Total:
$0.00
There are two tariff stories running through this industry at the moment and they point in opposite directions, which is why most merchants have merged them into one vague feeling that imports cost more now.
They are worth separating, because one of them owes you money — and, as of this summer, owes it on terms that depend on something most importers have not done.
On 20 February 2026 the Supreme Court held that the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were unlawful. Seven executive orders fell with it, covering the border and opioid measures against Canada, Mexico and China, the reciprocal tariffs applied to more than fifty countries from April 2025, and the later country-specific actions against Brazil and India. Duties paid under those measures between 4 February 2025 and 24 February 2026 became refundable.
Roughly $166 billion was collected under those tariffs. As of June 2026, reported figures put around $95 billion of claims accepted into the refund process and about $23 billion actually approved and sent to Treasury. The gap between those numbers is the point of this post.
Whether this is your money depends on one question
Not every eyewear store has a claim. The test is simple and it is not about where your frames were made — it is about who paid the duty.
If you are the importer of record, buying frames directly from a manufacturer in China, Vietnam, Thailand, Italy or anywhere else that was caught by the reciprocal tariffs, and clearing them into the US in your own name, you very likely paid IEEPA duties in 2025 and you very likely have a claim.
If you buy from a US distributor or a domestic brand, you paid the tariff in your cost price, not to Customs. Your supplier has the claim. You do not — although it is entirely reasonable to ask whether their pricing is going to reflect a refund they are receiving on inventory you already bought.
That first category is larger than people assume in eyewear. Direct-import frame programmes are how independent stores and small brands get their margin, and Italian acetate is a good example of how wide the net was — the reciprocal tariffs applied to the EU as well, so European-made frames were caught alongside Asian ones.
The part that changed in July: liquidation is now the dividing line
This is the section to read if you read nothing else, because it is where the story stopped being administrative and started being a decision.
CBP built a dedicated refund process — CAPE — rather than pushing everything through the normal correction routes, and it opened in phases:
- Phase 1, from April 2026 — unliquidated entries and entries inside the voluntary reliquidation window.
- Phase 2, from 29 June 2026 — entries flagged for reconciliation where the reconciliation entry had not been filed.
- Phase 3, from late July 2026 — finally liquidated entries, and this is the one with a condition attached.
An entry that has finally liquidated is one where CBP's duty determination has become permanent, and the agency cannot ordinarily reopen it without court authority. In mid-July 2026 the Court of International Trade supplied that authority: Judge Richard K. Eaton issued reliquidation orders directing CBP to refund IEEPA duties on finally liquidated entries — for importers who had filed suit at the CIT. Reporting at the time put the number of individual cases covered at roughly 3,700. Litigants are given instructions to submit their importer-of-record number and claim through Phase 3.
The order did not address importers who had not sued. Their route to a refund on finally liquidated entries currently depends on two things that have not resolved: the government's appeal to the Federal Circuit, filed 3 June 2026 and arguing that court-ordered refunds should not reach parties who did not sue, and a pending motion for class certification. Neither offers a confirmed outcome or a timetable.
So the practical position for an eyewear importer is a fork, and it is not a subtle one:
- Unliquidated entries, or entries still inside the voluntary reliquidation window — the administrative route works. Your broker files, and reported processing has been running roughly 60 to 90 days after a declaration is accepted.
- Finally liquidated entries and you have filed at the CIT — you have a court-ordered path.
- Finally liquidated entries and you have not filed — you do not currently have a confirmed path at all. You are waiting on somebody else's appeal.
Your own trade body has put a date on the fork
On 18 August 2026, the eyewear trade press reported The Vision Council advising importers directly on this point. Omar Elkhatib, the Council's director of government relations, was quoted: "Companies with outstanding refunds should bring suit at the CIT prior to February 2027, when the statute of limitations will begin to run, to perfect claims to these refunds."
That is worth more to a reader of this post than any amount of general trade commentary, because it is this industry's own body telling this industry's importers that the administrative route may not be the whole answer for them. And note what it is not: it is not advice to wait and see.
The decision it implies is not a February decision. It is an autumn one, because the broker and counsel review that informs it takes weeks, and everybody will want it at once in January.
The dates to put in your calendar
Litigation at the Court of International Trade is the route for entries the administrative process does not reach, and it has hard deadlines:
- 4 February 2027 — to bring an action for entries covered by the border and opioid IEEPA measures.
- 5 April 2027 — to bring an action for entries covered by the reciprocal tariffs.
Separately, for entries that have finally liquidated, the protest window is 180 days from liquidation, and a number of importers have been filing protectively rather than waiting to see how the phases evolve.
Those 2027 dates look distant. They are not, for the reason above — and because the appeal that would help non-filers may well not be decided before them.
The third change, which nobody sent you a notice about
While the refund story was running, a separate rule quietly removed something most importers had stopped thinking about: the $800 de minimis exemption.
On 24 June 2026, CBP issued an interim final rule — Indefinite Suspension of the De Minimis Exemption for Merchandise Arriving Through All Modes Other Than the International Postal Network (91 FR 37789) — effective immediately on the day of publication. It suspends duty-free de minimis treatment for imports valued at $800 or less arriving by any route other than the international postal network. Those shipments now require formal or informal entry rather than release from manifest, which means materially more data per shipment and a customs charge where there previously was none.
And it is not a temporary measure that will lapse. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, enacted 4 July 2025, terminates the de minimis exemption outright on 1 July 2027. The interim rule is the bridge to that.
