Joseph J. Thorndike, Who Gets the Tariff Refund? A Lesson From 1936, 191 Tax Notes Federal 175 (Apr. 13, 2026):

Shortly after the Supreme Court invalidated many of President Trump’s cherished tariffs, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) sent the White House a bill. “On behalf of the people of Illinois, I demand a refund of $1,700 for every family in Illinois,” the governor wrote. “There are 5,105,448 households in my state, bringing the total damages you owe to $8,679,261,600.” (For good measure, Pritzker included an invoice marked “Past Due — Delinquent.”)

Pritzker’s letter was a stunt, but it puts a real issue in view: When the Court strikes down a tariff, who should get their money back? The importer who submitted the duties to the government? Or people further down the line who may have borne the true economic burden of the tariffs (including those 5 million households in Illinois)?

Customs law provides a clear answer: Refunds go to the importer and everyone else is out of luck. Indeed, Customs and Border Protection has a well-established procedure for making refunds (helpfully outlined by my colleague Lee Sheppard last month; prior analysis: Tax Notes Federal, Mar. 30, 2026, p. 2127). Importers can seek correction to open entries, file protests for closed ones, and, when necessary, file suit in the Court of International Trade.

Broadly speaking, in other words, money leaves the treasury by the same route it entered. And it goes back to the people who actually submitted payment. There are many good and practical reasons for this arrangement, but it leaves important fairness questions largely unaddressed. If most tariffs were ultimately passed through to consumers (and they were), why shouldn’t consumers get a share of the refunds? (Yale Budget Lab, “Tracking the Economic Effects of Tariffs” (last updated Apr. 1, 2026.))