The case challenged the lawfulness of the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) actions in imposing the so-called “List 3” and “List 4A” tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the tariffs in 2025, the plaintiffs sought Supreme Court review. By declining to hear the case, the Supreme Court leaves the Federal Circuit’s decision intact and effectively ends the challenge.

As a result, the legality of the List 3 and List 4A tariffs has been conclusively upheld, absent future legislative or administrative action. Importers that continue to source goods from China should therefore expect these Section 301 duties to remain in effect until further notice.

If you have questions regarding the impact of this decision or potential tariff mitigation strategies, please contact us.

Specifically, CBP indicated that Phase 2, which will cover reconciliation entries, is expected to launch on June 29, 2026. CBP further stated that Phase 3, which is intended to cover all finally liquidated entries subject to IEEPA tariffs, is expected to launch at the end of July 2026.

At the same time, CBP reiterated its opposition to a universal refund mechanism, arguing that Phase 3 should be limited to importers that have filed suit at the CIT. We therefore expect continued litigation regarding whether refunds will ultimately be available to all affected importers or only to those participating in the litigation.

Given this uncertainty, companies with outstanding IEEPA duty refunds that have not yet instructed us to file a pleading before the CIT should contact us immediately to do so.

For further information, please contact Gail Cumins at gcumins@spcblaw.com, Alli Baron at abaron@spcblaw.com or call us at 212-425-0055.

• increasing bonding requirements and requiring IORs to maintain a minimum level of tangible domestic assets, bonding, or both;
• subjecting foreign IORs to heightened requirements for formal entry;
• limiting informal entry filings to U.S.-based IORs;
• imposing a “good standing” requirement on all IORs and their affiliates; and
• increasing vetting procedures for all individuals and entities engaged in activities directly related to the importation of goods, including foreign IORs, affiliates of IORs, customs brokers, custodians of bonded merchandise, and freight forwarders.

In addition, the order directs DHS and CBP to establish enhanced import disclosure and certification requirements and to increase customs enforcement. Among other measures, the order calls for the establishment of a minimum penalty “floor” of 50%, limiting CBP’s discretion to mitigate penalties, and directs DHS to expedite and enhance the seizure and disposal of non-compliant imports

The executive order signals a significant shift toward enhanced customs enforcement and stricter importer accountability.

Accordingly, we encourage you to take this opportunity to ensure that your company is complying with all applicable import regulations, including classification, valuation, origin disclosures, marking, etc.

Now may be the ideal time to conduct an internal audit to assess your compliance.

We are at your disposal to prepare an audit plan, review your classifications, and reconfirm your valuation methodology. To discuss the best next steps for your company, please contact us.

In this regard, USTR determined that additional tariffs were warranted in response to the “acts, policies, and practices” of countries that have not effectively imposed and enforced a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor. USTR found the actions of those countries is unreasonable, burdens or restricts U.S. commerce, and are thus actionable under Section 301(b) of the Trade Act.

As a result, the USTR has proposed the following additional tariffs.

• A 10% tariff on products from the following that either currently impose (but have failed to effectively enforce), or have undertaken commitments to impose, a prohibition on the importation of forced labor goods: the EU, the UK, Argentina, Bangladesh, Canada, Cambodia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Pakistan and Taiwan;
• A 12.5% tariff on products from the remaining countries under investigation, including Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Egypt, India, Thailand, and Vietnam. For a complete list of affected countries, please contact us.

It is expected, however, that these tariffs will not be apply to either USMCA-qualifying importations or on apparel eligible for entry under DR- CAFTA.

Comments this proposal are due July 6, 2026, and USTR will hold hearings about the proposed actions in these investigations on July 7, 2026. Those interested in testifying must advice USTR by June 22, 2026.

We strongly recommend that clients who will be impacted by these tariffs consider filing comments. We are available to assist with this process as needed.

For further information, please contact Gail Cumins at gcumins@spcblaw.com, Alli Baron at abaron@spcblaw.com or call us at 212-425-0055.

Accordingly, companies that have not yet joined the litigation, but have potential refunds associated with entries that liquidated more than 90 days ago, should consider filing their own protective pleading with the CIT as soon as possible.

In this regard, given the Government’s position, it is increasingly likely that a company-specific court order will be required to recover refunds on finally liquidated entries.

Please contact us if you are interested in filing. We will continue to keep you apprised of further developments.