For an eyewear business this lands in three specific places, none of which is your main container programme: sample shipments from a new frame supplier, small replenishment orders flown in to cover a stockout, and warranty or repair returns crossing the border. All three used to clear at no duty and minimal paperwork. None of them does now. If your broker has not raised it with you, raise it with them — and note the symmetry, since Europe removed its own €150 threshold on 1 July 2026 and is heading for duty from the first euro as well. The low-value shortcut is closing on both sides of the Atlantic at once.
Now the other half, which is the part that matters more
The tariffs that were struck down are not the tariffs you are paying today.
Still fully in force, and not refundable:
- Section 301 tariffs on China, including the forced-labour action that took effect on 24 July 2026 and swept in around sixty economies, landing every major eyewear sourcing market in a new duty tier. That one is covered in detail in our companion post on the new Section 301 tariffs, and it is the tariff that is actually shaping your 2027 cost base. The Vision Council testified for an eyewear-specific exclusion at the USTR hearings in May 2026; no determination has been reported.
- Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminium, copper and other categories, which reach metal frame components and expanded again in April 2026.
- Antidumping and countervailing duties, which are unaffected by any of this.
So the honest summary for an eyewear importer is: a one-off recovery on last year, and a permanently higher landed cost going forward. Treating the refund as good news about your cost structure would be a mistake. It is a working capital event, not a change in the economics.
What to do with it
A refund against 2025 imports is the cleanest capital an eyewear business is going to see this year, because it is money you have already written off in a prior period. Spending it on more inventory at the new landed cost simply converts it back into the problem it came from.
The structural response to permanently higher frame costs is the same as it was before the refund arrived: the tariff is charged on the frame, and nothing else in the order carries it. Lens work is domestic, configured per customer, and duty-free. Coatings, thinner indices, progressive upgrades and a second pair are all margin that no trade action touches.
Which means the highest-return use of a tariff refund is usually not more frames. It is the part of the buying flow that turns a frame sale into a complete prescription order — because that is the only line on the invoice the tariffs cannot reach.
Frequently asked questions
Which tariffs were actually refunded?
Those imposed under IEEPA by the seven executive orders voided on 20 February 2026, covering duties paid from 4 February 2025 until 24 February 2026. Section 301, Section 232 and AD/CVD duties are unaffected and remain payable.
My entries have finally liquidated and I never sued. Am I out?
Not necessarily, but you do not currently have a confirmed route. The July 2026 CIT orders covered importers who had filed. Non-filers are relying on the government losing its appeal or on a class being certified, and neither has happened. Take advice on whether to file before the 2027 deadlines rather than treating a favourable appeal as the plan.
I buy frames from a US wholesaler. Do I get anything?
Not directly. The refund follows the importer of record. It is worth asking your supplier whether recovered duty is being reflected in pricing.
How do I know if I paid IEEPA duties?
Look for Chapter 99 headings in the 9903.01.xx and 9903.02.xx ranges on your entry summaries, or ask your customs broker to run the period for you.
Is there a deadline?
Yes. Court actions face deadlines of 4 February 2027 and 5 April 2027 depending on which measure applied, and finally liquidated entries have a 180-day protest window from liquidation. The Vision Council has advised eyewear importers to bring suit at the CIT before February 2027, when the limitations period begins to run.
Is the $800 de minimis exemption still available for small shipments?
No. CBP suspended it indefinitely for all non-postal modes with effect from 24 June 2026, and it is terminated by statute on 1 July 2027. Samples, small replenishments and cross-border returns now need a formal or informal entry. Note that the rule discussed here is the non-postal one; CBP published separate companion rules covering the international postal network the same day.
Does this mean import costs are back to normal?
No. The measures that replaced them, particularly the Section 301 forced-labour action that took effect on 24 July 2026, are in force and are not refundable — and the low-value shortcut has closed as well.
This article is general information about a fast-moving trade and customs situation. It is not customs, tax or legal advice, and the refund position has been changing month to month. Confirm your own entries and options with your customs broker or trade counsel before acting, and do not rely on the classifications or timings described here for your own products.
VisioncarePro adds structured prescription capture and lens selection to any Shopify product, so more of each order sits in the part of the basket tariffs do not reach. Free to install.
Install VisioncarePro free on the Shopify App Store →
Sources: CBP, "Indefinite Suspension of the De Minimis Exemption for Merchandise Arriving Through All Modes Other Than the International Postal Network," interim final rule, 91 FR 37789 (24 June 2026), Docket USCBP-2026-0760, CBP Dec. 26-12, amending 19 CFR 10.151 · One Big Beautiful Bill Act (enacted 4 July 2025), de minimis termination effective 1 July 2027 · Vision Monday, "Importers May Need Court Action to Obtain IEEPA Refunds, The Vision Council Advises" (18 August 2026), quoting Omar Elkhatib, director of government relations · Davis Wright Tremaine (24 July 2026), Holland & Knight (27 July 2026) and Amundsen Davis (6 August 2026) on the mid-July CIT reliquidation orders, CAPE Phase 3 eligibility and the position of non-litigants · Holland & Knight and Morgan Lewis on the government's 3 June 2026 appeal of the CIT refund order · Skadden, "Tariff Refund Mechanism Takes Shape After Supreme Court's IEEPA Ruling" · BDO, "IEEPA Tariff Refunds: Key FAQs for Importers" · CBP IEEPA duty refunds programme materials.
