The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated on Dec. 19 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):
The U.S. agreed to classify importer Jing Mei Automotive (USA)'s rear drive axle covers and front axle covers under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8708.70.60, dutiable at 2.5%, according to stipulated judgments the government and Jing Mei filed in a trio of cases at the Court of International Trade (Jing Mei Automotive (USA) v. United States, CIT #'s 14-00281, 14-00060, 14-00003).
The Court of International Trade did not err in classifying The Comfy, an oversized pullover imported by Cozy Comfort, as a pullover of Harmonized Tariff Schedule 6110 and not a blanket of heading 6301, the U.S. argued in a Dec. 19 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Cozy Comfort v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1889).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
In the Dec. 17 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 47), CBP published proposals to revoke ruling letters and revoke treatment relating to the tariff classification of glass cold brew coffee makers and teapots with stainless steel filters or infusers.
Ceratizit USA, a North Carolina-based tungsten carbide distributor, agreed to pay $54.4 million to settle allegations it violated the False Claims Act by "knowingly and improperly failing to pay duties owed on tungsten carbide products" from China, DOJ announced.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. agreed to liquidate hoverboards imported by 3BTech under duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8711.60.000 and exclude the goods from Section 301 China tariffs under secondary subheading 9903.88.17. 3BTech and the U.S. filed a stipulated judgment in the importer's test case on the issue, which resolves the spat in favor of 3BTech (3BTech v. United States, CIT # 21-00026).
The United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement established a "double substantial transformation" test to qualify for preferential tr eatment under the FTA, the U.S. argued in a cross-motion for partial summary judgment at the Court of International Trade. The controlling authority regarding the test is General Note 30 to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and not, as importer JBF Bahrain has argued, the executive agreement between the two countries or a side letter on tariff classification, the U.S. said (JBF Bahrain v. United States, CIT # 23-00067).