CIT Litigation for IEEPA Tariff Recovery: When It's Your Only Option

There’s a moment in the IEEPA refund process that nobody wants to reach: the realization that the 180-day protest window has closed on some or all of your entries, and the only path left is litigation at the U.S. Court of International Trade. It’s not the fastest path. It’s not the cheapest. But for entries that have fallen through every other safety net, CIT litigation may be the only mechanism that can recover your money.

This guide explains when CIT litigation is necessary, how it works, what it costs, and what to expect. If you’re reading this because you’ve already missed protest deadlines, don’t panic — you still have options. If you’re reading this to understand the full landscape of recovery paths before committing to a strategy, even better. Knowing what the last-resort path looks like helps you appreciate why the earlier paths — PSC and protest — are worth prioritizing.

What Is the Court of International Trade?

The Court of International Trade is a specialized federal court headquartered in New York City that has exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising from customs and international trade laws. It’s not a regular district court — it deals exclusively with trade disputes, tariff classifications, duty assessments, and related matters.

The CIT has nine judges, all appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. These judges are trade law specialists who understand customs regulations, HTS classifications, and CBP procedures at an expert level. When your case lands in the CIT, it’s being heard by judges who’ve spent careers in this exact field.

For IEEPA tariff recovery, the CIT has already played a pivotal role. It was the CIT that issued the March 4 order directing CBP to process refunds for entries where liquidation is not yet final. The CIT has jurisdiction over both the administrative side (reviewing CBP protest denials) and the constitutional side (evaluating whether IEEPA tariffs were lawfully imposed in the first place).

When Is CIT Litigation Necessary?

CIT litigation becomes your path in three specific scenarios:

Scenario 1: The 180-Day Protest Window Has Closed

If your entries liquidated more than 180 days ago and no protest was filed, those entries are finally liquidated. CBP considers them closed. The administrative protest mechanism under 19 U.S.C. Section 1514 is no longer available. The CAPE system, when it launches, may not cover finally liquidated entries. The only way to challenge the duty assessment is through a court action.

How this happens: An importer didn’t know about the IEEPA refund opportunity until after the window closed. Or they knew but didn’t act quickly enough. Or they assumed CBP would handle refunds automatically and didn’t file a protective protest. Or their broker dropped the ball. Whatever the reason, the result is the same — entries that are administratively final but include duties that the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional.

Scenario 2: CBP Denied Your Protest

You filed a timely protest, but CBP denied it. This could happen if CBP takes a narrow interpretation of the refund order, identifies a technical deficiency in your protest, or disagrees with some aspect of your claim. After a protest denial, you have 180 days to file a summons with the CIT under 28 U.S.C. Section 1581(a). This is your appeal of the CBP decision.

Scenario 3: CBP Hasn’t Acted and You Need Resolution

You filed a protest and requested accelerated disposition, but CBP hasn’t responded within 30 days. Under 19 U.S.C. Section 1515(b), the protest is deemed denied. You can now take the deemed denial to CIT. This is a strategic tool for importers who want to bypass the potentially years-long CBP protest review process and get a court decision faster.

The Two Jurisdictional Paths

CIT litigation for IEEPA recovery generally falls under one of two jurisdictional statutes:

28 U.S.C. Section 1581(a): Protest Denial Review

This is the more common path. If CBP denied your protest (or if it was deemed denied through accelerated disposition), you file a summons under Section 1581(a). The CIT reviews CBP’s denial de novo — meaning the court looks at the issue fresh, without deference to CBP’s decision.

Requirements:

• A protest must have been filed and denied (explicitly or by deemed denial)
• The summons must be filed within 180 days of the denial
• This path is only available for entries where a timely protest was filed

28 U.S.C. Section 1581(i): Residual Jurisdiction

This is the path for entries where no protest was filed and the 180-day window has closed. Section 1581(i) provides “residual jurisdiction” for civil actions arising under federal trade laws that aren’t covered by other specific jurisdictional provisions. It’s a broader catch-all that courts use when the normal administrative channels are exhausted or unavailable.

Requirements:

• The importer must demonstrate that they had no adequate remedy through the normal protest/Section 1581(a) path
• The action must be filed within the applicable statute of limitations
• The claim must arise under customs or trade laws

For IEEPA recovery, the argument under Section 1581(i) is that the tariffs themselves were unconstitutional — it’s not a routine duty assessment challenge but a fundamental challenge to the legal authority under which the duties were collected. Courts have been receptive to this framing.

The Statute of Limitations: February 20, 2028

This is the most critical date for CIT litigation: two years from the Supreme Court’s ruling on February 20, 2026, which gives a deadline of February 20, 2028.

The statute of limitations for CIT actions under Section 1581(i) is generally two years from the date of the contested government action. For IEEPA tariffs, the “contested action” is the collection of duties under unconstitutional authority. The Supreme Court’s ruling on February 20, 2026, confirmed the unconstitutionality, which triggered — or at minimum clarified — the statute of limitations.

