Where’s My Money? Your Tariff Refund Questions Answered

By Rob Bates | March 09, 2026

There are already conflicting signals about how the estimated $175 billion in tariffs that the Supreme Court ruled illegal will be refunded.

Last week, Richard Eaton, a judge with the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), ordered the government to begin refunding tariffs collected under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA)—which is just about every tariff that’s hit the industry over the past year, including the 50% imposed on India and a 39% levy on Swiss goods.

Following the CIT ruling, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) asked the court for 45 days to develop a new system.

“CBP has never been ordered to, nor has it attempted to, process a volume of refunds anywhere near the volume [here],” Brandon Lord, executive director of CBP’s trade policy division, wrote in a filing with the court.

Lord claimed that refunding all the money (plus interest) would strain CBP’s resources, possibly endangering national security. Eaton agreed to the extension, giving the government the extra month and a half to develop a refund mechanism.

So what does all this mean? This situation is fluid, as it has been from the beginning, but here’s the best we can determine.

$175 billion is a lot of money! Are they really going to give all that back?

It sure looks like it. Last May, when the Court of International Trade first ruled the IEEPA tariffs illegal, the Trump administration argued it should be allowed to continue to collect them, and if the Supreme Court ruled them illegal, they’d give the money back.

Now that the administration has to actually return the cash, not surprisingly it doesn’t want to. At a press conference following the Supreme Court decision, President Trump predicted “years” of litigation over the issue.

But with Eaton’s ruling last week, it looks like the administration will have to refund the tariffs, even if it may try to draw out the process as much as possible.

So what’s being refunded?

Only the tariffs Trump imposed under IEEPA (as well as a few other authorities that mostly don’t apply to the jewelry industry). Since the Supreme Court has ruled those tariffs were collected illegally, anyone who paid them has the right to get their money back, plus interest.

Tariffs imposed prior to the Trump administration, including the 5.5% most favored nations duty on Indian jewelry that’s been in place in 2007, were not challenged and are not eligible for refunds.

The Trump administration’s suspension of the de minimis rule—which allows packages with a value of less than $800 to be imported duty-free—was not addressed by the Supreme Court ruling, and remains in effect.

What about the current tariffs?

Following the Supreme Court decision, President Trump imposed a 10% global tariff under a different authority (Section 122 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974).

These tariffs are capped at 15%, and are limited to 150 days—they expire on June 24, after which they will need congressional reauthorization. No such limits existed with the previous tariffs, because the Trump administration felt IEEPA allowed it to impose tariffs however and whenever it wanted. (The Supreme Court disagreed.)

Several states have sued to block the new Section 122 tariffs, but legal experts believe the Trump administration is on firmer legal ground here. A decision may not come until after June, though, and for now the government is collecting the new 10% tariffs. Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the global duty will soon increase to 15%.

The administration is also looking at other mechanisms to impose additional tariffs, so this issue is likely to not go away.

If I passed the tariffs on to my customers, do I have to refund money to them?

Nope. Just as importers had to decide whether to “eat” the tariffs or pass them on to clients, they now can decide what to do with any tariff money that is refunded.

Some small businesses have already said they don’t expect to lower prices. “We absorbed almost all of the cost of the tariffs,” Eva St. Clair, co-owner of apparel company Princess Awesome, told Reuters. “We don’t think there’s a reason to pay anybody back.”

On the other hand, Costco has indicated that its customers may see lower prices if it receives refunds.

What about the “exemptions” for natural diamonds, natural gemstones, and natural pearls?

Last September, the administration decreed that if a country signed a trade deal with the United States, duties on certain natural products from that country—including diamonds, gemstones, and pearls—would fall to zero.

Before the Supreme Court ruling, that only applied to the European Union and Switzerland. India was finalizing a trade deal with the United States and hoped to have its gemstones marked “exempt” soon.

Now those trade deals are up in the air, and it appears that duties again apply to natural diamonds and gemstones imported from the European Union.

What about all the companies that sued to get their money back?

Over 2,000 companies have sued for tariff refunds—including, in our industry, Costco, David Yurman, and Cemayla, the parent company of FoundRae. Several Swiss watch companies have also said they’ll sue.

Eaton’s order indicated that companies didn’t need to file lawsuits to get their money back. But the government may challenge that part of the order. If it is overturned, companies may have to sue the United States to obtain refunds. That could pose a challenge for small businesses, some of which have already decided they’ve spend enough time on this issue and won’t even bother to apply for refunds.

I’m due money. What should I do?

Be patient until the process becomes clear. CBP’s Lord said the refunds will be handled through Customs’ Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system.

The Jewelers Vigilance Committee recommends all importers set up ACE accounts, gather all documentation for tariffs paid, and work with their Customs brokers and trade counsel to understand what payments are eligible.

When would all this money come back?

Hopefully soon, but no one knows. There’s only one comparable precedent: In 1998, the government returned $730 million in tariffs, also in response to a Supreme Court order. That process took two years. Of course, that was a much smaller pile of money, but technology’s improved a lot since then.

Even so, given the administration’s fondness for litigation, don’t count your money just yet.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re talking about a process that’s going to continue into the next administration,” Luke Mathers, an associate at trade law firm Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, told Politico.

(Photo: Getty Images)