
Refunds are moving. CBP has certified and sent tens of billions of dollars to the Treasury, and a lot of importers have already seen money land.
But "a refund arrived" and "the refund was correct" are two different things. In the claims we've worked, some importers are getting back less than their own numbers say they're owed, with no explanation from CBP for the difference.
That gap matters on its own. It matters more if you can't prove what you actually paid.
CBP isn't required to show its work. When a CAPE refund comes back lower than an importer's own calculation, the agency doesn't automatically say why.
In practice, that shortfall sometimes lines up with CBP applying the refund against something else, an unrelated unpaid bill, or a classification the agency disagrees with, without spelling that out. For importers in categories CBP scrutinizes more closely, metals importers are a common example, that risk is higher.
If you don't know why your refund is short, you can't fix it. And CBP hasn't made a habit of volunteering the reason.
Not sure whether your refund matched what you actually paid? Call us at (602) 649-3887 and we'll help you check the math.
Here's what makes a shortfall hard to challenge. Proving you're owed more usually means pointing to the government's own record of what you paid, specifically your ACE entry summary data.
The relevant record is the ES-003 report, CBP's Entry Summary Line Tariff Details, which lists the duties charged line by line, entry by entry. It's supposed to be your proof.
The problem is that some importers have found entries, and even entire duty lines, missing or changed in their own historical ES-003 data compared to what they pulled earlier. If the version CBP has on file today doesn't match what you paid, and you didn't keep your own copy, you may have nothing to point to.
This isn't a theoretical concern. A federal judge overseeing IEEPA refund litigation has directly asked the government whether CBP has any protocols that could result in entry information being deleted. That question is still open, but it's coming from the bench, not just from importers comparing notes.
This is exactly the kind of gap our trade law team is built to catch, comparing your own records against what CBP's system currently shows and building the documentation to support a shortfall claim before it's too late to prove. Find out if your imports qualify for an IEEPA refund.
If your ES-003 data today doesn't match your ES-003 data from six months ago, today's version is what CBP will use if you ever need to challenge a refund. Whatever changed in between isn't something you can undo after the fact.
The same goes for your liquidation notice, the ES-701 report, which is CBP's official confirmation of when an entry closed out. That date drives your deadlines. If you can't independently confirm it, you're relying entirely on CBP's version of events, including its timing.
None of this means your refund is wrong. It means you may not be able to tell either way without your own copy of the record.
Pull your ES-003 and ES-701 reports for every entry that carries an IEEPA duty, and save your own copies outside of ACE. Do this whether your refund has already come through, is pending, or hasn't been requested yet.
Then compare what you actually paid, principal plus the interest CBP owes on top of it, against what you received. A gap is worth investigating, not assuming away.
At Frost Law AZ, our attorneys handle this kind of claim substantiation directly: pulling the entry-level data, checking it against what CBP paid, and building the documentation to challenge a shortfall or protect your position if the underlying record changes again. Not sure if your refund is short, or whether your records are complete enough to prove it either way? Tell us what you're working with in the form below, and we'll give you a straight answer.