The supreme irony of the $130 billion federal tariff refund pool is that the consumers demanding a share of it are fundamentally misunderstanding market mechanics. Following the Supreme Court's invalidation of executive tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a massive pool of capital is now slated for return to the importers of record. Unsurprisingly, downstream purchasers and class-action litigators have initiated lawsuits claiming this windfall belongs to the retail consumer. This represents a catastrophic macroeconomic error. The redistribution of these funds to individual consumers would result in the atomisation of capital, destroying the very liquidity required to fund the domestic industrial reshoring supercycle. Fortunately for institutional capital, the judicial mechanics heavily favour the corporations. Practitioners defending these importers are relying on the Hanover Shoe and Illinois Brick antitrust frameworks, a well-developed body of law that strictly limits refunds to the party that directly paid the tariff to US Customs and Border Protection. An importer of record transacted directly with the government; the downstream consumer merely accepted a market price. By explicitly defining retail consumer payouts as unearned rent, corporate balance sheets can successfully defend this capital concentration. The Court of International Trade has indicated that refunds will not be automatic, requiring importers to file specific protests. This procedural friction effectively ring-fences the capital away from the general public and secures it for the enterprises equipped to navigate the administrative labyrinth. The retention of these funds is not a market failure; it is the vital capital expenditure required to rebuild American logistical sovereignty.