June 2026 | Customs & International Trade Law Blog

CAPE Phase II Is Live: Most IEEPA Duties Are Now Refund-Eligible — Here’s How to Claim Yours

KEY TAKEAWAYS

As of June 29, 2026, CBP’s CAPE system reached Phase II — enhanced processing for reconciliation-flagged entries, making the large majority of IEEPA duties eligible for refund.
Refunds are not automatic for every entry type. Eligibility, filing method, and ACH enrollment all matter — and finally, liquidated entries are treated differently depending on whether you filed a CIT lawsuit.
The window rewards speed and documentation. Importers who reconcile their IEEPA-dutied entries now will recover capital sooner; those who wait risk falling into later, slower phases.

Tariff Refunds – a Moving Target

If your business paid duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), you have likely been watching a moving target: litigation over whether those duties were lawfully collected, a refund mechanism built in phases, and shifting guidance on which entries qualify and when. The result is paralysis — many importers know money may be owed back to them, but cannot tell whether, how, or when to claim it.

That uncertainty has a real cost. Every month, a refund-eligible entry that sits unaddressed, working capital tied up at CBP rather than in your business. And because the refund framework is being rolled out in stages, the entries you can act on today are not the same as the ones you will be able to act on next month — sequencing matters.

CAPE Phase II Now […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-29T09:50:13-04:00June 29, 2026|ACE, Import, Tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

De Minimis, Codified: CBP Finalizes the Postal Suspension Rule — July 24 Comment Deadline

KEY TAKEAWAYS

De minimis is not new news — the $800 duty-free exemption was already suspended for all countries on August 29, 2025. What’s new is CBP’s interim final rule codifying the postal piece and creating a formal postal informal entry process.
Two key dates: the postal IFR takes effect July 24, 2026 (compliance by October 22, 2026), and public comments on the rulemaking are due July 24, 2026.
If your business ships low-value parcels by mail, the entry mechanics are now being locked into regulation. The comment window is your one chance to shape them before they harden.

De Minimis Is Over. Now CBP Is Writing the New Rules.

For years, the de minimis exemption was the quiet engine of e-commerce: shipments valued at or under $800 entered the United States free of duty and with minimal formality. That era already ended. As we covered in De Minimis No More: What It Means for Importers and Consumers, a July 30, 2025, Executive Order suspended duty-free de minimis treatment for all countries effective August 29, 2025, accelerating the repeal that the 2025 budget law had set for July 1, 2027.

So the headline is not that de minimis is ending — it ended ten months ago. The development now is regulatory: CBP is codifying how low-value shipments, particularly through the international mail channel, must be […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-29T09:44:34-04:00June 29, 2026|Import, Pre-compliance, Tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

What Happened This Month in International Trade (June 2026)

Another busy month in international trade news. Here is a recap of what happened this month.

Administration

On June 3, 2026, President Trump signed an Executive Order that aims to strengthen customs enforcement. The order increases bonding and data requirements for IORs, prohibits foreign importers from filing informal entries, requires additional documentation and certifications from importers, among other requirements.
On June 1, 2026, President Trump issued a Proclamation providing 232 tariff reductions for agricultural equipment, mobile industrial equipment and machinery, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment. The reductions take effect June 8, 2026.

Courts

On June 2, 2026, the United States filed an appeal of the Court of International Trade’s April 17 order directing CBP to refund duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
A group of law firms filed an amicus brief with the CIT in the Euro-Notions Florida IEEPA case, arguing that the CIT should amend its refund orders to account for businesses and individuals who indirectly paid duties imposed under IEEPA.
Twenty-three non-importer states filed a notice to appeal the Court […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-26T12:41:42-04:00June 26, 2026|news, Snapshot|Comments Off

New AD/CVD Case Filed Against Choline Salts from China

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed against Choline Salts from China. The allegation is that imports from China are being dumped and unfairly subsidized.

Full list of importers here.
Full list of exporters here.

Background on AD/CVD Investigations

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are initiated when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner, while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent.