The Court, unusually, has also instructed Rodney S. Scott, Commissioner of Customs, to appear in person on June 9, 2026, to discuss the agency’s plans to comply with the Court’s order to reliquidate all applicable entries without IEEPA duties.

Customs has also been instructed to submit an updated CAPE progress report by June 10, 2026.

Collectively, these developments suggest that the CIT is considering the possibility of ordering the broad refund of all IEEPA duties, including those associated with entries presently excluded from CAPE phase 1.

However, it is also possible the government will respond to these instructions by filing an appeal to the CIT’s original refund order. Any appeal would need to be filed by June 6, 2026.

With so many questions remaining, it is imperative that you continue to take the necessary steps to protect your company’s IEEPA refunds.

Please contact us to discuss the best course of action for your company at this time.

The Court found that the three importer plaintiffs had standing and granted them a permanent injunction against the assessment of the Section 122 tariffs.

The decision suggests that other importers who paid these duties would also have standing. However, the Court did not address whether broader universal relief could be granted, and that issue remains an open question.

The decision was immediately appealed by the Government and is likely the first step in a significant appellate dispute. We also expect that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit may stay the injunction pending appeal. Notably, the CIT decision was not unanimous, and thus, the possibility of reversal is greater than in the IEEPA case.

While importers seeking to recover Section 122 tariffs may ultimately need to file their own action before the Court of International Trade, for now we recommend waiting to see how the litigation develops.

We are closely monitoring this case and will provide updates as appropriate.

___

For further information, please contact Gail Cumins at gcumins@spcblaw.com, Alli Baron at abaron@spcblaw.com or call us at 212-425-0055.

Key Updates from CBP

CBP reiterated prior guidance and shared the following updates:

• Only the importer or broker that has filed the entry can submit a CAPE declaration.
• A Post Summary Correction (PSC) cannot be submitted for an entry that has been processed through CAPE; however, CAPE declarations may be submitted for entries that were previously subject to a PSC.
• Submissions must be in .csv format and cannot exceed 10,000 entries.
• The header “Entry Number” in cell A1 must not be removed from the .csv file.
• If a declaration is not validated, the reason will appear in the “File Uploads” tab. When Status shows “Failed initial validation” or “Rejected by batch validation”, users must select the File Upload Job # and download the .csv file to view the errors. Corrected files may be resubmitted.
• CBP is aware of a widespread “unable to calculate duty” error and is working to resolve it .
• Where a declaration is partially accepted, CBP recommends removing successfully processed entries before resubmitting.
• CBP did not provide guidance regarding Phase 2 of CAPE.
• Interest on refunds will be calculated from the date of liquidation.

Our Recommendation

If you have not done so already, please prepare for this process by doing the following:

• Creating an ACE portal account and ensuring ACH banking information is set up for refunds.
• Compiling IEEPA entry information and categorizing entries as (i) unliquidated, (ii) recently liquidated (less than 80 days ago) and (iii) liquidated (beyond eligibility window).
• Filing protests for IEEPA entries that liquidated more than eighty (80) days ago.

__

For questions or assistance with preparing for CAPE, or filing protests, please contact us.

For further information, please contact Gail Cumins at gcumins@spcblaw.com, Alli Baron at abaron@spcblaw.com or call us at 212-425-0055.

While eFiling does not change the applicable consumer product safety requirements for imported products, it introduces a new process by which the required product certificate information must be transmitted to both CPSC and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Specifically, eFiling requires importers to electronically submit certificate data through CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) using the Partner Government Agency (PGA) Message Set. Proper eFiling is the importer’s responsibility.

Importers may transmit certificate data using one of two options:

• The Full PGA Message Set is the standard method for importers who import a limited amount of regulated goods, or whose shipments are covered by different product certificates. The importer provides their broker with the full product certificate for the imported product, and the broker files it in the CPSC PGA Message Set.
• The Reference PGA Message Set is recommended for importers who repeatedly import regulated consumer products covered by the same product certificate. The certificate data can be uploaded in advance and assigned a reference number. The importer or broker can then simply transmit the reference number with each entry instead of re-submitting the full certificate data.

Please contact us if you would like assistance preparing for eFiling or reviewing your products for applicable consumer product safety requirements.

For further information, please contact Gail Cumins at gcumins@spcblaw.com, Alli Baron at abaron@spcblaw.com or call us at 212-425-0055.