International Trade Today is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login
Penalties and Courts
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").

Hapag-Lloyd Reaches $2 Million Settlement With FMC for Violations of Detention, Demurrage Rule
June 9, 2022 by Ian Cohen|Penalties and Courts

The Federal Maritime Commission this week approved a $2 million settlement agreement with Hapag-Lloyd for alleged shipping violations involving the company’s detention and demurrage practices. Hapag-Lloyd also agreed to take several steps to improve its billing practices, including posting an updated tariff policy to its website, conducting a “training session” on the FMC’s detention and demurrage rule for all employees involved in billing, and publishing on its website a “complete list of locations that it has authorized to accept empty Hapag-Lloyd containers.”

CIT Says No Reliquidation for Entries Granted Section 232 Exclusion Post-Protest Period
May 18, 2022 by Jacob Kopnick|Penalties and Courts

The Court of International Trade dismissed two cases brought by steel importer Voestalpine USA and steel purchaser Bilstein Cold Rolled Steel seeking to retroactively apply a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion that was originally issued with a clerical error. Judge Mark Barnett said that the plaintiffs did not seek any relief that the court could grant since the entries eligible for the exclusion had already been liquidated, and the court does not have the power to order their reliquidation.

Topics:Harmonized Tariff Schedule, Customs duty, Court of International Trade, Section 232 Tariffs, CBP CROSS Rulings