International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Feb. 1-5 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Section 301 tariff exclusions
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has established an exclusion process for Section 301 tariffs on China. In a series of rounds since the tariffs took effect, importers have been able to request exclusions from the tariffs, as well as extensions to existing exclusions. Many exclusions have been allowed to expire, as well. Section 301 exclusions are applicable to all importers of a given good, which may be defined as an entire tariff schedule subheading or a subset of a subheading outlined in a written description.
The International Trade Commission recently posted Revision 3 to the preliminary edition of the 2021 Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Changes include implementation of extended and revised Section 201 safeguards on large residential washers, as announced in a proclamation issued by former President Donald Trump in mid-January (see 2101150049). Minor changes are also made to an exclusion from Section 301 China tariffs for supported catalysts with zinc oxide as the active substance.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 25-31:
More than 3,500 Section 301 complaints have inundated the U.S. Court of International Trade challenging the lawfulness of the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese imports, “and there’s likely more to come,” trade lawyer John Brew of Crowell & Moring told a Sports and Fitness Industry Association webinar Jan. 26.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 18-24:
CBP published notices in the Customs Bulletin revoking or modifying numerous rulings in 2020. These ruling revocations and modifications also apply to “any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.” When revoking or modifying a ruling, CBP is required by 19 USC 1625(c) to publish notice of the proposed action, and allow a period—generally one month—for comment before finalizing the action. An importer’s failure to advise CBP of “substantially identical transactions” or of a ruling not identified by CBP in these notices “may raise issues of reasonable care on the part of the importer or its agents for importations of merchandise subsequent to the effective date of this notice.” Rulings CBP revoked or modified in 2020 are as follows:
CBP published several thousand prospective rulings in 2020 on its Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) database. The agency issues its rulings from either the National Commodity Specialist Division in New York, which handles issues like classification, country of origin, marking and preferential treatment, or the Office of Regulations and Rulings at CBP headquarters in Washington, D.C., which may also decide other issues, such as valuation, drawback, exclusion order enforcement and liquidation.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 11-17:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 4-10:
A Republican congresswoman who has been the biggest critic of the Section 232 exclusion process told National Foreign Trade Council webinar listeners that, “I’m hoping for the best under this administration. We’ve suffered a lot under [Section] 232 and 301.” Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., added that “I can’t wait to see it start unraveling.” Walorski, who claimed Jan. 12 that “we were kind of in this battle” with President Donald Trump over the broadness of the China tariffs, voted against certifying Biden's Electoral College victory last week.