Businesses across the United States are beginning to receive tariff refunds following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that former President Donald Trump lacked the constitutional power to impose higher import taxes on goods from nearly all countries. However, this refund process may be interrupted as the Trump administration plans to appeal a federal judge’s order allowing all companies that paid these duties to seek refunds, not only those that filed lawsuits.
Until the Department of Justice announced its intention to appeal, the refund operation managed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was proceeding with minimal issues. The first successful refund claims were deposited on May 12, nearly three weeks after businesses and their customs brokers could submit claims online. By May 22, applications seeking refunds amounting to $85 billion were accepted for processing, as per the CBP’s report. So far, the Treasury Department has been directed to issue $20.6 billion in refunds.
The administration disclosed its appeal plan while contesting a requirement by Judge Richard K. Eaton for CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott to answer queries in the U.S. Court of International Trade regarding the repayment timeline for potentially 330,000 eligible importers. A hearing is set for June 9 to discuss why the government should expedite the repayment process. Justice Department attorneys argued against Eaton’s demand for Scott’s testimony, suggesting deputies appear instead, due to Scott’s status as a high-ranking presidential appointee. They also called Eaton’s decision to grant refunds to “all importers of record” beyond his authority. “For that reason, defendants intend to appeal the court’s universal injunction,” the lawyers stated, noting CBP’s continued efforts to process refunds swiftly for businesses filing around 485 trade court complaints.
In a succinct response, Eaton expressed the necessity to hear from Scott regarding the return of collected money from Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, enacted in April 2025, until the Supreme Court’s decision in late February. “This case involves $166 billion,” Eaton emphasized. “The remedy for this unlawful collection is for the United States government to refund the unlawfully collected duties.”
Several national retail chains intend to use their refunds to reduce prices for customers. Walmart Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey mentioned plans for price reductions, despite the company’s potential maximum refund comprising less than 0.5% of its $483 billion annual U.S. sales. Smaller companies informed The Associated Press that their partial refunds would help cover remaining or future tariffs, reduce debt, or sustain operations amid prolonged uncertainty and additional import expenses.
Jay Foreman, CEO of Basic Fun, shared that his company received around $450,000, making up 7% of his total claim, in two days this month. While the initial refund was promising, subsequent repayments were minimal, with the process appearing sluggish. “It’s time to release the funds back into the economy,” Foreman stated, stressing the importance of these funds for business support and operation funding.