CF-28 Audits Spiking in 2026: Why CBP Is Asking More Questions and How to Respond

Why are CF-28 Requests for Information spiking in 2026?

CBP CF-28 issuance has noticeably increased since September 2025 and accelerated through 2026. Three drivers explain most of the increase: post-IEEPA refund verification (CBP is verifying entries that received CAPE refunds against the underlying entry data), Section 232 derivative article enforcement (new derivative coverage and country-of-melt rules require detailed verification), and Section 301 exclusion verification (CBP is verifying that products claimed under exclusion grants actually qualify for the specific exclusion descriptions). The combination has produced the most active CF-28 environment importers have seen in recent years.

How should importers respond to a CF-28 differently in 2026?

The standard CF-28 response framework still applies (read carefully, gather supporting documentation, respond within the deadline, keep the response focused on the specific question), but three 2026-specific patterns matter. Treat IEEPA refund verification CF-28s as audit triggers (CBP is comparing CAPE refund claims against entry data, and discrepancies can trigger expanded enforcement). Treat Section 232 derivative CF-28s as country-of-melt deep dives (the new tiered structure requires documentation that may not have been required in earlier filings). Treat Section 301 exclusion CF-28s as product-description verification (the exclusion grant requires matching the exclusion description, not just the HTSUS line).

---

TL;DR: CBP CF-28 Request for Information issuance has noticeably increased since September 2025 and continued through 2026. The increase reflects three drivers specific to the current trade environment: IEEPA refund verification (CBP comparing CAPE refund claims against entry data), Section 232 derivative article enforcement (new tiered structure and country-of-melt rules requiring documentation), and Section 301 exclusion verification (CBP confirming products claimed under exclusion grants match the exclusion descriptions). For importers, this means CF-28 response work has higher stakes than in prior years because each CF-28 may be a leading indicator of broader enforcement on the same product, supplier, or HTSUS pattern. The standard response framework (read, gather, respond within deadline, focus on the question) still applies, but the documentation depth and audit-defense posture needs to be calibrated for the 2026 environment. CBP completed 417 audits and collected $117.67 million in audit-related revenue in FY 2025, with the FY 2026 trend pointing higher. GingerControl's compliance audit service supports CF-28 response across IEEPA, Section 232, Section 301, and traditional classification audits.

Last updated: May 2026

---

What CF-28 Actually Is and Why Issuance Has Spiked

CBP Form 28 (Request for Information) is the formal CBP request asking an importer to provide additional information about specific entry filings. The CF-28 is typically the first formal step in a CBP review of a specific entry or pattern of entries. The CF-28 is not yet a formal audit or penalty notice, but it is the leading indicator that CBP is reviewing the importer's filings for accuracy or compliance.

CF-28 issuance has noticeably increased since September 2025 according to trade law and customs broker community reports. The increase appears driven by three converging trends specific to the 2026 trade environment:

1. IEEPA refund verification. The Learning Resources v. Trump SCOTUS ruling in February 2026 and the CIT order in March 2026 triggered massive IEEPA refund processing through CAPE. CBP is verifying that the entries claimed for refund actually match the entry data filed during the IEEPA period. Discrepancies (whether in entry data or in CAPE Declaration data) are surfacing through CF-28 issuance.

2. Section 232 derivative article enforcement. The April 2, 2026 Section 232 tiered restructuring added new derivative article coverage, country-of-melt requirements for steel and aluminum, and a 95% U.S.-content threshold for the 10% reduced rate. CBP is verifying that derivative article filings reflect the correct tier and country-of-melt determination.

3. Section 301 exclusion verification. The USTR exclusion extension through November 9, 2026 keeps 178 exclusions active. CBP is verifying that products claimed under HTSUS 9903.88.69 or 9903.88.70 actually match the specific exclusion descriptions, not just the 10-digit HTSUS line.

The combined effect is the most active CF-28 environment most importers have seen in recent years.

Three CF-28 Patterns Specific to 2026

Pattern 1: IEEPA Refund Verification CF-28

These CF-28s typically reference specific entries that were claimed in a CAPE Declaration. The request asks for supporting documentation that confirms the IEEPA duty was actually paid on the cited entries.

Common requests:

• Entry summary (CBP Form 7501 or equivalent) showing the IEEPA Chapter 99 line (9903.01 or 9903.02)
• Proof of duty payment (ACH confirmation, bond posting, or other payment record)
• Reconciliation between original entry filing and CAPE Declaration data

Response approach: Pull the entry summary documents and payment records for the cited entries. Verify the IEEPA duty was correctly identified and paid. Respond with documentation showing the link between entry, payment, and CAPE Declaration.

Audit signal: Discrepancies between entry data and CAPE Declaration can trigger CAPE refund reversal and broader review of the importer's CAPE filings. Treat IEEPA refund verification CF-28s as audit triggers, not routine information requests.

