The Court of International Trade on Aug. 26 dismissed a steel importer's and purchaser's bid to reliquidate two entries subject to Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, saying the plaintiffs had already received the relief available to them from the Commerce Department in the form of a product exclusion but failed to preserve their ability to receive a refund by way of an extension of liquidation or a protest.
Jacob Kopnick
Jacob Kopnick, Associate Editor, is a reporter for Trade Law Daily and its sister publications Export Compliance Daily and International Trade Today. He joined the Warren Communications News team in early 2021 covering a wide range of topics including trade-related court cases and export issues in Europe and Asia. Jacob's background is in trade policy, having spent time with both CSIS and USTR researching international trade and its complexities. Jacob is a graduate of the University of Michigan with a B.A. in Public Policy.
Swiss computer peripheral and software company Logitech won its tariff classification challenge in the Court of International Trade, getting duty-free treatment for its webcams and ConferenceCams, per an Aug. 24 decision. Senior Judge Leo Gordon ruled that the webcams fit under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8517, as argued by Logitech, as opposed to heading 8525, dutiable at 2.1%, as suggested by the government. Finding that the products in dispute fall under both headings, Gordon said the duty-free heading describes the goods “with a greater degree of accuracy and certainty.”
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 16-22:
CBP cannot limit the amount of drawback that can be claimed on excise taxes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an Aug. 23 opinion upholding the Court of International Trade's ruling. Holding that the CBP regulation defied the "clear intent of Congress," the appellate court ruled against the government appeal of CIT's decision, providing a win for the plaintiffs, the National Association of Manufacturers and The Beer Institute.
OtterBox's victory in a Court of International Trade case setting a lower duty rate in a customs challenge on smartphone covers cannot be extended to a prior disclosure made by OtterBox, CIT said in an Aug. 18 opinion. Judge Claire Kelly ruled that the court did not have the jurisdiction to make the determination that entries not part of the Summons of the case should be reliquidated.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 9-15:
CBP seemed to open up the possibility for a new de minimis provision under forced labor withhold release orders, but more guidance is needed to determine its impact, Mayer Brown said in an Aug. 16 post. The post focused on an answer released in a recent CBP set of frequently asked questions on the WRO on silica-based products made by Hoshine Silicon Industry Co. in Xinjiang, China (see 2108030026). “CBP now appears willing to use its authority to enforce US law on the use of forced labor (19 U.S.C § 1307) to provide importers with flexibility when their imports contain de minimis amounts of product produced with forced labor,” the firm said. “However, until more guidance develops on how CBP intends to implement this policy, manufacturers and US importers should be wary of relying on it too heavily.”
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 2-8:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 26 - Aug. 1:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 19-25: