International Trade Today is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login
Customs
to
Refine Category Search
Clear Terms

Search Primer

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match together (e.g. "forced labor").

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons to find either word (e.g. AD/CVD CBP).

Acronyms: Use all capital letters (e.g., ACE).

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., tariffs +Canada).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., FDA -alert).

Simplest form: Use the simplest form of a term (e.g. "metal" instead of "metals" or "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

DHS Assessment of 100 Percent Scanning Submissions Underway
August 25, 2016 |Customs

The Department of Homeland Security received and is now reviewing 25 submissions in response to a request for information on risk reduction approaches to nuclear threats at foreign ports, said Alan Bersin, assistant secretary for International Affairs at DHS. The Aug. 18 letter (here) came in response to an industry letter to DHS calling for a congressional review of the 100 percent scanning on U.S.-bound maritime cargo containers that's required by law (see 1606210024). That requirement, which allows for DHS to delay implementation by two years as needed, has been pushed back several times, most recently in May (see 1605310028). When DHS notified Congress that it would again delay implementation, it also sought information on new strategies to address radiological and nuclear threats at foreign ports. DHS plans to hold further discussions with respondents in the fall and then "seek to test viable solutions in real-world environments," it said. While largely not addressing the request that DHS seek further congressional review of the statute, Bersin said DHS is similarly worried that implementation without "appropriate technological systems" could impede global commerce. "While further extension of the deadline is necessary, the Department is committed to advancing the law's primary objective of protection the National against radiological and nuclear threats," he said.

CBP Allows for Copyright Enforcement While Copyright Office Application Pending
August 25, 2016 |Customs

CBP will now enforce copyright registrations beginning when an application is filed with the Copyright Office, CBP said on its intellectual property rights site (here). "Temporary recordation of unregistered Copyrights is now available while your application for registration is pending at the U.S. Copyright Office," CBP said. "Upon request (email to iprrquestions@cbp.dhs.gov), you will receive instructions for submitting an application for recordation of your copyright with CBP for border enforcement purposes." Proof of application to register the copyright is required, it said. This is the result of the customs reauthorization law, which required that CBP develop a process to enforce copyrights while an application is pending (see 1602230080). CBP is authorized to detain or seize imports of protected copyrighted works.

AD/CV Duty Evasion Rule Reflects Law's Transparency Requirements, CBP Says
August 24, 2016 |Customs

CBP's interim final rule for new antidumping and countervailing duty evasion processes (see 1608190014) reflected the transparency requirements detailed in the customs reauthorization law's Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA), a CBP spokeswoman said. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, recently said that the rule might not provide enough transparency (see 1608230016). CBP also "ensured that the [rule] outlines that the parties to the EAPA investigation would be notified at key milestones, such as the initiation, interim measures, referrals to Commerce, consolidation of allegations, and the final determination as to evasion,” she said. “CBP’s regulations also require parties to file public versions of their submissions, which was done in lieu of the statutory authority to institute administrative protective orders. Such extensive measures were undertaken to promote transparency in the proceedings for all parties to the investigation.”