Scope of the Investigation

The merchandise covered by these investigations is choline salts, in all forms and purities.

The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 2923.10.0000, 2106.90.9998, 2309.90.1005, 2309.90.1015, 2309.90.1020, 2309.90.1030, 2309.90.1032, 2309.90.1035, 2309.90.1045, 2309.90.1050, 2309.90.9500, and 3824.99.9397.

Full scope here.

Next Steps

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-26T12:37:23-04:00June 26, 2026|AD/CVD, China, Import, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC)|Comments Off

CAPE Now Accepts Reconciliation-Flagged Entries — But File in the Wrong Order and You Forfeit the Refund

If you have entries flagged for reconciliation and a reconciliation deadline inside the next 30 days, the order in which you file has just become a decision that can cost you your IEEPA refund. Under CBP’s June 29, 2026, CAPE deployment, once you file the reconciliation entry (Type 09), the underlying entries are locked out of CAPE in this phase. File the recon first, and you have stripped your own entries of the consolidated IEEPA refund path — permanently, for now. The new functionality is genuinely good news. The trap is in the sequence.

Key points:

New as of June 29, 2026: CAPE will accept entries flagged for reconciliation (Entry Types 01, 02, 06) even when no Type 09 reconciliation entry has been filed yet.
The sequence that wins: File the CAPE Declaration FIRST. CAPE strips the IEEPA duties from the flagged entries, then you file the reconciliation.
The sequence that loses: File the reconciliation entry first. The underlying entries are then ineligible for CAPE in this phase.
Still not covered: Entries where the reconciliation entry is already on file — those wait for a future CAPE phase.

Same eligibility limits as Phase 1 carry over: unliquidated entries and entries within 80 days of liquidation only.

The Challenge: Reconciliation Was a Hole in Phase 1

When CBP launched Phase 1 of the Consolidated Administration […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-26T12:30:40-04:00June 26, 2026|ACE, Import, Tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

CBP Issues Two New WROs Against Jordan Garment Factories: What Importers Need to Know

Why importers who diversified out of China to FTA partners are now squarely in CBP’s forced-labor crosshairs — and the five-step package you need before your first detention notice.

Short summary: CBP just issued two Withhold Release Orders against garment factories in Jordan, a U.S. free trade agreement partner. If you diversified out of China, thinking that solved your forced-labor exposure, this action is your wake-up call. Duty-free status is not a compliance shield. For apparel and textile importers, the window to build a defensible admissibility package is now, before a detention notice arrives.

On June 23, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued two Withhold Release Orders (WROs) against garments produced by Needle Craft Ltd. and Casual Wear Apparel LLC — two garment-manufacturing factories in Jordan. Effective immediately, CBP will detain all garments produced by these two factories at every U.S. port of entry. These are the fifth and sixth WROs of fiscal year 2026, and they push CBP’s active enforcement docket to 58 WROs and eight Findings under 19 U.S.C. § 1307.

If you read only one sentence of this post, read this one: the country you moved your sourcing to to escape China-related forced-labor risk is not safe by virtue of being a U.S. trade-preference partner. Jordan Apparel enters the United States duty-free under the U.S.–Jordan Free Trade Agreement and […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-23T12:22:55-04:00June 23, 2026|Forced Labor|Comments Off

Forced Labor Enforcement Just Crossed a Border: What CBP’s Serbia Copper WRO Means for Your Supply Chain

Key Takeaways

CBP continues to chase the company, not just the country. Zijin’s parent was already on the UFLPA Entity List for forced labor in China; this Withhold Release Order (WRO) hits its Serbian copper operation on a separate evidentiary basis. Moving production to a “friendly” country does not move you out of CBP’s reach.
Copper just joined the enforcement map. Forced-labor detentions are no longer concentrated in apparel, solar, and cotton. If you import copper—or anything containing it—your supply chain is now in scope, and most copper-reliant importers have done zero forced-labor due diligence.
The burden is on you, and it lands the moment your shipment is detained. Under a WRO, there is no notice and no grace period. You either prove your goods are clean by detailed documentary evidence, or you export or destroy them.

