery and questioned whether relief for importers would be a “complete mess”. It is critical that importers file a lawsuit with the CIT to preserve their ability to recover tariff refunds if and when the court overturns the tariffs. Get in touch with Diaz Trade Law for assistance – 305-456-3830 or info@diaztradelaw.com.

Keep up with the latest tariff and trade deal news here.

Learn more:

By |2025-11-06T09:52:16-05:00November 6, 2025|Enforcement, International Trade, tariffs|0 Comments
Read More

De Minimis No More: What it Means for Importers and Consumers

President Trump’s Executive Order suspending duty-free de minimis treatment of shipments entering the U.S. took effect last week. The de minimis exemption has been used by retailers around the world catering to the American shopper, and the end of the policy is causing a ripple effect around the globe.

What is De Minimis?

De minimis is a Latin term that means “of the smallest things,” “trifling,” “insignificant.” In the U.S., the de minimis rule dates back to the Tariff Act of 1930. Upon passage of the act, individuals and businesses were permitted to import shipments under $200 without paying duties and taxes. 

The intent behind the exemption was to allow CBP to focus on higher-risk and higher-revenue imports and to encourage small-scale trade. In 2016, the U.S. raised the de minimis threshold to $800 with the passage of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act. 

After the 2016 change, de minimis shipments surged, from 139 million in FY 2015 to 1.36 billion in FY 2024. International retailers took advantage of the new threshold, and many U.S. policymakers began referring to de minimis as a “loophole.” 

Citing safety and fairness concerns, there were dozens of unsuccessful efforts in the U.S. Congress to end de minimis. Finally, the Big Beautiful Bill of 2025

By |2025-09-15T11:19:26-04:00September 15, 2025|ACE, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, Supply Chain, tariffs, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More

Trump IEEPA Tariffs Struck Down by CAFC

What Happened:

Late Friday afternoon the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act  (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to impose some of the tariffs he has ordered on imported goods under IEEPA authority. While this decision will still likely be examined by the Supreme Court, both the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) and the CAFC have now opined that the tariffs were not legally authorized.

The ruling covers:

  • IEEPA reciprocal tariffs
  • IEEPA fentanyl tariffs (China)
  • IEEPA fentanyl border tariffs (Canada and Mexico)

The ruling was not, however, all good news. The CAFC also sent the matter back to the CIT to consider whether the relief should be limited only to those parties that went to Court, and whether the CIT can issue a “universal” injunction (enjoining the Government from applying IEEPA tariffs to any U.S. imports) in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., 145 S. Ct. 2540 (2025). If the CIT were to change the nature of the relief, it could mean that the tariffs would remain in effect and/or refunds would be delayed or even avoided, for those parties not in Court.

To implement this, the CAFC issued a separate order pausing the remand back to the CIT until October 14, allowing time for the Administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.

What’s Next:

The Administration has confirmed that it will seek review by the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the CAFC’s ruling does […]

By |2025-09-02T20:59:15-04:00September 2, 2025|Import, news, tariffs|0 Comments
Read More
This website uses cookies and third party services. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the Privacy Policy. OK
Skip to content
Go to Top