Japanese Steel Sheet Importer Says CBP Failed to Refund Excess AD Cash Deposits Totaling Over $490K

CBP illegally failed to refund excess antidumping duty cash deposits totaling over $490,000, importer Marubeni-Itochu Steel America argued in a Jan. 5 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act when it failed to suspend liquidation of the entries, hold the cash deposits in suspense and issue a prompt refund, the importer claimed (Marubeni-Itochu Steel America v. United States, CIT # 23-00004).

From March to July 2016, Marubeni-Itochi brought in four entries of steel sheet from Japan to the U.S. In 2017, the company "inadvertently" failed to deposit AD cash deposits. The company told CBP as much, asking the agency to change the entry type of the goods from Type 01 (Consumption) to Type 03 (Consumption - AD/CVD) and submitting cash deposits totaling over $570,000. The entries were subject to two AD reviews. The Commerce Department had not generated liquidation instructions for either review.

When the reviews ended, it turned out that the AD rate was a good deal lower than the cash deposit rate for one of the reviews. The plaintiff claims that this should have resulted in a prompt refund of the excess AD cash deposits, but that CBP instead failed to pay the importer its money. As a result, Marubeni-Itochu filed suit, arguing that CBP violated the APA with its actions.

"CBP’s failure to follow its own rules and regulations is not only violative of the law, it is also deeply inequitable, given that MISA tendered the AD cash deposits in good faith, with the belief that CBP would -- in accordance with its express policies, and the applicable statutes and regulations -- hold such deposits in a suspense account or clearing account, 'liquidate final duties timely and accurately', and refund any overpaid AD duty cash deposits," the complaint said.

Alternatively, the plaintiff said that CBP violated the APA by "improperly calculating the loss of revenue in" the importer's prior disclosure. CBP was required by law and Commerce's instructions to suspend liquidation of the entries and treat the plaintiff's AD cash deposit submissions as estimated duties to be held in suspense pending the final AD rate. "Notwithstanding, even if CBP’s treatment of MISA’s AD cash deposits as the 'actual loss of duties' were to be accepted, it is plain that the calculated actual loss of duties was incorrect, and required correction," the brief said.