As the (Customs and Trade) World Turns: September 2025

We are navigating an unpredictable and fast changing trade landscape and what we are reporting today may change by tomorrow (or in the next hour). However, our team is regularly issuing reports and alerts to help our clients and friends stay up to date. Sign up here for regular updates and to receive this newsletter each month. In addition, our Trump 2.0 Tariff Tracker can be found here and information regarding navigating the new tariffs can be found here.

This edition provides essential insights for sectors including international trade, national security, aluminum and steel industries, fashion and retail, automotive, life sciences, electronics, artificial intelligence, transportation, electric mobility, e-commerce, shipping and logistics, and compliance, as well as for in-house counsel, importers, and compliance professionals.

In this September 2025 edition, we cover:

1. The Federal Circuit Court ruled that the IEEPA tariffs are unlawful. While a final SCOTUS decision is not expected until next year, importers should prepare now to preserve their rights to refunds.

2. The Trump Administration is implementing its “America First Trade Policy” through the creation of a cross-agency task force that will lead to faster DOJ referrals from CBP.

3. A recent $12.4 million FCA settlement demonstrates trade fraud actions are on the rise.

4. The Trump Administration started a Section 232 investigation into wind turbines.

5. The BIS updated rules on export controls on Syria to allow mostEAR99 items and certain consumer goods to be exported without a license under new and expanded exceptions.

6. The Trump Administration revoked Validated End-User status for several Korean semiconductor companies operating in China, which will now need to apply for licenses to continue their status.

7. DHS released their new 2025 Updates to the UFLPA Strategy, which includes a focus on steel, copper, lithium, caustic soda, and red dates. Those industries should expect increased enforcement.

On August 29, the Federal Circuit issued a pivotal decision in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, holding that tariffs collected under presidential orders pursuant to the IEEPA are unlawful. This decision sets the stage for a US Supreme Court battle.

The court explained that while the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) grants the president broad emergency powers, it does not provide the clear congressional authorization required to impose sweeping tariffs, as the statute does not mention “tariffs,” “duties,” or “taxes.” The Federal Circuit emphasized that, unlike other statutes delegating tariff authority, the IEEPA lacks the explicit language and procedural safeguards US Congress requires. The court also rejected the government’s reliance on prior precedent, finding that the current tariffs were unlimited in scope and duration and therefore exceeded what earlier cases permitted. Additionally, the court held that the Court of International Trade (CIT) has exclusive jurisdiction over such challenges and remanded to the CIT to determine the scope of relief in line with the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, which held that federal courts generally lack authority to issue nationwide injunctions.

As a result of the decision, importers now have a potential pathway to recover IEEPA tariffs, should the Supreme Court uphold the Federal Circuit decision. The Supreme Court has taken up the case, consolidating it with Learning Resources, et al., v. Trump, another case challenging the legality of the tariffs pending before the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Briefings are due by October 30, and oral arguments are scheduled for the first week of November. If the Court ultimately strikes down the IEEPA tariffs, the Trump Administration has already indicated its willingness to use other statutory authorities to impose tariffs, such as a Section 338 or Section 122 action.

And the Fox Says…: The fate of the IEEPA tariffs and scope of relief remains uncertain; clarity likely will not come until 2026 at the earliest. The ultimate decision may result in refunds for all importers, refunds for no one, or refunds only for the plaintiffs — in which case we expect a plethora of class action and individual suits. In the meantime, importers should monitor their entries on which they paid IEEPA tariffs, track liquidation dates, or prepare to take measures to protect their ability to obtain refunds, such as requesting an extension of liquidation or filing protective protests. We will provide more guidance, which will depend on timelines and the status of the case as entries begin to liquidate.

Contributors: James Kim, Natalie Tantisirirat, and Angela M. Santos

The US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) August 29 announcement of a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force marks another significant escalation of US customs enforcement (see our prior alerts here, here, and here). Coordinated by the DOJ’s Civil and Criminal Divisions and reinforced by the US Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Homeland Security Investigations and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Task Force will “aggressively pursue enforcement actions against any importers who seek to evade tariffs and other duties … who seek to import prohibited goods into the American economy.” To that end, the Task Force will streamline intelligence sharing, knit together civil False Claims Act (FCA) cases, and deploy data analytics to uncover tariff-evasion schemes.

In its announcement, the DOJ expressly highlighted recent multimillion-dollar settlements involving multi-layered wood flooring, plastic resin, extruded aluminum products, and quartz surface products. A tacit reminder to importers of the steep penalties that they can face for alleged tariff evasion under the FCA.

