FedEx Corporation has initiated legal proceedings against the United States government seeking a complete refund of tariffs paid under emergency powers that the Supreme Court has ruled unlawful. The global logistics and transportation firm filed its lawsuit following last week’s landmark judicial decision that invalidated the legal basis for import duties imposed by former President Donald Trump in April of the previous year.
The Supreme Court determined that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the legislation cited by Trump when introducing higher tariffs on imports from most trading partners, did not grant him the authority to impose such levies. This ruling has established a legal pathway for corporations to reclaim additional import duties paid since the tariffs took effect.
In its filing with the US Court of International Trade, FedEx stated that it seeks from the defendants a full refund of all IEEPA duties the company has remitted to the United States. The lawsuit names US Customs and Border Protection, the agency’s commissioner Rodney Scott, and the federal government as defendants. The company emphasised in its submission that it bore direct responsibility for paying the contested tariffs and is therefore entitled to seek restitution.
The logistics operator confirmed on Monday that it had taken the necessary legal action to protect its rights as an importer of record to pursue duty refunds from Customs and Border Protection. The company’s lawsuit did not specify the monetary value of the refund being sought. US Customs and Border Protection had not provided comment at the time of reporting.
The Trump administration is estimated to have collected at least an additional 130 billion dollars, equivalent to approximately 97 billion pounds, from tariffs imposed on most goods imported into the United States under the emergency powers legislation. Whilst the Supreme Court ruling determined the IEEPA tariffs lacked legal foundation, the judgment provided no guidance regarding the mechanism for returning these revenues to those who paid them.
Both Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated following the decision that the question of refunds could remain mired in litigation for years. The uncertainty surrounding reimbursement has not deterred corporations from pursuing legal remedies.
In the weeks preceding Friday’s Supreme Court decision, hundreds of firms filed lawsuits contesting the tariffs in an effort to position themselves for potential refunds. Companies spanning diverse sectors have taken legal action, including cosmetics manufacturer Revlon, aluminium producer Alcoa, and food importers such as tuna brand Bumble Bee. Retail giant Costco had pre-emptively sued the Trump administration in the previous year, arguing in its lawsuit that the text of IEEPA does not contain the word tariff or any equivalent term.
On Monday, 22 United States Senators, all members of the Democratic Party, introduced legislation mandating that the Trump administration provide full refunds of all revenue collected from the contested tariffs, including interest, within 180 days. The proposed legislation directs Customs and Border Protection, which would administer the reimbursements, to prioritise small businesses in the refund process.
In response to the Supreme Court’s invalidation of his emergency tariffs, Trump signed a proclamation on Friday invoking alternative legislation. Using Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, he imposed a new temporary 10 per cent tariff on goods from all countries. On Saturday, Trump announced his intention to increase these replacement tariffs to 15 per cent.
The legal challenge mounted by FedEx represents a significant test case for how the refund process will unfold following the Supreme Court’s ruling. The outcome of this litigation could establish important precedents for the hundreds of other companies seeking to reclaim tariff payments made under what has now been determined to be an improper exercise of presidential authority.
