CBP's CAPE portal is the fastest IEEPA refund path for eligible entries, but liquidation status, protest deadlines, and Phase 2 gaps now control recovery.
Primary lensEntry posture review
Evidence base10 records used
Use caseSaved scope review
The IEEPA merits are over; the refund clock is not
The Supreme Court answered the IEEPA merits question on February 20, 2026. In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, consolidated with Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, the Court held that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. That ruling ended the statutory-authority fight for the IEEPA tariff actions. It did not create a refund workflow.
That gap is now the real client problem. The entries are not all in the same procedural posture. Some remain unliquidated. Some liquidated recently and remain inside CBP's voluntary reliquidation window. Some liquidated long enough ago that only a protest can preserve the administrative path. Others are finally liquidated, tied to reconciliation, affected by drawback, or overlaid with AD/CVD liquidation instructions. The refund question is therefore not "did I pay an unlawful IEEPA duty?" The working question is "which channel is still open for this entry today?"
Trade Flows
Compare import and export trends
Congress
Find lawmakers and committees
The size of the problem explains the architecture. CBP told the Court of International Trade that more than 330,000 importers paid or deposited roughly $166 billion in IEEPA duties over more than 53 million entries. That volume made ordinary entry-by-entry processing impractical. The refund system had to become a bulk processing problem.
CAPE is the fast lane, not the whole road
CBP's answer is CAPE: the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries. CAPE is new functionality inside ACE that accepts bulk declarations for IEEPA refunds and then removes the relevant Chapter 99 IEEPA tariff lines, recalculates duties, and routes the resulting overpayment toward electronic refund. CBP launched Phase 1 on April 20, 2026 through CSMS #68396594, and CBP states that it will maintain CAPE information on its IEEPA Duty Refunds page.
The filing mechanics are deliberately narrow. The importer of record, or the broker that filed the original entries, uploads a CBP-mandated CSV file through the CAPE tab in ACE. Each declaration can list up to 9,999 entries. CAPE is not available through ABI or ordinary EDI channels. ACE then validates the file and the entries. The validation checks include whether the entry exists in ACE, whether it includes a dutiable IEEPA Chapter 99 code, whether the filer has authority, and whether the entry falls within Phase 1 scope.
That is why CAPE should be treated as the fast lane for eligible entries, not as the entire refund universe. It is the path CBP built to move clean claims at scale. It does not remove the need to monitor protest deadlines or later litigation options for entries the fast lane does not accept.
Phase 1 has hard edges
CAPE Phase 1 generally accepts two categories: unliquidated entries and entries that are less than 80 days past liquidation as of the date of CAPE submission. Covington's summary of CBP's April guidance explains that the 80-day cutoff exists because CBP must still operate inside the 90-day voluntary reliquidation period under 19 U.S.C. § 1501.
The exclusions matter as much as the eligibility rule. Phase 1 does not process entries subject to reconciliation or drawback claims, entries covered by open or suspended protests, certain AD/CVD entries where Commerce liquidation instructions are pending, entries not filed in ACE or lacking liquidation status in ACE, entries more than 80 days past liquidation, certain Type 08 duty-deferral entries, and temporary importation under bond entries. Entries in suspended, extended, under-review, warehouse, or warehouse-withdrawal status may be submitted, but refund payment waits for ordinary liquidation.
The sorting rule is straightforward. If the entry is unliquidated, or liquidated 80 days or less before the CAPE filing date, start with CAPE. Prepare the validation file, confirm the filer has authority, and confirm ACH routing before submission.
If the entry liquidated 81 to 180 days before filing, assume Phase 1 CAPE will not solve it. The immediate task is a protective protest before the 180-day window closes. If a protest is already open, decide whether it protects only the IEEPA refund or also carries classification, valuation, origin, or other issues that should not be withdrawn.
If the entry liquidated more than 180 days ago, or sits in reconciliation, drawback, AD/CVD-overlay, or another excluded category, treat it as a Phase 2 or litigation-monitoring file. Preserve the entry record, duty-payment evidence, Form 4811 routing, and interest calculation support now. Do not let an unannounced Phase 2 timeline become the deadline strategy.
This is where many client portfolios break. A single importer can have one population that belongs in CAPE now, one population that needs a protest, and one population that should be parked for Phase 2 while counsel evaluates whether a protective CIT action is warranted. Treating the whole portfolio as one refund claim creates deadline risk.
PSCs are closed for IEEPA refunds
The familiar Post Summary Correction route is not the refund mechanism here. CBP guidance for CAPE Phase 1 says PSCs may not be used to seek IEEPA refunds. That is an important distinction from other refund programs where PSCs are the natural first instinct for unliquidated entries.
