The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 6-12:.
Brian Feito
Brian Feito is Managing Editor of International Trade Today, Export Compliance Daily and Trade Law Daily. A licensed customs broker who spent time at the Department of Commerce calculating antidumping and countervailing duties, Brian covers a wide range of subjects including customs and trade-facing product regulation, the courts, antidumping and countervailing duties and Mexico and the European Union. Brian is a graduate of the University of Florida and George Mason University. He joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2012.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 29 - July 5:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 30 affirmed the constitutionality of a longstanding requirement to pay duties before bringing most customs cases to court (here). International Custom Products had appealed the case from the Court of International Trade, arguing that requiring the now-bankrupt importer to pay $28 million in duties violated its due process right to a hearing. In yet another twist in ICP’s decade-long struggle involving entries of white sauce that the courts have found were the subject of an improperly revoked ruling, the Federal Circuit found that the conditions set by law for challenging protest denials are inviolable, despite the unpleasant circumstances of ICP’s case.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 22-28:
The Food and Drug Administration issued a guidance document on its unique device identifier (UDI) system for medical devices (here). The guidance contains information on effective dates, label contents, and which products are subject to the new requirements. The UDI system will begin taking effect Sept. 24 for Class III devices.
The Court of International Trade on June 23 struck down a core tenet of the Commerce Department’s interpretation of the scope of antidumping and countervailing duties on aluminum extrusions from China, finding Commerce’s position that “finished goods kits” must include non-extruded aluminum components is unsupported by the language of the scope. CIT also unsettled another agency precedent by holding fasteners are not irrelevant when determining whether a product meets the “finished goods kit” exemption.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 15-21:
The Commerce Department issued its final affirmative countervailing duty determination on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China (C-570-017) (here). In a change from its preliminary determination, Commerce decided to add GITI tire to the list of exporters for which liquidation of entries is retroactively back to Sept. 2. Although this final determination takes effect June 18, suspension of liquidation has been lifted since March 31, and Commerce will only require CV duty cash deposits on future entries if it issues a CV duty order.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 8-14:
The past year’s court rulings on corporate employee liability for customs violations has sparked deliberation in the trade community over what Trek Leather means for import compliance professionals. Customs lawyers warn of the possibility that unsuspecting corporate officers and compliance managers could find themselves subject to penalties and fines, although some attorneys say those concerns are overstated. Trade associations are busy deciphering how importers should address any liability arising from the case, including whether they should offer employees indemnification or insurance. However, creating insurance covering employee liability for customs violations is fraught with difficulties, and lawyers and insurers interviewed said no such policies exist as of yet.