The Trump Administration has made clear its priority to ensure compliance with trade laws, including payment of applicable tariffs and duties, as outlined in President Trump’s “America First Trade Policy.” This Task Force will advance these objectives by pursuing those who violate customs laws through duty and penalty collection actions under the Tariff Act of 1930, actions under the FCA, and, wherever appropriate, parallel criminal prosecutions, penalties, and seizures under Title 18’s trade fraud and conspiracy provisions.

And the Fox Says…: In practice, importers should expect faster referrals from CBP, sharper scrutiny of valuation, classification, and country-of-origin claims, and a surge in whistleblower filings fueled by the promise of FCA bounties and the Criminal Division’s burgeoning Corporate Whistleblower Program. The Task Force’s mandate dovetails with Executive Order 14243, which compels agencies to fuse payment-integrity analytics with traditional enforcement channels — a marriage that all but guarantees wider use of anomaly-detection algorithms on Automated Commercial Environment data.

Contributors: Mario A. Torrico, Jackson David Toof, and Nadia Patel

Allied Stone Inc., a Dallas-based supplier of countertop and cabinetry products, and its President Jia “Jerry” Lim have agreed to pay $12.4 million to resolve allegations that they violated the FCA by evading antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) on quartz surface products imported from China. According to the DOJ (see here), between September 29, 2018, and February 7, 2023, Allied Stone and Lim allegedly misrepresented Chinese quartz products as other types of merchandise, such as marble or crystallized glass, which are subject to lower duties.

The government further alleged that Allied Stone and Lim failed to declare and pay, and failed to ensure that others, including manufacturers and third-party importers, were declaring and paying the required AD/CVDs. The case was initiated by a whistleblower lawsuit filed by Melinda Hemphill under the FCA’s qui tam provisions. As part of the settlement, Hemphill will receive approximately $2.17 million of the proceeds.

The settlement is civil in nature with no admission of liability. However, it underscores the government’s commitment to enforcing trade laws and holding companies accountable for alleged customs fraud.

And the Fox Says…: As FCA enforcement is on the rise, importers should implement robust customs and trade compliance programs, ensure accurate product classification and country-of-origin declarations, remit appropriate AD/CVD duties, and regularly audit import practices to avoid costly enforcement actions and penalties, as well as reputational damage.

Contributors: Mario A. Torrico, Jackson David Toof, and Nadia Patel

The US Department of Commerce initiated a Section 232 investigation to determine whether imports of wind turbines and their parts or components threaten national security. Announced on August 13, the investigation led by Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is the 10th such probe launched this year under the Trump Administration.

Section 232 authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate whether targeted imports are entering the United States “in such quantities or under such circumstances” as to impair national security and to recommend responsive trade restrictive measures (e.g., tariffs or quotas). BIS must deliver its report to the president within 270 days, or by May 10, 2026, for this investigation. The president then has 90 days to decide whether to concur and, if so, whether to impose trade restrictive measures. Based on recent Section 232 investigations, namely copper, we anticipate any action to occur on an expedited basis, well before mid-2026.

In connection with its investigation, Commerce solicited written comments, data, and analyses from interested parties — importers, domestic manufacturers, developers, suppliers, and other stakeholders — by September 9.

This investigation accompanies ongoing Section 232 reviews of timber, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, trucks, aircraft, polysilicon, and unmanned aircraft systems; only copper has reached a conclusion to date, resulting in 50% tariffs effective August 1.

And the Fox Says…: While the comment process related to this investigation has closed, impacted companies along the wind energy value chain should assess exposure to potential duties or quantitative limits and develop mitigation strategies, including supply-chain diversification, contract contingencies, and pricing adjustments in anticipation of possible trade restrictions that could arrive as early as 2026.

Contributors: Mario A. Torrico and Antonio J. Rivera

On September 2, BIS issued a final rule materially easing restrictions under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) for Syria. The rule aligns BIS policy with the earlier sanctions relief issued by the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and creates important new opportunities for exporters and re-exporters, while also presenting familiar compliance pitfalls. We cover the new rule in more depth in our latest alert.

Most significantly, BIS created License Exception “Syria Peace and Prosperity” (SPP). SPP permits the export or reexport of all EAR99 items to Syria without a license, provided no other EAR (or OFAC) end-use or end-user restriction applies. Companies must therefore continue to screen transactions against the Part 744 end-use or end-user controls and against OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals List and BIS’ restricted party lists. Confirming EAR99 status through fresh self-classification or a CCATS ruling remains essential.