The practical instruction is simple. If the only requested change is removal of IEEPA duties, do not spend time trying to force the claim through PSC. Put eligible entries into CAPE. If the entry also has a non-IEEPA issue, such as classification, value, origin, or other duty treatment, separate that issue before the CAPE filing decision. CBP has indicated that PSCs for non-IEEPA issues should be handled before the CAPE declaration.
This sequencing matters because CAPE declarations cannot be amended in the ordinary sense. A rejected entry can be corrected through a later declaration, but duplicate and standing errors can cascade across files. The pre-flight should be entry-level: liquidation date, Chapter 99 IEEPA code, filer authority, duplicate status, surety payment flags, reconciliation flag, drawback overlap, protest status, and ACH refund enrollment.
Protests are now a preservation tool
The protest window under 19 U.S.C. § 1514 remains central because CAPE Phase 1 does not cover every entry. For entries liquidated more than 80 days but less than 180 days before the filing date, CAPE Phase 1 is closed but the protest period may still be open. A protective protest preserves the administrative route and may become the predicate for CIT review under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a) if CBP later denies relief.
The protest also changes the entry's posture. An entry covered by an open protest is excluded from Phase 1 CAPE processing. That means a protest filed only to preserve IEEPA refund rights may need to be withdrawn if the entry is otherwise eligible for CAPE and the importer wants faster processing. CBP has indicated that withdrawal can allow CAPE processing for entries within the Phase 1 window. But if the protest also preserves non-IEEPA issues, withdrawing it can be costly.
The decision is therefore not CAPE versus protest as abstract alternatives. It is an entry-level sequencing question. If the entry is within the CAPE window and the protest is only about IEEPA, CAPE may be the faster route. If the entry is outside CAPE Phase 1 but inside the 180-day protest period, the protest is the protection. If the entry is outside both windows, counsel has to analyze residual CIT jurisdiction and the statute of limitations, not wait for a future portal update.
Interest and ACH are not back-office details
Refund value is not limited to principal. Customs interest on excess duty deposits is governed by 19 U.S.C. § 1505(c) and the quarterly rates implemented through 19 C.F.R. § 24.36. CBP calculates overpayment interest, but importers should still check the result where entries span multiple duty-deposit dates or multiple quarters.
Payment routing is equally operational. CAPE refunds are electronic. Importers need ACE access and U.S. bank information in the ACE Portal for ACH refunds; otherwise payment can be delayed even after the entry clears validation. The May 12 Lord declaration in Euro-Notions states that refunds are consolidated by importer of record or authorized CBP Form 4811 designee before they are sent to Treasury. A stale Form 4811, missing ACH enrollment, broker transition, or mismatch between IOR and filer authority can turn a legally valid refund into a parked payment.
The best pre-flight report is therefore not just a dollar estimate. It is a file that can answer six questions for each entry: who can file it, whether CAPE accepts it, whether a protest deadline is running, whether a later phase is needed, where the refund will be routed, and what interest period CBP should apply.
What to watch next
The first live metric is throughput. Brandon Lord's May 12 declaration in Euro-Notions Florida, Inc. v. United States reported that, as of 7:00 a.m. eastern time on May 11, 2026, 126,237 CAPE declarations had been submitted, 86,874 had passed file validation, 15,123,221 entries had passed entry-specific validation, 8,338,081 entries had been liquidated or reliquidated without IEEPA duties, and anticipated refunds plus interest for those entries totaled about $35.46 billion.
The second metric is Phase 2. CBP has indicated that later phases are needed for more complex categories, including entries outside the 90-day voluntary reliquidation window. But as of May 27, 2026, there is no public Phase 2 launch date that should be treated as operative for deadline planning. A client should not allow a 180-day protest period to expire because Phase 2 may eventually exist.
The third metric is appeal risk. The government may still appeal the CIT's refund orders, and trade advisors are tracking the early-June deadline for the Euro-Notions order. Separately, Section 122 is not part of the IEEPA refund universe. It is a different 10% tariff layer, and Greenberg Traurig notes that the Federal Circuit issued a temporary stay on May 12, 2026 after the CIT held the Section 122 tariffs unlawful. That stay affects Section 122 collection and litigation posture; it does not convert Section 122 duties into IEEPA refund claims.
The practitioner's map is now procedural. Put clean, eligible entries into CAPE. File protests before the 180-day window closes when CAPE Phase 1 is unavailable. Preserve records and refund routing evidence before Treasury payment. Monitor Phase 2, but do not build a deadline strategy around an unannounced phase. The merits decision opened the refund right. The calendar decides who can still use it.