The Loadstar Explainers: CBP refund process; USTR Section 301 investigation; Jones Act waiver plan 

© Nazeerdotahmad

There is a lot of coming out of the US this week that could have significant implications for logistics players and shippers. From the CBP tariff refund system, to a Section 301 investigation which could lead to tariffs; and a plan to waive the Jones Act in a bid to cut fuel prices, The Loadstar explains it all. 

Explainer: CBP building system to process potential tariff refunds 

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is developing a new system to process refunds of certain duties imposed under emergency tariff powers. 

The functionality, being added to CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) platform, will allow importers and brokers to submit refund claims linked to duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).  

The system – called Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) – will enable filers to upload lists of affected entry summaries through the ACE portal. The platform will validate the entries, remove the relevant tariff codes and recalculate duties before refunds are issued electronically.  

CBP said development was ongoing: the claim portal is about 70% complete, the mass-processing engine 40%, the review and liquidation module 80%, and the refund-processing component 60% complete.  

Implications 

The work suggests CBP is preparing for potentially significant refund claims, although some complex cases – such as those involving anti-dumping or countervailing duties – may not be handled in the initial phase. 

Explainer: US launches global manufacturing probe that could pave the way for tariffs 

The US has launched a sweeping trade investigation that could ultimately lead to new tariffs on a wide range of imported manufactured goods. 

The probe, announced by the office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), examines whether a group of major economies are artificially supporting manufacturing overcapacity in ways that harm US industry. The investigation has been opened under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the same legal authority used to impose tariffs on Chinese goods during the US–China trade war. 

What is being investigated 

USTR says some economies have developed manufacturing capacity far beyond domestic or global demand, often supported by government policies such as subsidies, cheap credit, state-owned enterprises or export incentives. 

The investigation will focus on China, the EU, Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan, and India. 

According to the notice, this “structural excess capacity” can lead to: 

• overproduction; 

• large or persistent trade surpluses; 

• unused industrial capacity; 

• pressure on producers in other countries. 

The US argues that when governments sustain production beyond market demand, surplus goods are often exported – particularly to the US – which can displace domestic manufacturing. 

Why the US is doing this 

The investigation reflects growing concern in Washington that global manufacturing imbalances are undermining US industry and complicating efforts to rebuild domestic supply chains. 

Officials point to sectors such as steel, autos, batteries, semiconductors, chemicals, and solar equipment, where global investment has surged even as demand growth has slowed. 

The USTR says this dynamic can discourage investment in US factories and contribute to the country’s long-running manufacturing trade deficit. 

What happens next 

The investigation has begun a formal process that includes: 

• public comments and hearings; 

• consultations with the governments under investigation; 

• a determination on whether their policies are “unreasonable or discriminatory” under US trade law. 

If the USTR concludes that they are harming US commerce, the US could respond with tariffs or other trade measures. 

Why it matters 

The probe could open the door to new trade restrictions across a wide range of manufacturing sectors – and across a wide range of strategic allies. 

Marco Forgione, director general of the Institute of Export & International Trade, told The Loadstar News in Brief podcast that many companies were continuing to trade with the US despite tariffs, because the market remained too important to ignore. 

“Most of the global supply chain into the US will be able to adapt and tolerate tariffs for the benefits of having access to the US market,” he said. 

He confirmed that investigations such as those launched under Section 301 could ultimately be used to justify additional tariffs on specific sectors or countries, adding to uncertainty in global supply chains. 

Explainer: Why the US may waive the Jones Act – and why it is controversial 

The White House is considering temporarily waiving the Jones Act, a century-old US maritime law that protects domestic shipping, in an effort to ease pressure on fuel prices and keep energy supplies moving during a period of geopolitical tension. 

Officials said the administration could grant a 30-day waiver that would allow foreign ships to move fuel and other goods between US ports – something normally prohibited under the law. 

Why the waive  

The White House says it is considering a temporary waiver “in the interest of national defence”, to ensure energy products and agricultural goods can move freely to US ports. 

The measure comes amid rising fuel prices and supply disruptions linked to the conflict involving Iran, which has unsettled global energy markets. 

Because there are relatively few US-flagged tankers available, the Jones Act can limit the number of vessels able to move oil or refined fuel between US ports. Allowing foreign ships to operate domestically could temporarily increase supply capacity. 

Why the proposal is controversial 

US maritime labour unions strongly oppose the idea, arguing that waiving the law would undermine American shipping jobs and national security. 

In a letter to President Trump, several maritime unions said Jones Act waivers should be used only in rare emergency situations when US-flag vessels are unavailable. 

They also argue that waiving the law would do little to reduce gasoline prices, because the main driver of fuel costs is global crude oil prices rather than domestic shipping costs. 

Why it matters 

A waiver would highlight the ongoing tension between economic pressures and US industrial policy. 

While policymakers sometimes suspend the law to respond to natural disasters or supply shocks, supporters say the Jones Act remains essential to maintaining US maritime capacity, shipbuilding, and a domestic industrial base tied to national security. 

Critics, however, argue that the restrictions raise transport costs and limit flexibility in US coastal shipping.