Conservative advocacy group the New Civil Liberties Alliance filed another lawsuit challenging the legality of the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, arguing that IEEPA categorically doesn't allow for tariffs and that the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump aren't "necessary" to address the declared emergencies. The alliance filed its suit on July 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on behalf of outdoor cooking product maker FIREDISC, the Game Manufacturers Association and wood product maker Ryan Wholesale (FIREDISC, Inc. v. Donald J. Trump, W.D. Tex. # 25-01134).
A domestic producer recently filed a petition with the Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission requesting new antidumping duties and countervailing duties on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells imported from India, Indonesia and Laos. Commerce now will decide whether to begin AD/CVD investigations, which could result in the imposition of permanent AD/CVD orders and the assessment of AD and CVD on importers. The Alliance for American Solar Manufacturing and Trade, which includes First Solar, Mission Solar Energy, and Qcells, with Talon PV Solar Solutions as a supporter, filed the petition.
The Court of International Trade on July 18 granted the government's motion for default judgment against importer Rayson Global and its owner Doris Cheng for negligently failing to pay ordinary, Section 301 and antidumping duties on its innerspring entries. Judge Timothy Stanceu granted the motion, after previously rejecting it for insufficiently pleaded facts, ordering Rayson and Cheng to pay a nearly $3.4 million penalty and all unpaid duties, taxes and cash deposits on the unliquidated entries in the case (U.S. v. Rayson Global, Inc. and Doris Cheng, CIT # 23-00201).
The U.S. opposed two importers' bid to have the Supreme Court hear their challenge to the president's ability to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has a chance to hear the case. The government argued that the high court shouldn't step in before either the D.C. Circuit or the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has had a chance to address the claims against the IEEPA tariffs, particularly since both courts are hearing the appeals on very expedited timelines (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, Sup. Ct. # 24-1287).
CBP provides guidance on applying Section 232 auto tariffs (see 2504020081) on non-U.S. content for imports of passenger vehicles and light trucks that also qualify for preferential tariff treatment under USMCA (see 2505190061), in a July 16 cargo systems message.
DOJ's criminal division has identified trade fraud as a top priority, assigning its market integrity and major frauds unit to handle tariff evasion cases, a DOJ official confirmed to us. The official said that the major frauds unit is shifting resources to trade and looking to cases involving "long-running frauds, senior executives, and large volumes of alleged losses from unlawful tariff evasion schemes."
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
In the July 9 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 28), CBP published proposals to revoke ruling letters concerning the tariff classification for tuna and rice kits.
Suspension of liquidation and antidumping duty cash deposit requirements take effect July 14 for imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico (A-201-820), after the Commerce Department withdrew from the latest in a series of agreements suspending the duties since 1996.
Five importers challenging the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the government's defense of the tariffs' legality falls short. The importers, represented by the conservative advocacy group Liberty Justice Center, argued that IEEPA categorically doesn't provide for tariffs, IEEPA is precluded from being used to address trade deficits due to the existence of Section 122, and the Court of International Trade was right to issue an injunction against the tariffs (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1812).