Importer Spirit Aerosystems' reading of the statute pertaining to its drawback claim for unused substitution drawback would lead to "unpredictable and often absurd results," the U.S. said in an Oct. 6 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Spirit's argument that CBP's implementation of the statute "misconstrues basic tariff terms, renders entire sections" of the law "inoperative, and requires the omission of certain words from the drawback statute," the government claimed (Spirit Aerosystems v. United States, CIT # 20-00094).
Harmonized Tariff Schedule
The Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) provide classification provisions and duty rates for almost every item that exists. It is a system of classifying and taxing all goods imported into the United States. The HTS is based on the international Harmonized System, which is a global standard for naming and describing trade products, and consists of a hierarchical structure that assigns a specific code and rate to each type of merchandise for duty, quota, and statistical purposes. The HTS was made effective on January 1, 1989, replacing the former Tariff Schedules of the United States. It is maintained by the U.S. International Trade Commission, but CBP is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the HTS.
The Court of International Trade's "unique and unprecedented interpretation" of an "other" provision in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule comes from a "false premise" that would greatly expand its scope throughout the HTS, importer Nature's Touch Frozen Foods argued in its Sept. 27 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Seeking its preferred classification of frozen fruit mixtures, the importer said the trade court's reading would also "greatly limit operation of the provisions in [General Rules of Interpretation] 3(b) and (c) which are designed to classify mixtures" (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2093).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 21 ruled in a customs classification case involving eight different categories of decorative plant parts, siding with importer Second Nature Designs on its preferred classification of two of the categories and with the government on one of the categories. Pertaining to three other categories, Judge Gary Katzmann said that there were fact questions remaining, leading the judge to deny summary judgment and advance litigation to its "second phase."
The classification of gun sight inserts that use tritium for powerless illumination in low light conditions are properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9022 under the first General Rule of Interpretation (GRI), importer Trijicon argued in a Sept. 15 motion for summary judgment at the Court of International Trade (Trijicon v. United States, CIT # 22-00040).
Importer Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing and DOJ argued during oral arguments Sept. 7 whether a test established in a previous U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case meant that plastic-dipped knit gloves are correctly classified as articles of plastic rather than as gloves under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
The government’s position in a case regarding substitution unused merchandise drawback for aircraft parts would lead to "absurd results" if upheld, presenting a "significant risk of manipulation or unintended results" arising from changes in statistical language in the tariff schedule if the court agrees with DOJ's interpretation of the drawback statute, importer Spirit Aerosystems said in an Aug. 18 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Spirit Aerosystems v. U.S., CIT # 20-00094).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Aug. 4 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The Commerce Department legally selected Malaysian import data to value backsheet and ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA) in an antidumping duty review on solar cells from China because that data best corresponds to the inputs used by exporter Risen Energy Co., the U.S. argued in an Aug. 3 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-11550).
CBP determined that importer Zinus US evaded an antidumping duty order covering wooden bedroom furniture from China by making "material false statements or omissions," it said in a notice released July 28. The agency said there was "substantial evidence" showing Zinus imported Chinese-origin furniture by using general product descriptions and misclassifying the furniture as non-covered merchandise.