After July 24: Section 122 Sunsets, the Section 301 Gap, and the Protest Clock That's Already Running

Thirteen days. On July 24, the 10% Section 122 surcharge disappears by operation of law, and the rate on most non-Chinese imports drops immediately. Most importers know this part. What fewer have mapped out: USTR's Section 301 replacement likely won't be effective until mid-August, which may open a gap of several weeks. And refunds for duties paid since February 24 don't resolve on July 24. They're tied to a Federal Circuit appeal still in the briefing stage, with a protest clock already running on any entries that have already liquidated.

This is where things stand, two weeks out.

The Sunset Is Automatic

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. § 2132) has a hard 150-day cap. Congress wrote it that way deliberately. Section 122 was meant as a narrow emergency tool, not a permanent tariff authority. There's no renewal mechanism, no executive extension, no proclamation that can push the clock.

Proclamation 11012, published at 91 Fed. Reg. Doc. 2026-03824, imposed the 10% surcharge effective February 24, 2026. 150 days from February 24 is July 24. At 12:01 AM EDT on July 24, CBP stops collecting. No Federal Register notice required, no presidential action. The statute does it.

For background on how Section 122 became the IEEPA replacement after the Supreme Court's February ruling and what the Federal Circuit stay means, see the earlier post covering the mechanics through June. This post covers what's changed since then.

What Replaces Section 122, and When

The administration's plan has always been to replace Section 122 with Section 301 tariffs. On June 2, USTR issued affirmative determinations in 60 Section 301 investigations, proposing 10% duties on economies with adequate forced-labor prohibitions and 12.5% on the remaining 46, including China, Vietnam, India, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil. The proposed structure by country was covered when the investigations were announced.

Where things stand today: no final rule has been published. The public hearing ran July 7–9. Post-hearing rebuttal comments close around July 14. USTR's internal target for completing the determinations is roughly July 20, based on multiple trade-law analyses tracking the process.

The timing problem. Under 19 U.S.C. § 2411, once USTR issues a final Section 301 determination, the action must be implemented within 30 days. What "within 30 days" means in practice is disputed. Some trade lawyers read it as an outer deadline: USTR can make the tariffs effective on the date of publication if it chooses. Others read it as requiring a 30-day post-publication window before collection begins. USTR hasn't said publicly which interpretation it's using here.

If USTR publishes a final rule on July 20 and makes the tariffs effective immediately, the gap closes to around four days or less. If the 30-day interpretation applies, a July 20 publication pushes the effective date to August 19. The right answer depends on a policy decision that hasn't been announced.

Don't plan for the optimistic scenario without a Federal Register notice confirming it.

What continues regardless. The original Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods (Lists 1–4A, 7.5%–25% under the China unfair-trade investigations) are a separate legal action entirely and are not affected. Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum continue. AD/CVD cash deposits continue. What disappears July 24 is specifically the 10% blanket surcharge under Proclamation 11012.

Rate Stack Scenarios

What the full duty picture looks like across the transition, by sourcing origin:

China — Section 301 List 3, 25% (e.g., industrial machinery, Chapter 84):

Through July 23: base rate + 25% Section 301 + 10% Section 122
July 24 to Section 301 effective date: base rate + 25% Section 301
After Section 301 forced-labor takes effect: base rate + 25% + 12.5% additional Section 301

Vietnam (no existing Section 301, e.g., furniture, Chapter 94):

Through July 23: base rate (0%–6.5%) + 10% Section 122
During any gap: base rate only
After Section 301 forced-labor: base rate + 12.5%

Mexico, non-USMCA goods:

Through July 23: base rate + 10% Section 122
During any gap: base rate only
After Section 301 forced-labor: base rate + 10% (Mexico is in the 10% tier with an existing forced-labor import prohibition)

USMCA-qualifying goods from Canada and Mexico carry the free rate on qualifying content, unaffected by Section 122 or the proposed Section 301 action.

The landed cost calculator lets you model each scenario with your actual shipment values. The HTS code lookup shows current Section 301 and additional duty flags by code and origin.

