Three compliance clocks are running simultaneously for Indiana manufacturers right now — an IEEPA tariff refund window closing entry by entry, a grid reliability fight at Rockport with a potential billion-dollar scrubber liability attached, and an AI hiring law taking effect in 60 days with direct employer liability. Here is what you need before your next staff meeting.

IEEPA Tariff Refund Deadline: Up to $175 Billion Available — But the Clock Is Closing Per Entry

The Supreme Court struck down IEEPA tariffs 6-3 on February 20, and all IEEPA duties terminated February 24. The refund is real — CBP's CAPE system launched Phase 1 in April and Phase 2 in June, with industry estimates placing the refund pool at up to $175 billion. A federal judge ordered reliquidation on July 17 after the government argued it couldn't refund finally-liquidated entries; the government immediately appealed, so this remains live litigation.

The window is rolling: 80 days per entry, and those clocks are expiring now. Most lean customs teams have not been auditing this systematically.

The IEEPA tariff refund deadline risk is highest for manufacturers who shifted sourcing to Vietnam or Southeast Asia during the 2025 tariff surge — those same origins may now be inside the new 12.5 percent Section 301 duty net that took effect July 24. The administration bridged from IEEPA to Section 122 authority — never previously invoked — and then to new Section 301 investigations, landing a two-tier 10 and 12.5 percent duty regime with zero congressional votes. The sunk-cost restructuring made to escape one regime may have landed you inside the next one.

The Manufacturers Alliance data reframes this for Indiana fabricators: the "significant negative impact" score for fabricated metal dropped from 27 percent to 6 percent as IEEPA fell — but primary metal producers went from zero to 20 percent as cheaper foreign supply re-entered. Buyers and sellers of steel and aluminum are now on opposite sides of this repricing.

Action: Get your customs team auditing IEEPA duty entries from February 4, 2025 through February 24, 2026. Identify which entries are still inside the 80-day CAPE protest window and quantify what is recoverable before those clocks run out.

Rockport Coal Fight: AG Rokita's Legal Win Could Cost I&M Ratepayers More Than the Retirement It Prevents

AG Rokita filed July 31 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio to block retirement of one coal unit at the 1,750-megawatt Rockport plant — owned by I&M and AEP Enterprises in Spencer County — arguing circumstances have changed and the court should modify the 2007 consent decree. The court has not approved the motion. I&M issued a statement of appreciation without endorsing Rokita's position, and simultaneously has a 1,520-megawatt natural gas replacement filed with the IURC for the same site by 2030.

Here is the detail that did not make the press conference: the 2019 modification to the consent decree explicitly allowed AEP to forgo up to $1 billion in scrubber spending in exchange for committing to the 2028 retirement. If the court modifies the decree without carving out that scrubber waiver, AEP could face renewed obligations on that spending. A court could structure any modification to extend the retirement date without reinstating the scrubber schedule — but that outcome is not guaranteed, and no one at Rokita's press conference mentioned the possibility. Ratepayers need to pressure-test this scenario before treating the litigation as an unambiguous win.

The NIPSCO/Schahfer situation illustrates what forced plant extensions can cost in practice. Following the DOE emergency order requiring NIPSCO to extend Schahfer past its planned retirement, the subsequent FERC cost-allocation proceedings spread repair costs across multiple MISO states, and the plant remained substantially offline through much of 2026 despite those orders. The pattern: a forced extension that produced costs without reliable capacity.

One additional fact worth naming — Rockport runs on Powder River Basin coal from Wyoming, not Indiana coal. The local-economy argument at Rokita's press conference does not directly benefit Indiana's coal mining industry.

Action: If I&M serves your facilities, model both ratepayer cost scenarios — Rokita wins with scrubber obligation reinstated, and the planned 2028 retirement proceeds — before the August 10 memorandum filing date. Do not wait for the court to decide before starting that analysis.

Patrick-LCI Merger: $8.1 Billion Combined Entity Puts Elkhart County Supplier Consolidation on the Clock

Patrick Industries reported Q2 2026 net sales of $1.04 billion — essentially flat year-over-year — with RV revenue down 15 percent as industrywide wholesale shipments dropped roughly 15,300 units. Marine revenue surged 22 percent and powersports jumped 28 percent, cushioning the RV decline.

