Rivian Sues US for Refund of Trump Tariffs After Supreme Court Ruling

Rivian is asking the U.S. Court of International Trade to order the federal government to refund tariffs the electric vehicle maker paid under President Donald Trump’s emergency trade program, months after the Supreme Court ruled that the law used to impose those duties did not give the president tariff authority.

Rivian LLC and Rivian Automotive LLC filed the lawsuit July 23 against the United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott. The companies seek repayment of all tariffs collected from their imports under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, along with interest.

The complaint does not state how much Rivian is seeking. The automaker says it imports automotive products for distribution and for use in manufacturing completed vehicles and was required to pay IEEPA duties on goods brought into the United States.

Rivian claims the Supreme Court decision does not by itself guarantee repayment of every tariff it previously paid. The company is asking the trade court for a judgment applying that ruling to its imports and directing Customs to refund the duties.

Trump began using IEEPA in February 2025 to impose additional tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico and China. The administration later relied on the emergency powers law for a broader tariff program that included a 10% baseline duty on most imports and higher rates for goods from dozens of countries.

A series of lawsuits challenged whether IEEPA gave the president that authority. The Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that the statute did not authorize the tariffs, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit later upheld that conclusion.

The Supreme Court resolved the dispute on February 20, 2026, holding that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.

IEEPA gives presidents broad economic powers during declared national emergencies, including authority to restrict or regulate certain transactions involving foreign countries. The tariff cases centered on whether the law’s power to regulate imports also allowed the president to impose duties on goods entering the United States. The Supreme Court concluded that it did not.

That ruling did not eliminate presidential tariff authority altogether. Congress has passed separate trade laws that expressly allow presidents to impose duties under certain conditions. The Court found that IEEPA, the emergency law used for the challenged tariffs, contained no comparable grant of tariff authority.

Rivian relies on that holding as the legal basis for its lawsuit. The company claims the duties assessed against its imports were unlawful because Customs collected them under executive orders that depended on IEEPA for tariff authority.

The automaker had previously warned investors that tariffs were increasing its costs. Following the Supreme Court ruling, Rivian said in a regulatory filing that it believed recovery of IEEPA duties was possible but that the timing, method and amount of any refund remained uncertain. The company had not recorded a refund receivable as of March 31.

Part of Rivian’s requested relief involves a Customs process known as liquidation. Importers generally pay estimated duties when merchandise enters the country. Customs later liquidates the entry, which finalizes the amount owed on that shipment.

Rivian is asking the court to order CBP to reliquidate entries where IEEPA tariffs were included. Reliquidation would allow Customs to recalculate those entries without the challenged duties and return any resulting overpayments.

CBP has established electronic procedures for processing certain IEEPA tariff refunds following the Supreme Court decision. Rivian nevertheless claims it needs a judgment covering its own imports to ensure that previously collected duties are returned.

The complaint also points to a representation the government made during the earlier tariff litigation. While seeking to keep the duties in place during the appeals, the government said it would refund tariffs paid by the companies involved in that litigation if the duties were ultimately found unlawful, including applicable interest.

Rivian now argues that the same Supreme Court precedent requires the trade court to declare the IEEPA duties collected from the automaker unlawful and order their repayment.

The company is seeking refunds with interest, an order requiring Customs to recalculate affected import entries, and reimbursement of litigation costs and attorneys’ fees.