Trade Law Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login

Harmonized Tariff Schedule

The Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) provide classification provisions and duty rates for almost every item that exists. It is a system of classifying and taxing all goods imported into the United States. The HTS is based on the international Harmonized System, which is a global standard for naming and describing trade products, and consists of a hierarchical structure that assigns a specific code and rate to each type of merchandise for duty, quota, and statistical purposes. The HTS was made effective on January 1, 1989, replacing the former Tariff Schedules of the United States. It is maintained by the U.S. International Trade Commission, but CBP is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the HTS. 

to
articlessource documents
Refine Topic Search
Clear Terms

Search Primer

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons.

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match (e.g. "China import").

Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead.

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., +CBP).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Always use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted (multi-word) term, you want to only include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

IEEPA Tariff Challengers Ask for 3-Way Split of Argument Time, 45 Minutes Per Side
October 2, 2025 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

The parties challenging tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act asked the Supreme Court to grant divided argument among the three groups of plaintiffs challenging the tariffs and to allow for 45 minutes of argument for each side. The three groups are five importers that filed suit at the Court of International Trade, 12 U.S. states that filed suit at CIT, and two importers that filed their case at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity
Importer Drops Suit Seeking Section 301 Exclusions for Vinyl Flooring Entries
October 1, 2025 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

Importer PF America dropped another case at the Court of International Trade seeking exclusions from Section 301 duties on its vinyl flooring imports. The importer entered the goods under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings 3916.20.0020 and 9903.88.17, though CBP classified the goods under subheadings 3916.20.0091 and 9903.88.02, subjecting the flooring to Section 301 duties. Recently, PF America dropped a separate suit also seeking Section 301 exclusions on its flooring entries under a similar secondary subheading (see 2509190050) (PF America v. United States, CIT # 22-00255).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity
Commerce Alters AFA Rate Calculation in Solar Cell AD Review After CIT Remand
September 30, 2025 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

The Commerce Department on Sept. 26 stuck with its valuation of solar glass, an input in solar cells, and altered its adverse facts available calculations in remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade in a case on the 2019-20 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from China. The result left the AD rates for respondents Jinko Solar and Risen Energy unchanged, with Jinko receiving a 20.99% rate and Risen getting a 12.24% rate (Jinko Solar Import and Export Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00219).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity, Country of origin cases