NEWSAR
Multi-perspective news intelligence
SRCAssociated Press (AP)
LANGEN
LEANCenter
WORDS571
ENT6
WED · 2026-03-04 · 22:23 GMTBRIEF NSR-2026-0304-21490
News/US judge orders refunds for more than $1/Judge rules companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tari…
NSR-2026-0304-21490News Report·EN·Legal & Judicial

Judge rules companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs overturned by the Supreme Court

A federal judge in New York ruled that companies are entitled to refunds for tariffs imposed by the Trump administration that were overturned by the Supreme Court last month. Judge Richard Eaton stated that all importers are eligible for refunds following the Supreme Court's decision that President Trump's tariffs, enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were unconstitutional.

By  PAUL WISEMAN and MAE ANDERSONAssociated Press (AP)Filed 2026-03-04 · 22:23 GMTLean · CenterRead · 3 min
Judge rules companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs overturned by the Supreme Court
Associated Press (AP)FIG 01
Reading time
3min
Word count
571words
Sources cited
3cited
Entities identified
6entities
Quality score
100%
§ 01

Briefing Summary

AI-generated
NEWSAR · AI

A federal judge in New York ruled that companies are entitled to refunds for tariffs imposed by the Trump administration that were overturned by the Supreme Court last month. Judge Richard Eaton stated that all importers are eligible for refunds following the Supreme Court's decision that President Trump's tariffs, enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court determined that the president cannot unilaterally set tariffs, as that power belongs to Congress. Judge Eaton will oversee cases related to these tariff refunds, potentially worth $175 billion. The ruling clarifies the refund process, ordering customs to cease collecting the IEEPA tariffs and recalculate duties for goods already processed.

Confidence 0.90Sources 3Claims 5Entities 6
§ 02

Article analysis

Model · rule-based
Framing
Legal & Judicial
Economic Impact
Tone
Measured
AI-assessed
CalmNeutralAlarmist
Factuality
0.80 / 1.00
Factual
LowHigh
Sources cited
3
Well sourced
FewMany
§ 03

Key claims

5 extracted
01

The federal government collected more than $130 billion in the now-defunct tariffs through mid-December.

statistic
Confidence
1.00
02

The Supreme Court found Trump's tariffs to be unconstitutional under the emergency powers law.

factual
Confidence
1.00
03

A federal judge ruled companies are entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs overturned by the Supreme Court.

factual
Confidence
1.00
04

This is a great decision for importers and consumers who paid.

quoteBarry Appleton, a law professor
Confidence
0.90
05

Refunds could be worth $175 billion, according to calculations by the Penn Wharton Budget Model.

statisticPenn Wharton Budget Model
Confidence
0.90
§ 04

Full report

3 min read · 571 words
Containers are stored in a cargo terminal in Frankfurt, Germany, Monday, Feb. 23, 2026. (AP Photo/Michael Probst) Updated [hour]:[minute] [AMPM] [timezone], [monthFull] [day], [year] WASHINGTON (AP) — In a defeat for the Trump administration, a federal judge in New York ruled Wednesday that companies that paid tariffs struck down last month by Supreme Court are due refunds.Judge Richard Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade wrote that “all importers of record’’ were “entitled to benefit’’ from the Supreme Court ruling that struck down sweeping double-digit import taxes President Donald Trump imposed last year under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).The Supreme Court found those tariffs to be unconstitutional under the emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs he levied on nearly every other country. The majority ruled that the president could not unilaterally set and change tariffs because taxation power clearly belongs to Congress.In his ruling, Eaton wrote that he alone “will hear cases pertaining to the refund of IEEPA duties.’’ The ruling offers some clarity about the tariff refund process, something the Supreme Court did not even mention in its Feb. 20 decision. Trade lawyer Ryan Majerus, a partner at King & Spalding and a former U.S. trade official, said he expects the government to appeal or “seek a stay to buy more time for U.S. Customs to comply.″ The federal government collected more than $130 billion in the now-defunct tariffs through mid-December and could ultimately be on the hook for refunds worth $175 billion, according to calculations by the Penn Wharton Budget Model. Eaton was ruling specifically on a case brought by Atmus Filtration, a Nashville, Tennessee, company that makes filters and other filtration products, claiming a right to a tariff refund. All goods that go through U.S. Customs and Border Protections enter a process called “liquidation,” when the agency issues its final accounting of what is owed. Once liquidated, importers have 180 days to formally contest the duties. After that window closes, the liquidation is legally final. The judge ordered customs to stop collecting the IEEPA tariffs the Supreme Court struck down last month on goods going through the liquidation process. And if the goods were past that part of the process, the agency would have to recalculate them without the tariffs.“This is a great decision for importers and consumers who paid,” said Barry Appleton, a law professor and co-director New York Law School’s Center for International Law. “It will make customs brokers busy. It should make things easier for the courts — and get a process underway for those importers who paid within the last 180 days.”On Monday, another federal court rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to slow the refund process. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit started the next phase in the refund process by sending it to New York trade court to sort out.Now the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency must come up with a way to process the refunds. Customs routinely refunds tariffs when there’s been some kind of error, but its system was “not designed for a mass refund,″ said trade lawyer Alexis Early, a partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner. “The devil will be in the details of the administrative process.″____Anderson reported from New York.AP Writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this story. Anderson reports for The Associated Press on a wide range of issues that small businesses face. She is based in New York.
§ 05

Entities

6 identified
§ 06

Keywords & salience

8 terms
tariffs
1.00
refunds
0.90
supreme court
0.80
international emergency economic powers act
0.70
import taxes
0.60
u.s. customs
0.50
trade
0.40
importers
0.40
§ 07

Topic connections

Interactive graph
No topic relationship data available yet. This graph will appear once topic relationships have been computed.