Gee, who could have predicted this?
Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding Tariffs
The Wall Street Journal reports Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130 Billion in Tariffs
A federal trade-court judge on Wednesday ordered the Trump administration to start refunding the more than $130 billion it collected in the global tariffs invalidated by the Supreme Court last month.
Following a hearing involving a filtration company’s fight for a refund, Judge Richard Eaton at the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade issued a written order directing the administration to begin the process of refunding importers. He set a hearing for Friday at which he asked for updates.
More than 2,000 lawsuits have been filed by companies—including big names such as Costco Wholesale, FedEx and Pandora Jewelry—seeking to recoup their money.
The judge’s order requires U.S. Customs and Border Protection to issue refunds by recalculating the initial duties importers paid, excluding the tariffs voided by the high court. Eaton also said the court’s chief judge indicated he will be in charge of settling the refund litigation.
Larry Friedman, a partner at Barnes, Richardson & Colburn, said this means the government has to issue a refund to everyone who paid the tariffs. “This is the order I hoped for, but never expected to see,” he said.
Judge Smacks Expected Administration Response
In court on Wednesday, a Justice Department lawyer asked for Eaton to pause his order while the government appeals, but the judge denied that request.
The judge said the repayment process should be straightforward and grew impatient when a Justice Department lawyer said the government hadn’t yet formalized its position on refunding the tariffs, which President Trump imposed by citing a decades-old law. “Your position is clear,” the judge said. “The Supreme Court told you what your position is.”
The Justice Department lawyer, Claudia Burke, said that any refund process would be time-consuming for the tariff collector, CBP. The government agency would have to manually go through millions of import entries, she added.
“We live in the age of computers,” Eaton said. “It must be possible for Customs Service to program its computers so it doesn’t need a manual review.”
Trump Sideswipes Supreme Court
“Wouldn’t you think they would have put one sentence in there, saying: ‘Keep the money,’ or ‘Don’t keep the money’, right?” Trump told reporters. “I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years.”
The litigation is nearly over already. Trump will appeal and quickly lose.
Who Got Things Wrong?
For many trade lawyers, Eaton’s order came as a surprise. They had been expecting judges who heard the initial cases challenging Trump’s tariffs to also lead the decision-making on refunds. One of the cases that ultimately went up to the Supreme Court was decided by a three-judge panel that Eaton, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wasn’t on.
The legal filings piling up at the trade court seeking refunds have largely looked very similar, but lawyers in the case that Eaton heard on Wednesday did something others didn’t: They asked for an emergency order to stop the government from finalizing the amounts importers paid on goods that were subject to the tariffs.
Kathleen Claussen, a law professor at Georgetown University, said it was remarkable that one case out of thousands has transformed the course of the refund litigation.
Who Got This Right Early On?
June 6, 2025: Reciprocal Tariffs Are Dead, but Trump Has 7 Other Options to Discuss
Trump Will Lose
One of my delusional readers said Trump would win this 9-0 in the Supreme Court.
There is almost no chance the Supreme Court will go along with such nonsense and it should be obvious why.
The three liberal judges will all be against Trump. I believe Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett are near-certain votes against Trump as well.
Justices John Roberts, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett have all ruled against Trump at times.
So start with 3 certain and pick 2 more.
August 27, 2025: Can Trump’s Tariff Revenues Help Pay for the Federal Budget Deficit?
Hypothetical Vote Count
The three liberal justices are certain to vote against Trump. That means we need two more.
Pair 1: Barrett and Roberts
Pair 2: Barrett and Gorsuch
Pair 3: Gorsuch and RobertsIf I am correct, I think Barrett is already on board. I can’t help but think Roberts will go with the majority, and perhaps decide.
If it’s pair 2, add Roberts for a 6-3 decision. The bigger the majority, the more cover for all of them.
Note that those picks were in advance of the Appeals Court decision.
January 1, 2026: Fearless Predictions, Ten Key Events to Expect in 2026
#1: Trump will Lose His Supreme Court Battle on Reciprocal Tariffs
Expect a 6-3 margin against Trump, possibly 7-2. I rate this a 75 percent chance.
Then If he loses, then there is about a 60 percent chance of at least some of the money will have to be refunded.
Trump will moan the SC is killing the best economy in history. He will also say that the ruling will have no impact at all. This is illogical of course, but seriously, expect both statements.
Trump will pursue other avenues of doing the same things with mixed success (using the word success in terms of what Trump wants, not what’s good for the country).
#2: Trump will Lose His Supreme Court Battle on Birthright Citizenship
Expect a 7-2 vote against Trump. 9-0 would not be a surprise.
I rate this a 90 percent chance.
#3: Trump will lose his Supreme Court battle over the right to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook.
Expect a 6-3 vote against Trump. I rate this a 80 percent chance.
One down, two to go on Supreme Court Trump calls. Click above link for the rest of my 2026 calls.
I discuss the unemployment rate, AI, health care, the midterm elections, and more.
February 20, 2026: Supreme Court Strikes Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs In 6-3 Vote (I Told You So)
Forgive me for bragging, but I got every justice correct.
Beautifully Written Gorsuch Concurrence
For those who think it important for the Nation to impose more tariffs, I understand that today’s decision will be disappointing. All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man. There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future. For some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious. But if history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today’s result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.
February 20, 2026: Big Tariff Refunds Are Coming. How Much and How Soon?
The Supreme Court did not discuss refunds. They will be up to the Trade Court. Messy?
Expect refunds. That was also my prediction. Most didn’t, even those who expected the courts to smack this.
It Doesn’t Have to Be Messy
Following Oral Arguments, I commented … ” I appreciate the logic of Gorsuch who stated that a refund is the traditional remedy for unlawfully imposed fees.“
But why should it be messy?
Simple Process
- The Administration know IEEPA tariff money collected.
- The Administration knows who it collected money from.
- The Administration refunds the money it collected.
I truly fail to understand how this can be messy, unless the administration purposely tries to make it messy.
But why should it be messy?
“We live in the age of computers,” Eaton said. “It must be possible for Customs Service to program its computers so it doesn’t need a manual review.”
Bingo.
Article posted with permission from Mish Shedlock
