The Section 122 tariffs expired at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time on 24 July 2026, at the end of their 150-day statutory life, and Congress did not extend them. At the same moment, a new Section 301 action on forced labour took effect and replaced them for most origins, so the expiry did not bring the cost relief some importers had hoped for.
What the expiry did do was crystallise a different question. The roughly five months of surcharge already paid, between 24 February and 24 July, is now the subject of live refund litigation, and whether any individual importer can recover it depends on the records and deadlines they preserve now.
This blog explains what happened at expiry, why the surcharge was collected throughout despite a court ruling it unlawful, what replaced it, and the specific actions importers should take to protect a possible refund. It reflects the position as of late July 2026, in a situation that is still moving through the courts.
The Section 122 tariffs were a 10% surcharge on most US imports, in force from 24 February to 24 July 2026. A trade court ruled the surcharge unlawful in May, but the Federal Circuit stayed that ruling, so collection continued until the statutory expiry. The tariffs have now lapsed and been replaced by Section 301 forced-labour duties. The question of refunds on what was paid remains unresolved and in litigation.
| Status | While Section 122 was in force | Now (after 24 July expiry) |
|---|---|---|
| Is the surcharge collected? | Yes, at 10%, on most imports, despite the CIT ruling | No. It expired by statute on 24 July 2026 |
| What applies instead? | Section 122, plus existing Section 232 and China Section 301 | Section 301 forced-labour duties of 10% or 12.5% on most origins |
| Refund on what was paid? | Contingent on the appeal | Still unresolved and in litigation; preserve rights now |
| Legal status | Ruled unlawful by CIT, stayed pending appeal | Section 122 appeal continues at the Federal Circuit |
What Happened to the Section 122 Tariffs
To understand the refund question, it helps to see the full sequence, because it moved quickly and ended on a fixed date.
- February 2026: After the Supreme Court invalidated the previous tariff basis, the administration introduced a 10% surcharge on most imports under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, effective 24 February 2026. An increase to 15% was announced but never enacted by proclamation, so the operative rate stayed at 10%.
- 7 May 2026: The US Court of International Trade ruled, in a divided decision, that the Section 122 tariffs were unlawful, finding the statutory conditions to impose them were not met. The injunction applied only to the named plaintiffs, so most importers kept paying.
- 8 May 2026: The government appealed to the Federal Circuit and sought to keep the tariffs in place during the appeal.
- 11 June 2026: The Federal Circuit granted a stay pending appeal, finding the government likely to succeed on the merits. Collection continued from all importers.
- 24 July 2026: The surcharge reached its 150-day statutory limit and expired at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time. Congress did not extend it. New Section 301 forced-labour duties took effect the same moment.
So the surcharge was never struck from collection while it ran. A lower court called it unlawful, a higher court paused that ruling, and then the clock simply ran out. For importers, the live issue is no longer whether to pay, because there is nothing left to pay, but whether the five months already paid can be recovered. This follows the same pattern as the earlier tariff litigation we covered in our analysis of how the Supreme Court struck down the IEEPA tariffs, which is what led the administration to Section 122 in the first place.
Why the Surcharge Was Collected Even After a Court Ruled It Unlawful
The reason comes down to how a stay works, and it explains why the refund question is now unsettled rather than automatic.
When the trade court ruled the surcharge unlawful, that ruling only directly protected the specific companies that brought the case. Every other importer remained liable. When the government appealed and the Federal Circuit paused the ruling, the lower court’s decision had no force while the appeal was heard, so Customs continued to assess and collect the surcharge on affected entries at 10%.
That stay is still in place, and the appeal is still running even though the tariff itself has expired. This is the crux of the refund position: the legality of the surcharge that was collected is still being decided. If the appeal upholds the finding that the tariffs were unlawful, refund opportunities may open to importers beyond the original plaintiffs. If the government prevails, the surcharge stands.
Either way, there is no automatic refund channel of the kind that existed for the earlier IEEPA duties, so recovery, if it comes, is likely to depend on individual claims. For background on how the surcharge itself operated, see our explainer on the Section 122 tariff and what importers need to know.
What Replaced Section 122 on 24 July
The expiry did not return costs to pre-surcharge levels, because a replacement was ready. On 23 July 2026 the US Trade Representative announced final action in its Section 301 forced-labour investigations, and the new duties took effect at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time on 24 July, the same moment Section 122 lapsed.
The replacement is structurally different from the flat surcharge it succeeded. It applies additional duties of 10% or 12.5% to products of 60 economies, accounting for roughly 99% of US imports, rather than a single global rate.
