President Donald Trump's directive in his proclamation expanding Section 232 steel tariffs to assess penalties for the misclassification of entries resulting in non-payment of the duties without regard for "evidence of mitigating factors" may run afoul of existing customs laws, trade lawyers said. Even if the directive stays within the bounds of the current statutory scheme, expect more prior disclosures and proactive steps to ensure the proper customs treatment of steel entries, the lawyers added.
The White House announced this week it has selected Joseph Barloon to be its ambassador to the World Trade Organization, a role of a deputy U.S. trade representative. Barloon served as general counsel to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 2019-2020, during the first Trump administration. He also was nominated to be a judge at the Court of International Trade by President Donald Trump in that first term but wasn't confirmed (see 2102050032).
CBP has released its Feb. 12 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 7), which includes a ruling action involving the revocation of 10 ruling letters, modification of four ruling letters and revocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of training pants. Also included are five Court of International Trade slip opinions.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 3-9:
CBP has released its Feb. 5 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 6), which includes the following ruling actions:
A Wisconsin man filed a pro se lawsuit at the Court of International Trade challenging the president's ability to impose tariffs, arguing that any attempt by the president to levy import duties represents an improper delegation of power under the U.S. Constitution. The individual, Gary Barnes, said imposing tariffs "is not within the jurisdiction of the President's duties," noting that the power to levy tariffs rests solely with Congress (Gary L Barnes v. United States President Donald Trump, CIT # 25-00043).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 27 - Feb. 2:
The U.S. on Feb. 3 brought a complaint against importer Shunny Corp., doing business as Sampac Enterprises, alleging that the company negligently misreported the country of origin of its health products to avoid import duties. The government is seeking nearly $200,000 in unpaid duties, along with a nearly $1.4 million penalty (United States v. Shunny Corp., CIT # 25-00039).
Howard Lutnick, whose nomination advanced out of the Senate Commerce Committee Feb. 2 with a 16-12 vote, told senators from both parties that, despite the president's announcements that he would have "direct responsibilities over the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative," the scope of responsibilities for the USTR won't change, and his agency will coordinate with others working on trade policy.
The Commerce Department is amending the final results of an antidumping duty administrative review on circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from South Korea (A-580-809) to revise its results so that they align with the Jan. 15 final decision in a court case that challenged rate calculations in those original final results. In that review, covering subject merchandise entered Nov. 1, 2019, through Oct. 31, 2020, Hyundai Steel Company was given a 1.97% AD rate, Husteel Co., Ltd. received a 4.07% AD rate, and 21 non-individually examined companies were given a review average rate of 3.21%.