The strategic headline is the June 30 all-stock merger agreement with fellow Elkhart-based LCI Industries (Lippert). LCI shareholders receive 1.2440 Patrick shares each, producing a combined entity with roughly $8.1 billion in pro forma revenue and more than $150 million in targeted run-rate cost synergies within three years. CEO Andy Nemeth stays in charge. Headquarters stays in Elkhart. Close is expected in the first half of 2027.

Year-to-date operating cash flow fell to $69 million from $189 million a year earlier, with merger-related expenses compounding the RV volume weakness. Those deal costs accelerate materially through the proxy filing, shareholder vote, and integration planning phases — meaning real capital allocation pressure builds before a single synergy dollar is realized.

Patrick's growth is concentrated in electrical solutions content: the 22 percent marine revenue surge was driven by its December 2025 acquisitions of QES in Syracuse, Indiana — wire harnesses and electrical systems — and Egis Group in Washington — power distribution modules. That is the same playbook Tier 1 auto suppliers used to build EV-adjacent capability during ICE downturns.

Programs targeting $150 million in synergies typically include some facilities consolidation. Patrick has not disclosed which sites are candidates, and the Elkhart HQ commitment suggests corporate-level continuity — but procurement and G&A synergies alone do not add up to $150 million. Manufacturing footprint decisions are on the table even if they have not been announced.

Action: If you are in Elkhart County's supplier network, map your exposure in supplier relationships, labor recruiting pools, and component categories now — before H1 2027 consolidation decisions are made without your input.

Connecticut CART Act: AI Hiring Liability Falls on the Employer, Not Just the Vendor — Effective October 1

Connecticut's CART Act takes effect October 1, 2026. If your multi-shift hiring operation uses any AI-assisted tool that produces a score, rank, or recommendation influencing a hiring decision, and you are pulling from Connecticut talent pools or operating Connecticut facilities, the employer-client carries the liability — not just the vendor. Require your vendors to provide bias-audit logs and documentation before October 1.

Questions for Your Morning Huddle

Q: What is the IEEPA tariff refund deadline and how do Indiana manufacturers file for it?

A: CBP's CAPE process allows manufacturers to protest IEEPA duties paid between February 4, 2025 and February 24, 2026, on an 80-day per-entry rolling window. To file, your customs team needs to identify which entries are still inside that window, quantify the duties paid, and submit protests through the CAPE system before those individual deadlines expire — entries where the window has already closed are no longer eligible.

Q: What is the scrubber liability risk if AG Rokita wins the Rockport coal plant case?

A: The 2019 modification to the original 2007 consent decree allowed AEP to forgo up to $1 billion in scrubber spending at Rockport in exchange for committing to a 2028 retirement. If a court modifies the decree to extend the retirement date without explicitly preserving that waiver, AEP could face renewed scrubber obligations — costs that would likely flow to I&M ratepayers through the rate base. A court could structure the modification to avoid this outcome, but that is not guaranteed, and I&M-served manufacturers should model this scenario before the August 10 filing date.

Q: What does the Patrick-LCI merger mean for Elkhart County suppliers?

A: Patrick Industries and LCI Industries are merging into an $8.1 billion combined entity targeting more than $150 million in run-rate synergies within three years — synergy targets of that size typically require some facilities consolidation, not just procurement and back-office savings. Patrick has not disclosed which sites are candidates, but Elkhart County suppliers should map their exposure across component categories, procurement relationships, and shared labor pools now, before consolidation decisions are finalized ahead of the expected H1 2027 close.

Q: Does the Connecticut CART Act apply to Indiana manufacturers?

A: Yes, if your hiring operation pulls from Connecticut talent pools or you operate facilities in Connecticut. The CART Act, effective October 1, 2026, places liability for AI hiring tool bias directly on the employer-client — not just the software vendor — for Connecticut-based applicants. Indiana multi-shift operations using AI-assisted screening, scoring, or ranking tools need to audit those platforms and require bias-audit documentation from vendors before the effective date.