What this means in practice: If you’re considering CIT litigation for entries outside the protest window, you don’t need to file tomorrow. But you do need to file before February 20, 2028. That gives you roughly 22 months from today (April 2026) to engage counsel, prepare your case, and file.

For entries where the protest was denied, the deadline is different: 180 days from the denial date under Section 1581(a).

Get your free Impact Assessment →

How to File: The Process

CIT litigation is not a self-service process. You’ll need a trade attorney — specifically, one admitted to the CIT bar. Here’s what the process looks like:

Step 1: Engage a Trade Attorney

You need an attorney who is admitted to practice before the Court of International Trade. Not every attorney can file in the CIT — it requires separate bar admission. If you don’t have a trade attorney, our partner network includes vetted CIT practitioners who handle IEEPA recovery cases.

Key questions to ask potential attorneys:

• Are you admitted to the CIT bar?
• How many CIT cases have you handled?
• What is your fee structure for IEEPA recovery cases? (Contingency, hourly, or hybrid?)
• Do you have experience with Section 1581(i) jurisdiction?
• Can you handle cases involving multiple entries or class actions?

Step 2: Prepare the Case

Your attorney will need:

• Complete entry data for every affected entry (ES-003 reports, entry summaries, duty payment records)
• Liquidation documentation showing that entries are finally liquidated
• Evidence of protest filing and denial (for Section 1581(a) cases)
• Calculation of total IEEPA duties paid across all affected entries
• Corporate documentation establishing your standing as the importer of record (or successor-in-interest)

An Impact Assessment provides most of this analytical foundation — entry-by-entry identification of affected entries, duty calculations, and liquidation status mapping. If you’ve already completed an assessment, your attorney can use it as the starting point for case preparation.

Step 3: File the Summons and Complaint

Your attorney files a summons with the CIT, along with a complaint that sets out:

• The factual basis (you paid IEEPA tariffs during the covered period)
• The legal basis (the Supreme Court held IEEPA tariffs unconstitutional)
• The specific entries and amounts at issue
• The relief sought (reliquidation and refund of IEEPA duties plus interest)

Filing fees for CIT cases are modest — currently $200 per action. The real cost is the attorney’s time, which varies significantly by firm and fee structure.

Step 4: Service and Response

After filing, the summons and complaint must be served on the defendant — in this case, the United States, represented by the Department of Justice’s International Trade Section. The government has 60 days to respond.

Step 5: Litigation Process

From here, the case follows standard federal litigation procedures adapted for the CIT:

• Discovery: Both sides exchange relevant documents and information. For IEEPA cases, this is typically focused on entry data, duty calculations, and CBP processing records.
• Motions: Either side may file dispositive motions (such as summary judgment). Given the Supreme Court ruling, plaintiffs in IEEPA cases have strong grounds for summary judgment — the constitutional question is already decided.
• Trial or settlement: If the case isn’t resolved on summary judgment, it proceeds to trial before a CIT judge. Settlement negotiations can occur at any point.
• Judgment: The CIT issues a decision ordering reliquidation and refund, or denying relief.

Costs: What to Expect

CIT litigation costs vary widely depending on the complexity of your case, the number of entries involved, and your attorney’s fee structure. Here’s a realistic breakdown:

Attorney Fees

• Contingency: Some trade attorneys handle IEEPA cases on contingency, taking a percentage (typically 15-33%) of the recovery. This means no upfront cost, but a larger share of your refund goes to fees.
• Hourly: Rates for CIT attorneys range from $350-$800/hour depending on the firm and attorney seniority. A straightforward IEEPA case might require 40-100 hours of attorney time, totaling $14,000-$80,000.
• Hybrid: Some attorneys charge a reduced hourly rate plus a smaller contingency percentage. This balances the risk and cost for both sides.

Court Costs

• Filing fee: $200
• Service costs: Minimal (government service is straightforward)
• Expert witnesses: Typically not needed for IEEPA cases, since the legal issue is constitutional rather than factual

Cost-Benefit Analysis

The critical question is whether the recovery amount justifies the litigation cost. Consider:

For smaller claims, the economics of individual CIT litigation are challenging. This is where class actions and consolidated cases become relevant.

Class Action vs. Individual Case

IEEPA recovery cases at the CIT can be filed individually or as part of a class action. Each approach has trade-offs:

Individual Cases

Advantages:

• You control the case strategy and timeline
• Your attorney focuses exclusively on your entries
• Settlement negotiations are between you and the government
• No dependency on other plaintiffs or class certification

Disadvantages:

• You bear the full cost of litigation
• May not be economical for smaller claims
• No leverage from aggregate claim size

Class Actions

Advantages:

• Litigation costs are shared across the class
• Economical for smaller claims that wouldn’t justify individual litigation
• Aggregate claim size creates leverage in settlement negotiations
• You benefit from the class attorneys’ expertise and resources

Disadvantages:

• You have less control over strategy and timing
• Class certification adds time and complexity
• Settlement terms are negotiated for the class as a whole, not tailored to your situation
• Attorney fees are deducted from the class recovery, reducing individual payouts

For importers with significant IEEPA exposure (six figures or more), individual litigation often makes sense — especially on contingency. For smaller claims, monitoring class action filings and opting in may be the better strategy.