On June 16, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a Withhold Release Order against copper and copper products manufactured in Serbia by Serbia Zijin Copper D.O.O.—the fourth WRO of Fiscal Year 2026 and the second targeting a Serbian operation in roughly six months. Effective immediately, CBP personnel at every U.S. port of entry will detain shipments of copper and copper products from this company.

If you read that as another distant enforcement headline, you are missing the part that should concern you. This […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-19T13:16:26-04:00June 19, 2026|Enforcement, Forced Labor, Supply Chain, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

Breaking Trade News: New WRO on Copper Products, $36M BIS Settlement, Cuba Sanctions

Here is a recap of the latest customs and international trade news:

Administration

During a conversation with a reporter, President Trump said that he would “rather not have the USMCA” and that he would prefer “not having an agreement, but I’m open to doing it.”
In an interview with the New York Post, President Trump threatened a 100% tariff on all champagnes and all wines coming out of France if the country does not drop its Digital Services Tax on U.S. companies.

Courts

A group of law firms filed an amicus brief with the CIT in the Euro-Notions Florida IEEPA case, arguing that the CIT should amend its refund orders to account for businesses and individuals who indirectly paid duties imposed under IEEPA.
The Supreme Court denied a petition to appeal the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision upholding lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on China imposed during the first Trump Administration.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

CBP issued a Withhold Release Order (WRO) on copper products manufactured in Serbia by Serbia Zijin Copper […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-19T11:46:03-04:00June 19, 2026|news, Snapshot|Comments Off

CBP Seized Your Goods at the Border: Your Options and Next Steps

For more information on this topic, register today for our upcoming webinar: ‘Goods Detained or Seized by CBP? Understand Your Options.” Register here.

Summary: When CBP seizes imported goods at the border, importers have several options — including filing a Petition, submitting an Offer in Compromise, or pursuing court action. This article explains the difference between detention and seizure, outlines the steps importers should take immediately after receiving a CBP Seizure Notice, and describes how a customs attorney can help recover seized merchandise and prevent future seizure.

Importers expect the import process to run smoothly, but when a product is not compliant with U.S. laws and regulations, CBP is authorized under 19 CFR Part 162 and 19 CFR Part 151 to detain or seize goods upon importation.

When goods arrive at a U.S. port of entry, CBP has the authority to detain a shipment if there is a question about its admissibility or compliance with U.S. laws and regulations. Detention is not the same as seizure. It is a temporary hold that gives CBP time to review the shipment and allows the importer to respond. During this window, a customs attorney can communicate directly with CBP on your behalf, provide the documentation or legal arguments needed to resolve the issue, and work to get your goods released before the situation escalates.

If you do not respond effectively, CBP may move forward with […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2026-06-19T11:41:20-04:00June 19, 2026|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, Pre-compliance, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

The CPSC eFiling Deadline is Here!

Summary: On December 18, 2024, the CPSC voted to approve a Final Rule requiring importers of regulated consumer products to electronically file Certificate of Compliance data at the time of entry. The rule takes effect July 8, 2026, for most imported consumer products. This article covers what the CPSC eFiling requirement means for importers, and the steps businesses should take now to ensure compliance before the deadline.

On July 8, 2026, the CPSC’s mandatory eFiling requirements take effect for most imported consumer products. That means importers can no longer wait to be asked for a Certificate of Compliance. These certificates must now be electronically filed in CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) at the time of entry, not after the fact.

Importers that are not compliant with the applicable effective date may experience delays in the release of their shipments and increased scrutiny by CPSC at the port of entry. For products entering from a Foreign Trade Zone, the compliance date is January 8, 2027.

CPSC’s eFiling Proposal

Since 2008, importers have been required to maintain Certificates of Compliance stating that the product they are importing meets all applicable safety standards. However, these certificates did not need to be filed at the time of import.

In June 2022, CPSC announced a Beta Pilot test with CBP for the eFiling of certificate data for regulated […]