Refunds: The Federal Circuit and the Protest Clock

The sunset removes the duty prospectively. It doesn't adjudicate the legality of what was collected since February 24. Refunds require a separate legal basis.

That basis is the Court of International Trade's May 7, 2026 ruling in State of Oregon v. Trump, CIT No. 1:26-cv-01472. A 2-1 majority held that Proclamation 11012 exceeded presidential authority under § 2132. The majority's reasoning: the statute requires the President to identify a balance-of-payments deficit using the metrics Congress contemplated in 1974 (basic balance, liquidity, or official settlements), and the proclamation instead cited a trade deficit and negative net international investment position, which the majority held are legally distinct triggers.

The Federal Circuit stayed that ruling on June 11 (docket No. 26-1804). CBP has continued collecting from everyone, including the three plaintiffs who won at the CIT. The government's opening brief in the appeal was extended to July 21. Full briefing won't complete until September at the earliest; a merits decision is months away, at minimum.

Preserving refund rights through protests. Under 19 U.S.C. § 1514, a customs protest must be filed within 180 days of the date of liquidation of the entry. Not from entry date, not from when the duty was paid. From liquidation.

For standard entries filed on or after February 24, the ordinary 314-day liquidation window under 19 U.S.C. § 1504 means liquidation in early 2027. An entry filed February 24 liquidates around January 3, 2027; the protest window closes July 2, 2027. Entries filed in March push the windows further out.

Most importers aren't in the danger zone yet. But some entries have already liquidated: accelerated liquidations, entries CBP formally decided early as part of an audit or drawback proceeding, or formal entries with short liquidation cycles. For those, the 180-day clock is running now.

The practical step: pull your Section 122 entries from ACE, identify any that have already liquidated, and check whether you're within 180 days. For the bulk of entries that haven't liquidated yet, build a tracking system. You want calendar alerts tied to each entry's liquidation date, and a template protest ready to file. The protest itself doesn't require a detailed brief. Citing the CIT decision and the pending Federal Circuit appeal as grounds is sufficient to preserve your rights.

Don't wait for a Federal Circuit ruling before filing. If the appeal is still pending when your entry liquidates, file the protest anyway. If you miss the window, liquidation becomes final under 19 U.S.C. § 1514(a), and no Federal Circuit win later reopens it.

An alternative: request suspension of liquidation. Under 19 CFR § 159.12, CBP can suspend liquidation of entries where a pending court case may affect the applicable rate. CBP has used this authority in past large-scale tariff litigation, which avoided the need for importers to protest thousands of entries individually. Whether CBP extends it here, on a systematic basis or only on case-by-case request, hasn't been announced. Requesting suspension is worth doing, but treating it as a substitute for protests is a risk. If CBP declines or doesn't act, your entries are liquidating in the background.

Key Takeaways

Section 122's 10% surcharge expires by statute at 12:01 AM EDT July 24. No action can extend it. CBP stops collecting automatically.
As of July 11, no final Section 301 rule has been published. Post-hearing rebuttals close around July 14; USTR's target is around July 20 for finalization. Whether the tariffs take effect on publication day or after a 30-day delay is unresolved — a gap of varying length is a real possibility.
During any gap, the original Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods and Section 232 steel/aluminum duties continue. The 10% blanket surcharge does not.
Refunds for Section 122 duties paid since February 24 depend on the Federal Circuit's ruling in Oregon v. Trump, No. 26-1804 — not on the July 24 sunset date. The government's brief is due July 21; a decision is months out.
Preserve refund rights by filing protests within 180 days of liquidation of each affected entry under 19 U.S.C. § 1514. Most entries haven't liquidated yet, but any that have are running on the clock. Pull your ACE data now to confirm.
As an alternative to entry-by-entry protests, request suspension of liquidation under 19 CFR § 159.12, which would pause the clock pending the Federal Circuit's resolution. Don't treat this as a replacement for protests — CBP may not act, and a missed protest deadline is permanent.

The duty rate on your entries changes July 24 and again when Section 301 takes effect. TariffClassify shows the full current rate stack by HTS code and country of origin, and the tariff rate alerts watchlist will notify you automatically when any layer moves. Check your current duty stack.