In February, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the tariffs first imposed in April 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were unlawful. This effectively invalidated a broad set of so-called “reciprocal” duties imposed by the President on imported goods. Roughly $165-$170 billion in tariffs were collected under IEEPA.

Filing for a Refund: What Importers Need to Know

Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the U.S. Court of International Trade directed the federal government to begin issuing refunds. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has since launched an administrative process—through its CAPE/ACE systems—to allow importers to file claims. A link to CBP’s portal for filing claims is found here. Importers must file claims through CBP’s designated systems and provide supporting documentation, including entry summaries, tariff classifications, and duty amounts. Although refunds are expected to include interest, processing timelines remain uncertain and may extend beyond several months. If disputes arise—for example, if claims are denied or only partially paid—importers may need to pursue relief through the Court of International Trade. In sum, while CBP has established a refund process, the speed of claim processing, refund eligibility across tariff categories, and other questions remain.

Why Most Brewers Will See Little Direct Relief

More fundamentally, although most brewers have felt the impact of tariffs on their businesses through rising costs, IEEPA refunds will likely provided very limited relief. While IEEPA tariffs were imposed on a great many imported goods, the tariffs on aluminum and steel, which have impacted the price of aluminum cans and steel brewing equipment, were imposed under a different law. The IEEPA process offers no relief for importers subject to such tariffs, where were imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Moreover, brewers have felt most of tariffs’ impacts indirectly, as importers pass on the cost of tariffs in the guise of higher prices.

For businesses that did not directly pay the tariffs—such as breweries purchasing imported equipment, hops, or packaging from third party importers—any possible relief is more constrained. U.S. law generally ties refund eligibility to the “importer of record,” meaning the party that actually paid the duties to CBP. As a result, downstream buyers generally do not have a direct claim against the government. Instead, such downstream buyers’ ability to recover any portion of the additional costs caused by illegally imposed tariffs depends largely on private commercial arrangements. If a brewery purchased a brewhouse from a U.S. equipment importer that paid illegal IEEPA tariffs, the refund will flow to that importer, not to the brewery. Whether the brewery can realize any benefits from the importers’ refund claim depends on contract terms or subsequent negotiations. The same dynamic applies to inputs like imported hops: the importer or distributor of such hops may receive a refund, but most breweries will not see direct payments unless their hop supply agreements require a pass-through.

What Brewers Should Do Now

Given these limitations, in most cases brewers should expect any benefit from the IEEPA refund process to come indirectly through future price adjustments or supplier concessions. Going forward, breweries should consider revisiting supply contracts to address how tariff changes—whether increases or refunds—are allocated, as this issue has now proven to carry significant financial consequences.

The Brewers Association will continue monitoring tariff developments and advocate for policies that relieve cost and supply chain burdens on members.