Court Battles Trump tariff refund fight in motion as small businesses take helm by Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld - 03/01/26 6:00 AM ET by Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld - 03/01/26 6:00 AM ET Share ✕ LinkedIn LinkedIn Email Email NOW PLAYING The fight for tariff refunds following the Supreme Court’s decision to void President Trump’s sweeping levies is underway.  A Michigan auto parts store and New York wine importer are leading the charge, and they’re moving fast.  Hundreds of small businesses and major corporations alike have rushed to court to reclaim the unlawfully collected funds, as the Trump administration awaits instruction on a roadmap for next steps.    “Our goal is simple: No unnecessary expense. No unnecessary disruption. No 900-case pileup,” Liberty Justice Center, which represents the wine importer, VOS Selections, said this week.  Here’s where things stand. Who will lead: Wine importer or auto parts store? VOS Selections, which imports sake and spirits, has already made moves to secure its refund with the four small businesses it sued alongside.  Victor Schwartz, VOS Selections’ founder, said hours after the Supreme Court’s decision last Friday that the ruling marked a “turning point” for thousands of small businesses nationwide.  Though his company is owed a refund in the “low six figures,” the tariffs made a major impact on his business’s cash flow — a disadvantage many small businesses likely faced, he said.  “As you could understand, cash flow is the lifeblood of a company,” said Schwartz.   The Trump administration long ago guaranteed VOS Selections and the other original plaintiffs refunds if they emerged victorious.   The administration has said it won’t object to refunds for other businesses. But still, the process may be more complicated.  In an email Thursday, Liberty Justice Center urged that most businesses do not need to take immediate action now, and if litigation does become necessary, their claims will still be viable.  The nonprofit, public interest litigation firm emphasized its focus on ensuring a “uniform, court-supervised refund process” that would be applied across the board.   “We are working to prevent a scenario in which thousands of small businesses are forced to file separate lawsuits simply to recover unlawfully collected duties,” the email read.  That hasn’t stopped hundreds of businesses from filing suit, anyways.   In one major move, FedEx, the global shipping company, sued the Trump administration Tuesday for a “full refund” on the import taxes it paid since the emergency tariffs went into place. Soon after, the company vowed to give those funds back to those who initially bore the charges: Shippers and consumers.  “When that will happen and the exact process for requesting and issuing refunds will depend in part on future guidance from the government and the court,” the company said in a statement Thursday.   As companies like FedEx line up, it remains unclear whether the wine importer will continue to be the face.  A Muskegon, Mich., auto parts store has emerged as a contender to take the baton.  For months, other companies’ lawsuits were consolidated with AGS Company Automotive Solutions’ case, effectively making it the lead docket.  That is, until Dec. 23, when Mark Barnett, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of International Trade, halted new cases.  DOJ not stepping on gas With the Supreme Court ruling now in, AGS is pushing to lift the pause.  On Wednesday, the auto parts store asked for a hearing “as soon as practicable.” The store’s lawyers said they’d be ready to go as soon as the next day, but the court did not oblige.  AGS had told the court that “a delay in lifting the stay favors defendants and prejudices Plaintiffs further.”  Schwartz’s business, meanwhile, is back at the intermediate appeals court.  VOS Selections has urged the swift return of its “mandate,” the formal document ending the appeals process that enables the lower court to regain jurisdiction .    Though the government has 25 days to ask the Supreme Court to rehear the case, and the justices won’t issue its judgment until 32 days have passed, the businesses argue that there is “no impediment” to moving forward now. The appeals court can issue its mandate at any time, they contend.  “The mandate did not issue in the ordinary course here only because of this Court’s order staying the mandate’s issuance until the Supreme Court entered its judgment,” their lawyers wrote. “Because that has now happened, this mandate should issue forthwith.”   As