A limited number of major trading partners, including the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and Taiwan, are charged a combined rate net of their most-favoured-nation duty. This means the Section 301 charge and the existing duty together are capped rather than stacked, and where the existing duty already meets the cap the additional rate is zero. Goods already covered by Section 232 duties, such as steel, aluminium, copper and vehicles, are excluded from the forced-labour action, and unlike the older China measures the new duty does not stack on top of Section 232.
The practical consequence is that the shift from Section 122 to Section 301 is not a simple like-for-like swap, and the effect on any given shipment depends on its origin and its tariff classification. Some importers face a higher rate than the old 10%, some a lower effective rate after the MFN cap, and some, whose products fall within the extensive exemptions, a lower cost than under the surcharge. We cover the replacement in detail in our analysis of the Section 301 tariffs for 2026.
Paid the Section 122 surcharge and unsure how to keep a refund claim open? Carra Globe’s Importer of Record services help importers keep accurate entry records, track liquidation deadlines, and model exposure under the new Section 301 duties.
Section 122 Refunds: What Importers Should Do Now
The importers best placed to recover the surcharge, if recovery becomes possible, are the ones treating the unresolved appeal as a reason to prepare rather than wait. The appeal could take many months, and if it succeeds for importers, the ability to claim will depend on records and deadlines preserved now. Take these steps.
- Preserve every Section 122 entry record. Organise and retain the documentation, including entry summaries, 7501s and liquidation dates, for all entries on which you paid the surcharge between 24 February and 24 July. If refunds become available, a claim will depend on clean, complete records. This is the single most important step.
- Track your protest and post-summary correction deadlines. Refund rights run on strict timelines tied to when each entry liquidates. A post-summary correction can be filed before liquidation, and a protest is generally filed within 180 days after liquidation. Diarise the liquidation date of every Section 122 entry so neither window closes unnoticed, and consider protective claims to keep your rights open while the appeal runs.
- Quantify what you paid. Calculate the total Section 122 surcharge you paid across the five-month window, so you know the size of the potential refund at stake and can decide whether protective filings are worthwhile. Our landed cost guide helps you isolate the duty component accurately.
- Reconcile your new Section 301 position. Now that the replacement duties are live, confirm the correct rate and any exemption for each of your product lines and origins under the new Chapter 99 provisions, so current entries are classified correctly from day one.
- Get your import structure and classification right. Accurate classification and a compliant importer of record structure protect you through legal flux and tighter enforcement. For the foundational role, see our explainer on what an Importer of Record is and does.
This situation also sits within a broader tightening of US customs enforcement in 2026, which raises the stakes on getting documentation and import structure right. For the wider context, see our analysis of the 2026 customs enforcement changes affecting every importer of record.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are Section 122 tariffs still in effect in 2026?
No. The Section 122 surcharge expired at 12:01 a.m. ET on 24 July 2026 at its statutory limit, and Congress did not extend it. Section 301 forced-labour duties replaced it the same moment.
The surcharge is no longer collected on new entries. What remains open is the question of refunds on the surcharge paid while it was in force.
Can I get a refund on Section 122 tariffs I paid?
Possibly, but not automatically and not yet. The surcharge’s legality is still on appeal at the Federal Circuit. If the appeal upholds the ruling, refunds may open to importers beyond the original plaintiffs.
There is no automatic refund channel, so recovery is likely to depend on individual claims. Preserve complete entry records and track your protest and post-summary correction deadlines now, because importers who wait risk missing the windows that make a claim possible.
What replaced Section 122 when it expired on 24 July 2026?
A new Section 301 forced-labour action took effect at 12:01 a.m. ET on 24 July 2026, imposing additional duties of 10% or 12.5% on products of 60 economies, subject to extensive exemptions.
It is country-specific rather than a flat global surcharge, and for some major partners the rate is capped net of existing duty. Model the new duty on your own product lines rather than assuming costs fell when Section 122 ended.
Why was the surcharge collected even after a court ruled it unlawful?
Because the Federal Circuit stayed the lower court ruling pending appeal. A stay pauses a ruling’s effect, so the surcharge stayed collectable while the higher court reviewed the case, up to its statutory expiry.
The lower court’s injunction had only ever protected the three named plaintiffs. Every other importer was liable throughout, which is why the refund question now turns on the appeal rather than on the original ruling.
The Section 122 appeal will likely take months, and its outcome is uncertain. The importers who handle this well are the ones who keep clean records, track their liquidation deadlines, and reconcile their new Section 301 position now rather than reacting later. If you would like support reviewing your Section 122 exposure, keeping entry records claim-ready, or classifying under the new duties, Carra Globe acts as importer of record across 175+ countries and can help you put that in place.