Swiss companies are seeking reimbursement from the United States for tariffs imposed during the Trump administration that have since been deemed unlawful by international trade bodies. The effort comes as the U.S. Department of Commerce begins processing refunds for certain duties collected under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which were applied to steel and aluminum imports between 2018, and 2021. Swiss firms, particularly in the machinery, watchmaking, and pharmaceutical sectors, say they paid millions in duties that violated World Trade Organization rules and are now pursuing restitution through official channels.
The movement gained momentum after the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in 2023 that the Trump-era tariffs on European steel and aluminum exceeded presidential authority under trade laws. That decision, later affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, prompted the Biden administration to initiate a review of collected duties. While the U.S. Has not admitted fault, it has agreed to repay amounts deemed excessive under the court’s findings, creating a pathway for foreign exporters to file claims.
According to data from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, over $2.3 billion in Section 232 duties were collected on steel and aluminum imports from the European Union between March 2018 and December 2021. Swiss exports to the U.S. In these categories totaled approximately CHF 1.2 billion during that period, based on figures from the Swiss Federal Customs Administration. Industry estimates suggest Swiss firms may be eligible for refunds ranging from CHF 80 million to CHF 150 million, depending on product mix and documentation quality.
Swissmem, the trade association representing Switzerland’s mechanical and electrical engineering industries, has been assisting members with the claims process. In a statement to World Today Journal, the group confirmed it has submitted preliminary documentation on behalf of over 40 companies seeking reimbursement. “We are helping our members navigate the complex filing requirements,” said a spokesperson for Swissmem. “Many firms kept detailed records, which will be critical in proving eligibility.”
The claims process requires exporters to provide proof of payment, detailed invoices showing the tariff amount, and evidence that the goods were subject to the disputed Section 232 duties. The U.S. Commerce Department has set up an online portal for submissions, with deadlines varying by product category and entry date. Initial filings must be made within two years of the duty payment, meaning some claims for 2018 imports are approaching their deadline.
Legal experts note that while the U.S. Government has agreed to repay certain amounts, it is not automatically issuing refunds. Companies must actively apply and demonstrate eligibility. “This is not a windfall,” said Andreas Keller, a trade lawyer based in Zurich who has advised several Swiss exporters. “It’s a restitution process governed by strict procedural rules. Missing a deadline or submitting incomplete paperwork can result in denial, even if the underlying duty was unlawful.”
The Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) has monitored the situation closely but has not taken a formal role in individual claims. In response to inquiries, SECO stated it “continues to engage with U.S. Authorities on trade matters affecting Swiss exporters” and encourages companies to retain all customs documentation. The agency has not issued specific guidance on the Section 232 refund process, leaving industry associations to fill the gap.
Watchmakers, a particularly visible sector in U.S.-Swiss trade, have also been affected. Switzerland exported CHF 2.1 billion worth of watches to the United States in 2022, according to the Swiss Watch Industry Federation. While watches were not directly subject to the steel and aluminum tariffs, some components — such as cases and bracelets — were. Industry sources say several major brands are reviewing their supply chains to determine if they paid duties on eligible parts.
Pharmaceutical firms, another cornerstone of Swiss exports, may also qualify if they used steel or aluminum in manufacturing equipment or packaging that was imported and subjected to the duties. Novartis and Roche, the country’s two largest pharmaceutical companies, have not publicly commented on potential claims, but industry analysts note that both maintain extensive U.S. Operations and import significant industrial inputs.
The broader implications extend beyond individual reimbursements. Trade analysts say the episode underscores the risks of unilateral trade actions and the importance of multilateral dispute resolution mechanisms. “Even when a country eventually corrects course, the process of recovering funds is lengthy and uncertain,” said Lydia Perovic, a senior fellow at the German Council on Foreign Relations. “It highlights why businesses need to diversify markets and maintain rigorous trade compliance systems.”
As of early April 2025, the U.S. Commerce Department has processed approximately $420 million in Section 232 refund requests globally, with the majority going to Canadian and European exporters. No official breakdown by country has been released, but Swiss industry sources believe their share is growing as more firms complete documentation. The agency states it is reviewing claims on a rolling basis and aims to conclude most submissions within 18 months of receipt.
For Swiss companies considering a claim, experts recommend consulting trade attorneys or customs specialists familiar with U.S. Administrative procedures. The U.S. Court of International Trade’s website provides access to the relevant rulings, while the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security publishes updates on the refund process. Companies are advised to act promptly, as delays could jeopardize eligibility under statutory time limits.
The effort to recover these duties reflects a broader trend of countries using legal and administrative channels to address trade disputes rather than retaliatory measures. While politically sensitive, the approach aims to uphold rules-based trade principles. For Swiss exporters, the outcome could provide not only financial relief but also reinforcement of confidence in international legal frameworks.
Those seeking the latest updates on the Section 232 refund process should monitor the U.S. Department of Commerce’s official announcements page, where notices about deadlines and procedural changes are published. The next key date is the anticipated completion of the initial review cycle in late 2025, after which the agency will announce whether additional rounds will be opened.
We invite readers to share their experiences or insights on international trade claims in the comments below. If you found this article informative, please consider sharing it with colleagues or networks interested in global trade policy.