The Court of International Trade on Aug. 23 ordered a Texas company and its owner to pay a penalty for negligent misstatements on import documentation, though at a level far below what the government requested. Neither Deladiep or its owner and sole corporate officer John Delatorre appeared in court to defend themselves, but CIT nonetheless cut the penalty by 80 percent to $17,548.12, finding the violation of 19 USC 1592 did not warrant the $87,740.60 maximum.
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 Aug. 14-20:
A recent Court of International Trade decision reaffirms the right of importers to use tariff engineering to obtain lower duty rates, customs lawyers said after the Aug. 9 decision was released publicly on Aug. 16. The addition of stripped-down seats to a Ford Transit Connect cargo van and their removal immediately after importation constitutes “legitimate tariff engineering” to obtain a lower duty rate applicable to passenger vehicles, CIT said.
The U.S. government filed a federal court complaint on Aug. 10 alleging a Florida importer of wooden bedroom furniture sought to evade antidumping duties and customs fees by misclassifying and undervaluing its furniture imports. Blue Furniture Solutions evaded “millions of dollars” in duties and fees by classifying its wooden bedroom furniture as metal and office furniture to avoid a 216.01% antidumping duty rate, and stating false values of its imports on entry documentation.
CBP posted its updated Fish and Wildlife Service ACE implementation guide to its website on Aug. 11. The updated FWS partner government agency (PGA) message set now includes only two FWS flags, with one indicating a commodity always requires clearance by FWS and the other covering commodities that are “likely to contain commodities” that require FWS declarations and may be disclaimed. The new message set also adds a new ACE input for designated port exception permits, as expected (see 1703010042).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 7-13:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 31 - Aug. 6:
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is proposing to end a ban on importation of fresh pork and pork products for classical swine fever (CSF) reasons from most of Mexico, after finding the entire country to be essentially free of the illness. APHIS already recognizes nine Mexican states as free of CSF: Baja California, Baja California Sur, Campeche, Chihuahua, Nayarit, Quintana Roo, Sinaloa, Sonora and Yucatan. Under the proposal, fresh pork and pork products would be eligible for importation from every Mexican state, and APHIS would add the entire country of Mexico to its Web list of regions considered to be free of CSF but from which live pork, swine and pork products can be imported to the U.S. under conditions specified in 9 CFR 94.32. Comments are due Oct. 7.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 24-30:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 17-23: