The Court of International Trade earlier this month heard oral argument on whether a CBP protest denial effectively revoked a prior CBP protest decision by applying a different tariff classification to identical merchandise, and should have been subject to a notice-and-comment period (Under the Weather v. U.S., CIT # 21-00211).
In the July 31 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 58, No. 30), CBP published proposals to revoke ruling letters concerning cheetah Squishmallows and paper wine bottle carriers from China.
Trade associations are generally pleased with the trade facilitation discussion draft issued in the Senate last week (see 2407310037), though they all noted that moving to a true one-U.S.-government data submission and release regime requires money, which may not follow, even if the bill becomes law.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted on CBP's website Aug. 1, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADCVD Search page.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., is sharing draft text with the trade of a bill that would remove goods subject to Section 301 tariffs from the de minimis entry lane, along with any categories deemed "import sensitive" in the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program legislation.
CBP has released its July 31 Customs Bulletin (Vol 58, No. 30), which includes the following ruling actions:
A united front and better data analysis are key to ensuring that imported seafood is lawfully produced and harvested, representatives from CBP, the FDA, the Department of Labor and NOAA Fisheries said when discussing the next steps for NOAA's Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) during a July 30 webinar hosted by the Stimson Center think tank.
A bipartisan pair of senators fleshed out a trade facilitation framework released in early June (see 2406100015) with legislative text that authorizes spending to create a true single window and modernize ACE, as well as details of how duty drawback could change.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit last week said that an entity can only violate the Plant Protection Act and Animal Health Protection Act for aiding, abetting, causing or inducing the illicit import of plant and animal products by knowingly taking part in the import process (Amazon Services v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, D.C. Cir. # 22-1052).
The U.S. government, aware that many goods made with forced labor are inputs to finished goods, is working both to identify those inputs and to help importers understand that their goods could be banned from import as traceability becomes more possible.