The vessel operator is responsible for determining whether the vessel is subject to new fees on Chinese-built and -operated vessels calling at U.S. ports, CBP said in an Oct. 3 cargo systems message.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said that while the administration doesn't expect to lose its tariff case at the Supreme Court, "wherever we end up," the approach will be similar to what it is now.
The case against the lists 3 and 4A tariffs is unlikely to be heard by the Supreme Court or the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the recent decision from the Federal Circuit upholding the tariffs likely gives the Trump administration greater confidence in using tariff authorities other than the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, various attorneys told us.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 25 upheld the Lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs. CAFC Judges Todd Hughes and Alan Lourie, along with Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas, who was sitting by designation, said the tariffs were a valid exercise of the government's authority under Section 307(a)(1)(C), which lets the U.S. Trade Representative "modify or terminate any action" taken under Section 301, where such action is "no longer appropriate."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 25 upheld the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on China, finding them to be a valid exercise of authority under Section 307(a)(1)(C). CAFC Judges Todd Hughes and Alan Lourie, along with Eastern District of Texas Judge Rodney Gilstrap, sitting by designation, held that the statute's permission to "modify" Section 301 action where it's "no longer appropriate," allows the U.S. trade representative to ramp up the tariffs if the original action is "insufficient" to achieve its "stated purpose."
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 15-21:
As importers mull their options on how to prepare for potential tariff refunds should the Supreme Court rule against the legality of IEEPA tariffs, importers should also be mindful of the potential pitfalls they might encounter as they preserve their rights to refunds from CBP, according to speakers during Flexport's Sept. 17 webinar on tariffs and updates on trade.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is seeking comments on whether any of the 178 existing Section 301 exclusions should be extended past Nov. 29. Comments must be submitted at https://comments.USTR.gov. The portal will open Sept. 16 at 12:01 a.m. EDT and close Oct. 16 at 11:59 p.m. EDT. A list of all the products that are receiving exclusions also will be at the portal.
Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, said he has met with customs brokers each of the last three days, and their main ask is no more executive orders changing tariffs that are released on a Friday afternoon or night and take effect on Monday.
CBP has clarified the resubmission time frame for rejected entry summaries with trade remedy duties, according to a Sept. 11 cargo systems message. The time limit for rejecting antidumping duty and countervailing duty and trade remedy entry summaries is 60 days without supervisory approval and 300 days with supervisory approval, CBP said. Trade remedy summaries include those subject to Section 232, Section 301, Section 201 and International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs. The trade community has 10 working days to respond to AD/CVD and/or trade remedy entry summary rejects, the agency said.