Vanity mirrors with speaker and a charging port or wireless charging pad are still classifiable in the tariff schedule as mirrors, CBP said in a recent ruling, denying an importer's protest for one entry but granting it for two others on the basis that the underlying entries were untimely reliquidated.
Ben Perkins
Ben Perkins, Assistant Editor, is a reporter with International Trade Today and its sister publications, Trade Law Daily and Export Compliance Daily, where he covers sanctions, court rulings, and other international trade issues. He previously worked as a trade analyst for a Washington D.C. advisory firm. Ben holds a B.A. in English from the University of New Hampshire and an M.A. in International Relations from American University. Ben joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2022.
The government’s position in a case regarding substitution unused merchandise drawback for aircraft parts would lead to "absurd results" if upheld, presenting a "significant risk of manipulation or unintended results" arising from changes in statistical language in the tariff schedule if the court agrees with DOJ's interpretation of the drawback statute, importer Spirit Aerosystems said in an Aug. 18 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Spirit Aerosystems v. U.S., CIT # 20-00094).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Vanguard National Trailer Corporation imported steel wheels from China covered by antidumping and countervailing duty orders through evasion, according to the results of a recently released Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) investigation. CBP said that Vanguard had entered steel wheels "using false statements that they didn't contain covered merchandise," despite the company's protests that it believed the wheels were out of scope.
Correction: Importer YVC USA told CBP in the course of an Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) investigation that it was unaware that its Chinese supplier was conducting an evasion scheme by transshipping Chinese-origin forged steel fittings through Sri Lanka (see 2308220028).
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Aug. 21 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
A CBP Center of Excellence and Expertise improperly classified an imported organometallic substance, then compounded its own classification error by taking too long to forward an application for further review of the protest to CBP headquarters so that CBP HQ was unable to weigh in, importer Lanxess said in an Aug. 21 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Lanxess Corporation v. U.S., CIT # 23-00073).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
An importer of forged steel fittings told CBP it was never aware its Chinese supplier was participating in a scheme to transship forged steel fittings, covered by antidumping and countervailing duty orders, from China through Sri Lanka, yet CBP concluded its Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) investigation with the determination that the importer, YVC USA, had evaded the duties, according to a recently posted notice.
The statute of limitations for CBP to collect on customs bonds runs six years from the date of the underlying entry's liquidation, not from the date that CBP demanded payment, the Court of International Trade said in an opinion released publicly on Aug. 22, rejecting CBP's bid to collect on a 20-year-old customs bond.