The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 5-11:
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 2 declined to order the release of an importer’s entries that were detained by CBP on country of origin concerns, finding the uncertainty around its own contradictory line of cases on substantial transformation was a factor in denying the bid for a preliminary injunction.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories from Aug. 24-28 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Five people are facing federal charges over allegations of illegal filing of drawback claims, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California said in a news release. An Aug. 12 grand jury indictment, which was unsealed Aug. 25, charged Dale Behm of Shell Knob, Missouri; Yong Heng Liang of Daly City, California; Joshua Stanka of Katy, Texas; Joshua Clark of Fair Oaks Ranch, Texas; and Michael Choy of Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada, “with conspiracy, wire fraud, and related charges related to an alleged scheme to submit fraudulent claims for refunds on import duties,” the release said.
More companies are seeking drawback payments as the economic slowdown has increased the importance of cash on hand, CBP officials and industry executives said during the American Association of Exporters and Importers virtual conference Aug. 20. “In general, I would say COVID's had a major impact on our businesses and it's also made our company even more focused on getting cash in the door,” said Kathleen Palma, senior executive for international trade compliance at GE. “One of the levers that our leadership has been looking at has been drawback.” At the same time, Palma expects that because the company is bringing in fewer shipments, that will be reflected in fewer drawback claims going forward.
Rock Trade Law absorbed consulting firm Kennard & Associates “to offer expanded duty drawback capabilities,” the law firm said in a news release. The firm will also “expand its portfolio of services to include vessel repair entry filings,” it said.
Some of CBP's proposed changes for the regulations that govern customs brokers (see 2006040037) appear likely result in unexpected problems if not addressed by the agency before the rules are finalized, the Florida Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association said in recently filed comments. “We feel strongly against the concept of a customs broker being a 'force multiplier' from an enforcement perspective and, while we do want to ensure there is 'enhanced compliance,' deputizing brokers, as some of these proposed changes demand, can lead to an unnecessarily conflictive, non-productive broker-importer as well as broker-CBP client relationship,” the trade group said. Comments in the docket are due Aug. 4.
Because the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative was in such a hurry on implementation, some USMCA details needed by traders are either wrong or missing. For instance, there are tariff numbers that are invalid, because negotiators used the 2012 Harmonized Tariff Schedule numbers. On a call with trade professionals July 6, CBP staffers said importers or exporters can email CBP with a tariff number in question, and the agency can provide guidance on how to claim USMCA treatment for those goods.
Drawback filers should not file any USMCA drawback claims at this time, CBP said in a CSMS message. Some technical changes to ACE need to be made before CBP can accept USMCA claims, and the agency will send out another CSMS message when they have been deployed. “Please continue to file NAFTA drawback claims, if applicable, under the NAFTA requirements,” CBP said. Filers will not be allowed to commingle NAFTA and USMCA imports on the same drawback claim. “The date of entry determines which agreement controls, not the date of claim,” it said.