BIS also broadened several existing license exceptions to include exports to Syria. These include the License Exception Consumer Communications Devices (CCD), replacement parts (RPL), temporary exports (TMP), government shipments (GOV), technology/software use (TSU), and aircraft and vessel sojourns (AVS), although restrictions on sensitive end users, national-security-controlled aircraft parts, and General Prohibition 10 waivers still apply. Personal baggage (BAG) rules are unchanged. For an in-depth discussion of each license exception, please see our alert.

For items that still require a license, BIS adopted a “presumption of approval” for exports that demonstrably support Syria’s economic and civil infrastructure — telecommunications, water, power, aviation, and related civil services — without materially enhancing Syrian military capabilities or terrorism support. Other applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis under existing control policies. Well-crafted letters of explanation tying proposed shipments to Syrian civilian benefit will be critical.

And the Fox Says…: EAR99 goods and many consumer communication devices can now be exported to Syria, but rigorous product classification, end-user screening, and documentation are still required. Exporters contemplating transactions with Syria should update compliance procedures immediately and, where doubt remains, seek guidance before shipping. Finally, while Congress is expected to change Syria’s status, exporters should confirm with their banks that they are able to accept payments from Syria, given that Syria is still designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the US Department of State.

Contributors: Kay C. Georgi, Megan Barnhill, and Maya S. Cohen

On August 29, BIS announced that, effective December 31, it will revoke the Validated End-User (VEU) authorizations for three Korean-owned semiconductor fabrication plants based in China: Intel Semiconductor (Dalian) Ltd, Samsung China Semiconductor Co. Ltd, and SK hynix Semiconductor (China) Ltd. (SK hynix acquired Intel’s Dalian facility earlier this year.) Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.’s (TSMC) facility in Nanjing, China, will also lose its VEU status on the same date, though it was not named in the official notice.

VEU status enabled end users who had been vetted by BIS to receive exports, re-exports, and in-country transfers of US chipmaking equipment and technology at specified destinations without needing individual export licenses. This special program, expanded during the Biden Administration, allowed certain semiconductor companies to maintain their Chinese operations, despite broader US export restrictions aimed at semiconductor manufacturing operations in China.

With the revocations, these companies (and companies supplying to the affected fabs) must now apply for and obtain export licenses to continue supporting operations in China. BIS expects this change to generate about 1,000 additional license applications each year (which does not include license applications for TSMC’s facility). An accompanying press release states that licenses will only be approved to maintain existing capacity in the affected fabs, not for expanding or upgrading.

And the Fox Says…: The Trump Administration continues to tighten controls on semiconductor manufacturing equipment and technology exports to China. Companies exporting to facilities whose VEU status is being revoked should start preparing now.

Contributors: Megan Barnhill, Christopher Skinner, Derek Ha, Gamin Kim, and John Bingel

DHS released its 2025 Updates to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Strategy, signaling a renewed focus on preventing the importation of goods linked to forced labor in China. The updated strategy highlights new high-priority sectors for enforcement, including steel, copper, lithium, caustic soda, and red dates.

The 2025 Strategy highlights that since the UFLPA’s implementation in June 2022, CBP has examined over 16,700 shipments and denied entry to more than 10,000, spanning products such as apparel, automotive parts, chemicals, electronics, flooring, and solar panels. The UFLPA Entity List has also grown significantly, expanding from 20 to 144 entities.

A recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, co-authored by former DHS Consultant Laura Murphy, assesses the UFLPA’s impact as it marks its third anniversary. The report notes that enforcement has prompted changes in supply chains for sectors like cotton, polyvinyl chloride, and tomatoes, as well as in the solar, green technology, and automotive industries. These shifts reflect broader changes in corporate behavior among US importers as companies adapt to heightened scrutiny and compliance requirements. The report also includes recommendations to facilitate enforcement, such as adding entities to the UFLPA Entity List and using risk analysis and survey assessments.

Multinational companies should also be aware of increased enforcement efforts outside the United States. The Canada Border Services Agency has reportedly begun issuing notices to importers of goods considered at higher risk of being produced with forced labor, signaling a trend toward greater global enforcement.

And the Fox Says…: Companies importing products in newly designated high-priority sectors should continue to strengthen their supply chain due diligence processes and expect increased enforcement. Companies in the steel and copper industries in particular should ensure they have robust supply chain due diligence processes in place, as we expect that forced labor reviews may be combined with tariff-related actions. Multinational companies should monitor enforcement trends not only in the United States but also in other jurisdictions, including Canada, to ensure ongoing compliance with forced labor regulations.

Contributors: Lucas A. Rock, Angela M. Santos, and Fernando Ramírez