The $175 Billion Tariff Refund Fight Has No Playbook. But History Can Guide Us.

On Friday, February 20, the Supreme Court struck down President Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in a decisive 6-3 ruling. The Court held that IEEPA does not grant the President the authority to impose tariffs, a power reserved for Congress under the Constitution.

The legal question is now largely settled. The tariffs were unlawful. The money is owed back.

But the Court said nothing about how $175 billion in collected duties will actually be refunded. There is no process, no timeline and no set of rules governing how this will work. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has never administered refunds at anywhere near this scale. The administration has said it is "waiting for the courts to provide instructions." Over 1,800 companies have already filed lawsuits at the U.S. Court of International Trade seeking their money back.

In short: the right to refunds exists. The mechanism to deliver them does not.

There is no precedent for this in trade law. But if we examine two precedents in modern American history, they tell the same story and can help us understand what's to come.

1. The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund

In the days following September 11, 2001, Congress moved with extraordinary speed. Within 11 days of the attacks, it passed the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act, which created the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. Kenneth Feinberg was appointed Special Master to design and administer the program. By the time the fund closed in 2004, it had distributed more than $7 billion to 97% of eligible families.

The initial response was fast because the political pressure was overwhelming. The nation was united. Congress acted.

But then the fund expired. And thousands of first responders, construction workers and volunteers who developed cancers, respiratory diseases and other conditions in the years after the attacks found themselves with no recourse. The government acknowledged these people were owed compensation, but Congress did nothing to reauthorize the fund for years.

What changed? A sustained political advocacy campaign.

Jon Stewart became the public face of the effort, delivering testimony before Congress in 2019 that went viral, shaming lawmakers for the rows of empty chairs in the hearing room. On the ground, John Feal and the FealGood Foundation organized first responders into a political coalition that made the issue impossible to ignore.

The result: Congress passed the Never Forget the Heroes Act, making the fund permanent.

The scale and human stakes are obviously different, but the structural dynamics of the payout process are strikingly similar.

The lesson is clear. Even when the government acknowledged it owed people money, it took organized political pressure to make them actually pay it. When that pressure was high, Congress moved in 11 days. When the pressure faded, victims waited years.

2. The BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

In April 2010, the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and triggering the largest marine oil spill in history. Hundreds of thousands of fishermen, small business owners and coastal communities were suddenly facing economic devastation with no clear path to compensation.

BP initially ran its own claims process. It was slow, opaque and designed to minimize payouts. Small businesses were going under as they waited for checks that never came.

Then political pressure changed everything.

Congressional hearings hauled BP's CEO Tony Hayward before the cameras, producing the infamous moment when BP's chairman told the press "we care about the small people." Gulf Coast governors went public demanding faster action. Fishing industry coalitions organized as a bloc and applied coordinated pressure. President Obama delivered an Oval Office address to the nation and summoned BP's leadership to the White House.

Within 24 hours of that White House meeting, BP agreed to establish a $20 billion escrow fund with an independent claims administrator. Kenneth Feinberg, the same lawyer who had administered the 9/11 fund, was appointed to run it. The Gulf Coast Claims Facility ultimately paid out $6.2 billion to more than 220,000 claimants, years before the courts reached a final settlement of $20.8 billion in 2016, six years after the spill.

The people who got paid first were not the ones with the best lawyers. They were the ones who organized politically, built coalitions and created public pressure that made delay politically untenable.

Why This Matters for the Tariff Refund Fight

In both of these cases, one where the federal government held the money and one where a private corporation did, the pattern was identical.

The legal right to compensation was established early. But the speed, structure and scope of actual payouts were determined by political pressure, not legal proceedings. When advocacy was organized and public, the process moved. When it was not, people waited years.

The tariff refund fight has the same dynamics. $175 billion is sitting in government accounts. The Supreme Court has said it was collected unlawfully. But the process for returning that money has not been designed, and the administration has every incentive to delay.

The political environment, however, is unusually favorable for companies and trade associations willing to act. Cost of living is the dominant issue in American politics right now. The public already connects tariffs to higher prices at the grocery store and the gas pump. Any organized voice that frames the refund push around consumer relief, around lowering costs for American families, will find a receptive audience in Congress, in the media and with voters.

The companies and trade associations that move first on the advocacy side, not just the legal side, will shape how this refund process is designed and how quickly it moves. History tells us that much.

That window opened on Friday.

‍