As of April 2026, several class actions have been filed or are being organized for IEEPA recovery at the CIT. Your trade attorney can advise on whether joining an existing class or filing individually is the better path for your specific situation.

What Makes a Strong CIT Case?

Not all CIT cases are created equal. Here’s what strengthens your position:

Complete, validated entry data. The more precise your documentation, the faster the case moves. Entries with clear HTS codes, accurate duty amounts, and documented IEEPA components make it easy for the court to calculate relief.

Clear IOR status. If your standing as importer of record is clean — no 3PL complications, no corporate restructurings, no disputed IOR designations — the case is straightforward. IOR issues add complexity and potential challenges to standing.

Significant dollar amount. Courts give every case the same legal attention, but practically, larger claims justify more attorney resources and tend to move faster.

No other adequate remedy. For Section 1581(i) cases, you need to show that the normal protest/Section 1581(a) path isn’t available — typically because the protest window closed. If you could have filed a protest but chose not to, the court may question why you’re using the residual jurisdiction path.

Alignment with existing precedent. The Supreme Court ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump is your strongest asset. Your complaint should tie directly to the ruling’s holding that IEEPA doesn’t delegate tariff authority. The constitutional argument is settled — the only questions are factual (did you pay IEEPA tariffs?) and procedural (do you have standing and jurisdiction?).

Potential Outcomes

CIT litigation in the IEEPA context can result in several outcomes:

Full reliquidation and refund. The court orders CBP to reliquidate your entries without IEEPA duties and issue a refund plus interest. This is the expected outcome for well-documented claims.

Partial relief. If some entries have documentation issues, IOR complications, or jurisdictional questions, the court may grant relief on some entries and deny it on others.

Settlement. The government may offer a settlement to resolve the case without a full trial. Settlement amounts are negotiable and may include or exclude interest. Your attorney will advise on whether a settlement offer is reasonable.

Denial. The court denies relief. This is unlikely for straightforward IEEPA claims backed by the Supreme Court ruling, but could occur if there are standing issues, jurisdictional problems, or documentation deficiencies. Denial can be appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The Timeline: How Long CIT Cases Take

Be realistic about timing. CIT litigation is not fast:

• Case filing to government response: 60-90 days
• Discovery: 3-6 months
• Summary judgment briefing: 3-6 months
• Court decision on summary judgment: 3-12 months
• If trial is needed: Additional 6-12 months
• Total estimate: 12-24 months from filing to resolution

For IEEPA cases specifically, the timeline may be shorter than average because the core legal question (constitutionality of IEEPA tariffs) is already decided by the Supreme Court. Summary judgment motions should be strong, potentially cutting the timeline to 12-18 months. But court scheduling is unpredictable, and the volume of IEEPA cases being filed may create backlogs at the CIT itself.

The Immediate Capital Alternative

For importers who face CIT litigation as their only path and don’t want to wait 12-24 months (or spend tens of thousands on legal fees), claim assignment offers an alternative. You assign your IEEPA refund claim to an institutional buyer who pays you immediately, at a discount, and takes on the litigation risk and cost themselves.

This is particularly attractive for:

• Smaller claims where litigation costs consume most of the recovery
• Companies that need capital now rather than in 12-24 months
• Risk-averse importers who prefer certainty over the uncertainty of litigation outcomes

The government filing vs. immediate capital analysis provides a detailed framework for evaluating whether to litigate or assign. The CFO guide to IEEPA recovery adds the financial modeling dimension — calculating whether the time value of immediate cash exceeds the litigation discount.

Action Steps If CIT Is Your Path

1. Confirm which entries need CIT litigation. Pull your entry data and identify entries that are finally liquidated (past the 180-day protest window) with IEEPA duties. An Impact Assessment does this automatically.

2. Calculate your total exposure. Sum the IEEPA duties across all CIT-eligible entries. This determines whether individual litigation or class action is the better approach.

3. Engage a CIT-admitted trade attorney. Start the conversation now — attorney schedules fill up, especially with the volume of IEEPA cases being filed. Our partner network can provide referrals.

4. Preserve your documentation. Gather entry summaries, ES-003 reports, duty payment records, and corporate documents. The more organized your file, the faster (and cheaper) the litigation process.

5. Watch the February 20, 2028 deadline. You have time, but not unlimited time. File well before the statute of limitations to avoid any last-minute complications.

6. Don’t forget other entries. If you have entries that are still within the protest window or still unliquidated, file PSCs and protests on those immediately. CIT litigation should be the path for entries that have no other option — not for entries where faster, cheaper paths are still available.