The U.S. charged Hans Maria De Geetere, a Belgian national, in two separate indictments for allegedly helping to illegally export "military-grade technology" from the U.S. to end-users in China and Russia, DOJ said. Along with the unsealing of the indictments in the U.S. district courts for the Eastern District of Texas and the District of Oregon, DOJ said the Belgian government arrested De Geetere, and others, and executed search warrants as part of the investigation (United States v. Hans De Geetere, E.D. Tex. # 4:19-cr-00207) (United States v. Hans De Geetere, D. Ore. # 3:23-cr-00374).
CBP failed to apply a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion on G&H Diversified Manufacturing's steel tube entry, the importer argued in a Nov. 21 complaint at the Court of International Trade. G&H said CBP had said on at least three separate occasions that the classification of the imports was correct and that the classification was excluded from having to pay the national security duties as determined by the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (G&H Diversified Manufacturing v. U.S., CIT # 22-00130).
Steel and aluminum importers should expect the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security to "conduct additional quantity certification reviews and more closely scrutinize the data points included in exclusion requests" following a Government Accountability Office report on the exclusion process, global firm Crowell & Moring said. The firm said importers could also face further scrutiny from CBP, who will be more closely examining Section 232 exclusion claims that are not properly filed.
Investors in Mississippi's public employees' retirement system sued Seagate Technology Holdings for deceiving its investors and causing them to buy Seagate stock at "artificially inflated prices" related to its conduct in illegally exporting hard disk drives to China. (Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi v. Seagate Technology Holdings, N.D. Cal. # 3:23-03711).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
CBP illegally failed to apply exclusions for Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs to eight shipments of hot wrought steel round bars even though the exclusions were granted after the shipments entered the U.S., importer Saarsteel argued in a complaint last week at the Court of International Trade. The company said it is CBP's practice to allow an importer to claim a granted exclusion via a post-summary correction or a protest when the exclusion was granted after the entry was made but "relates back to a submission date covering the entry" (Saarsteel Inc. v. United States, CIT # 21-00271).
A Washington, D.C., court last week rejected a Russian citizen’s bid to dismiss government accusations that he misled investors about his company’s “key” space technology and several U.S. “adverse national security determinations” against the company. The ruling came after the Securities and Exchange Commission said Mikhail Kokorich, former CEO of space industry startup Momentus, made several “misrepresentations, false statements, and material omissions” in merger discussions with another firm, failing to disclose that the Commerce Department had rejected at least one of his company's export license applications and planned to deny another (SEC v. Mikhail Kokorich, D.D.C. # 21-1869).
The Commerce Department and DOJ this week launched a new task force to “target illicit actors” and protect critical technologies from being acquired by “nation-state adversaries.” The Disruptive Technology Strike Force -- which will be led by Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security and DOJ’s National Security Division -- will focus on investigating and prosecuting criminal export violations, improving “administrative enforcement” of export controls, coordinating law enforcement actions and “disruption strategies” with U.S. allies and more.
Protests seeking refunds for granted exclusions from Section 232 tariffs must be filed in a timely manner, even when the process is complicated by government errors, the DOJ argued in a Jan. 27 motion to dismiss at the Court of International Trade (SXP Schulz Xtruded Products v. United States, CIT # 22-00136).