U.S. Trade Policy and Tariff Actions
- IEEPA refund process updates from CIT and Customs and Border Patrol (CBP): (Alert sent on 5 March)
On 4 March, the CIT issued an order in Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States directing the CBP to liquidate entries which have not yet been liquidated “without regard to the IEEPA duties”. Similarly, CBP has been ordered to reliquidate entries for which liquidation is not final without IEEPA tariffs applied. The Trump Administration is expected to appeal.
Additionally, on 6 March, CBP confirmed to the CIT that the IEEPA tariff refund mechanism would be operational in the next 45 days and is working on a streamlined system (separate from existing refund processes) as opposed to processing individual tariff requests. This does not mean tariff refunds will be distributed in that timeframe, but rather when importers will be able to request refunds on IEEPA tariffs paid. Early reporting indicates that the process will:
o Require importers to work with their customs broker to file a declaration through CBP’s ACE portal.
o Importers will not be required to file litigation to secure refunds.
o Provide a single payment (including interest) to importers, not separate payments for each product entry.
- State Attorneys General coalition sue President Trump over Section 122 global tariffs: On 5 March, a group of 24 US state’s Attorneys General sued the Trump Administration arguing the implementation of global Sect. 122 tariffs are illegal. Oregon Attorney General stated the group’s intent is to seek a restraining order while the litigation proceeds through the Court of International Trade (CIT). The suit comes on the same week Treasury Secretary Bessent noted that Sect. 122 tariffs would be raised to 15%. As of 9 March, the White House has not yet officially published an Executive Order increasing the Sect. 122 tariff.
- Status of U.S. bilaterial negotiations and discussions: During the period when IEEPA tariffs were in effect, the Trump Administration negotiated or announced trade agreements with 18 countries. Countries with announced US reciprocal framework trade deals of relevance to PMMI members include the EU, Switzerland, Japan, UK, Taiwan, South Korea, and India. Given the Supreme Court decision, the IEEPA-related provisions of agreements are nullified. As of 24 February, all US trading partners are subject to the Sect. 122 10% tariff (increase to 15% forthcoming) regardless of whether a deal was negotiated. The Administration has noted that they intend to stand by the trade deals and expect counterparts to as well. Country reactions to date include:
- European Union: The EU Parliament’s trade committee agreed to extend the pause on the implementation of the US-EU framework agreement as they await more information from the United States.
- Switzerland: The Switzerland’s Federal Council announced on 6 March that it will continue negotiations with the US under the current negotiating mandate with the goal of concluding an agreement to stabilize bilateral trade.
- The United Kingdom: Britian’s Trade Minister Peter Kyle said he was confident the trade deal between the US and Britain would still stand despite the 10% Section 122 tariff.
- South Korea: South Korea’s Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan said that the US Supreme Court’s ruling would not affect its trade agreement and the conditions secured under the Korea-US tariff agreement will remain intact. Further, on 8 March, Industry Minister Kim said the US has indicated it will not raise tariffs on South Korean goods if the special investment legislation passes in the South Korean National Assembly this week.
- India: India delayed a visit by India’s trade delegation which was planned to finalized an interim trade deal with the US.
