The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 17-23.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 10-16.
The Court of International Trade ruled that a shipment of 443 bales of secondhand clothing imported by DIS Vintage should be classified as “commingled goods” and subject to the “highest rate of duty for any part thereof,” siding with the government in a May 17 opinion. Judge Timothy Reif, after a government analysis of 41 samples of the subject merchandise, determined that nine weren't classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6309 as “worn clothing and other worn articles” since they had no visible signs of appreciable wear.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 3-9.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 26 - May 2:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on April 26 upheld a recent lower court ruling that found an active pharmaceutical ingredient imported by Janssen Ortho eligible for duty-free treatment. In line with a February 2020 Court of International Trade decision, the Federal Circuit found darunavir ethanolate, the active ingredient in a Janssen HIV medication, is encompassed by a listing in the tariff schedule's Pharmaceutical Appendix for darunavir.
The Court of International Trade's newest judge, Stephen Vaden, issued his first opinion with the court on April 21, dismissing tire importer Strategic Import Supply's challenge of CBP's assessment of countervailing duties on its imports of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. Vaden found that the importer's protest was filed too late, holding the 180-day deadline for protests runs from the date of liquidation, rather than the date CBP received updated assessment instructions from Commerce after Commerce amended rates set in the relevant CV duty administrative review.
CBP's process for carrying out Enforce and Protect Act investigations could eventually be found by the courts to be unconstitutional, trade lawyers Jen Diaz and David Craven of Diaz Trade Law said during an April 21 webinar. The EAPA investigations, which seek to determine if a company evaded antidumping or countervailing duty orders, are mostly secret and do not inform entities if they are being investigated or what evidence stands against them.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 12-18:
Following a Court of International Trade opinion throwing the future of first sale import valuations from non-market economies (NMEs) into question (see 2103020040), KPMG released recommendations for U.S. importers who use the valuation practice. One recommendation in the tax firm's April 19 analysis is to establish a “reasonable care” file in which to file commercial documentation and financial statements to demonstrate compliance with first sale requirements. Importers should also determine which party can best represent the firm in the product's supply chain for the “all costs plus a profit” test for first sale valuations. The rationale for that decision should also be filed in the reasonable care folder, KPMG said.