Pattern 2: Section 232 Derivative Article CF-28

These CF-28s typically reference entries containing steel, aluminum, or copper derivative articles and ask for documentation supporting the tier classification and country-of-melt determination.

Common requests:

• Bill of materials showing metal content percentage
• Mill certifications (steel) or smelter certifications (aluminum/copper) tracing metal to country of melt
• Documentation supporting any reduced-rate claim (15% transitional tier, 10% U.S.-content tier)

Response approach: Pull the bill of materials and metal supply chain documentation. For products claiming the 10% reduced rate under the 95% U.S.-content threshold, document the metal traceability comprehensively. For products in the 25% derivative tier, document the metal content percentage (>15%).

Audit signal: Section 232 derivative CF-28s may indicate CBP is reviewing the importer's broader derivative article filings. Treat the response as foundational documentation that may need to support subsequent verification.

Pattern 3: Section 301 Exclusion Verification CF-28

These CF-28s typically reference entries filed under HTSUS 9903.88.69 or 9903.88.70 (exclusion lines) and ask for documentation that the products actually qualify for the specific exclusion description.

Common requests:

• Product specifications matching the exclusion description language
• Commercial invoices or product literature confirming product characteristics
• Photographs or technical drawings supporting the product description

Response approach: Pull the USTR exclusion description for the specific exclusion claimed. Pull the importer's product specifications. Demonstrate that the product matches the exclusion description, not just the 10-digit HTSUS line. Vague or generic product descriptions in the original filing may not be sufficient for verification; supplement with detailed product specifications.

Audit signal: Section 301 exclusion CF-28s may indicate CBP is reviewing exclusion claims more broadly. A product that does not match the exclusion description loses the exclusion and reverts to Section 301 tariff (typically 25%).

The CF-28 Response Framework

The standard response framework still applies in 2026:

1. Read the CF-28 carefully. Identify the specific entries cited, the specific questions asked, and the response deadline. CF-28 responses typically have a 30-day deadline.

2. Gather supporting documentation. Pull entry summaries, commercial invoices, product specifications, bills of materials, payment records, mill or smelter certifications, and any other documentation relevant to the specific questions.

3. Coordinate internally. CF-28 responses typically involve multiple internal stakeholders: trade compliance, customs broker, supplier coordination, finance (for payment records), engineering or procurement (for product specifications).

4. Respond within the deadline. A response submitted late or not at all typically escalates the matter to CF-29 (Notice of Action) with the proposed CBP action.

5. Keep the response focused. Answer the specific questions asked. Volunteering extensive information beyond what was requested can broaden the scope of CBP's review.

6. Document the response. Internal documentation of what was provided, when, and to whom is important for follow-up tracking and audit defense.

7. Track follow-up. A favorable CF-28 response typically ends the matter. An unfavorable response may trigger CF-29 (proposed action) or further information requests.

When a CF-28 Becomes a Bigger Problem

Three signals that a CF-28 may be the beginning of a broader enforcement matter:

Signal 1: Multiple CF-28s on similar entries. CBP issuing multiple CF-28s on similar product, supplier, or HTSUS patterns suggests CBP is reviewing a broader pattern, not just specific entries.

Signal 2: CF-29 (Notice of Action) follows the CF-28. A CF-29 indicates CBP is proposing specific action (typically reclassification or duty adjustment) based on the CF-28 review. CF-29 responses have different procedural requirements than CF-28.

Signal 3: Focused Assessment notification. If CBP escalates from CF-28 to Focused Assessment, the scope expands significantly and the audit defense work becomes more complex.

For importers seeing multiple CF-28s, CF-29 follow-up, or Focused Assessment escalation, the response work typically benefits from specialized compliance audit support.

What 2026 Trade Compliance Programs Need to Do Differently

The CF-28 spike reflects the broader enforcement environment. Compliance programs that worked in 2023-2024 may not be sufficient for 2026:

Stronger entry-level documentation. CF-28 verification requests in 2026 require deeper documentation than CBP typically asked for in prior years. Entry-level documentation should support classification, valuation, country of origin, and any preferential treatment claims with documents available at the entry level, not just in higher-level files.

Audit-ready CAPE filings. IEEPA refund verification CF-28s focus on the link between entry data and CAPE Declaration data. Compliance programs should treat CAPE Declarations as audit-ready documents from the time of filing, with reconciliation documentation immediately available.

Section 232 country-of-melt tracking. For steel, aluminum, and copper imports, country-of-melt tracking should be in place from the supplier level forward. Mill and smelter certifications should be requested and retained per shipment.

Section 301 exclusion product-description verification. For products claimed under exclusion grants, internal documentation should affirmatively support that the product matches the exclusion description, not just the HTSUS line.

Compliance Radar for policy monitoring. Compliance Radar delivers personalized alerts matched to the importer's catalog for Section 301, Section 232, Section 122, and other policy changes that affect classification and duty calculation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is CF-28 issuance actually increasing in 2026?

Yes. Trade law and customs broker community reports indicate noticeable increase since September 2025, continuing through 2026. Specific statistical data from CBP is limited publicly, but the practitioner community consistently reports higher CF-28 volume than in prior years.

What is the deadline for responding to a CF-28?

CF-28 responses typically have a 30-day deadline. The specific deadline appears on the CF-28 itself. A response submitted late or not at all typically escalates the matter to CF-29.

Should I respond to a CF-28 myself or through my customs broker?

It depends on the complexity of the question and the importer's internal capability. Simple verification CF-28s can typically be handled internally with broker coordination. Complex CF-28s (especially Section 232 derivative, Section 301 exclusion, or IEEPA refund verification) often benefit from specialized compliance support.

What happens if I miss the CF-28 deadline?

A missed deadline typically results in CBP issuing CF-29 (Notice of Action) with a proposed action (typically reclassification or duty adjustment). The CF-29 then has its own procedural requirements and response deadline.

Can I dispute the CF-28 itself?

CF-28 is a request for information, not a final CBP action. You typically respond to the CF-28 by providing the requested information (or explaining why you cannot). Disputes about CBP's authority to request specific information are uncommon and typically not productive at the CF-28 stage.

Does a CF-28 mean CBP suspects fraud?

No. CF-28 is a routine information request that CBP uses for many reasons, including routine verification, pattern analysis, post-CAPE reconciliation, and Section 232/301 verification. Most CF-28s are not fraud investigations. However, CF-28s can sometimes be the beginning of broader review that eventually surfaces compliance issues.

How does GingerControl support CF-28 response?

GingerControl's compliance audit service supports CF-28 response across IEEPA refund verification, Section 232 derivative articles, Section 301 exclusion verification, and traditional classification audits. The team supports documentation gathering, response drafting, and follow-up coordination with CBP.

How should I prepare for the next CF-28 even if I have not received one?

Three preparation steps: improve entry-level documentation (especially for Section 232 derivative, Section 301 exclusion, and CAPE refund entries), build CAPE filing audit trails (so IEEPA refund verification CF-28s can be responded to quickly), and establish a CF-28 response process internally (so when a CF-28 arrives the response work can begin immediately rather than figuring out the process under deadline pressure).

---

Get Your CF-28 Response Ready

If you have received a CF-28 or anticipate receiving one based on the 2026 environment, the right preparation and response work significantly affects the outcome. CF-28 responses that are timely, focused, and well-documented typically end the matter. Responses that miss deadlines, are incomplete, or expose broader issues can escalate to CF-29 or Focused Assessment.

Get a no-cost CF-28 readiness review from GingerControl. The review evaluates your current CF-28 response capability, identifies the documentation gaps that would slow a future response, and supports active CF-28 response when needed.

GingerControl is not just a tool. We work with importers, customs brokers, and trade compliance counsel on CF-28 and CF-29 response, Focused Assessment defense, IEEPA refund verification, Section 232 derivative documentation, and Section 301 exclusion verification. Talk to our team about your CF-28 situation.

---

References

[REF 1] U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP Form 28 Request for Information Data cited: CF-28 framework and response process Source: CBP Form 28

[REF 2] Sobel Network Shipping, Importers Face Heightened Scrutiny as CBP Issues More CF-28 Requests Data cited: Noticeable increase in CF-28 issuance since September 2025 Source: Sobel Network CF-28 Increase Published: 2025-2026

[REF 3] Livingston International, CBP Increases Requests for Information from Importers Data cited: CBP CF-28 issuance trend in 2026 Source: Livingston International CF-28 Trend Published: 2026

[REF 4] CBP Quick Response Audits, FY 2025 Audit Statistics Data cited: 417 audits completed, $117.67 million in audit-related revenue Source: CBP Quick Response Audits Published: 2025

[REF 5] U.S. Customs and Border Protection, IEEPA Duty Refunds Data cited: CAPE framework underlying IEEPA verification CF-28s Source: CBP IEEPA Duty Refunds

[REF 6] U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Section 232 Tariffs Data cited: April 2 2026 tiered restructuring affecting derivative verification Source: CBP Section 232

[REF 7] Federal Register, Section 301 Product Exclusion Extensions Data cited: USTR exclusion extension through November 9, 2026 Source: Federal Register Notice 2025-21671 Published: December 1, 2025

[REF 8] CBP Informed Compliance Publication, Reasonable Care Data cited: Reasonable care standard underlying CF-28 verification Source: CBP Reasonable Care Publication Published: September 2017