A World Trade Organization arbitrator determined the methodology Canada can use to set the level of retaliatory measures it can impose on goods imported from the U.S. if the U.S. applies countervailing duties on Canadian goods based on a measure found to be inconsistent with WTO rules. In the July 13 decision, the arbitrator said Canada would set the appropriate level of nullification or impairment in the future "based on the four-variety Armington model," which was recommended by the U.S. and can quantify the trade decline experienced by Canada through a particular use of the U.S.'s adverse facts available measures in CVD proceedings.

Florida-based importer Siboney Corporation violated the law by fraudulently avoiding paying Federal Excise Tax (FET) on 32 entries of large cigars, the U.S. argued in a July 12 complaint at the Court of International Trade. DOJ alleged that Siboney improperly calculated its amount of FET owed on the entries based on the sales price from the Nicaraguan exporter plus a 5% markup to a "fictitious" company, Blue Mountain Cigars, and an affiliated wholesaler, GAMATTSA (United States v. Siboney Corporation, CIT #22-00204).

The Court of International Trade in a July 12 opinion denied a motion from Kevin Ho, owner and director of importer Atria, to dismiss a penalty action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Judge Timothy Reif said that the U.S. properly identified the "who, what, when, where, and how" of Ho's alleged fraud over the alleged illegal importation of HID headlight conversion kits, so personal jurisdiction was established. However, Reif denied in part and granted in part Ho's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, holding that the U.S. made insufficient factual allegations on Ho's knowledge and intent to violate customs law based on fraud, but giving the U.S. the opportunity to amend its complaint.

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.

A U.S. appeals court on July 8 affirmed a 2020 District of Columbia court ruling dismissing FedEx’s lawsuit against the Bureau of Industry and Security, saying the shipping company failed to show BIS acted outside its authority. The court also rejected FedEx’s claims that the agency was using the Export Administration Regulations to apply overly burdensome liability standards on carriers and penalize them even when carriers do not have knowledge of violations.

Importer Charman Manufacturing didn't evade antidumping duties on its malleable cast iron pipe fittings imported from China, CBP said in a July 5 determination. After looking into claims from Matco-Norca that Charman skirted the duties by transshipping the pipe fittings through Indonesia or Singapore, CBP said it didn't have substantial evidence proving these claims. The determination in the Enforce and Protect Act investigation is one of only a handful of times that CBP has come back with a negative evasion finding.

The Court of International Trade in a July 8 opinion dismissed importer Rimco's antidumping and countervailing duty challenge after finding that the claims lack subject-matter jurisdiction at the trade court. Judge Mark Barnett said that Rimco's Eighth Amendment claims could not proceed under Section 1581(a) since they are not contesting the liquidation of the steel wheel entries at issue but instead contest the Commerce Department's actions leading up to the high AD/CVD rates. The judge further ruled that Rimco's claims made under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, cannot stand since the importer could have requested an administrative review of the AD/CVD orders, clearly showing that other avenues of remedy were available.

The U.S.'s rationale for its motion to stay in an Enforce and Protect Act case at the Court of International Trade is "remarkable," and essentially concedes that CBP cannot back its evasion finding, plaintiffs Norca Industrial Co. and International Piping & Procurement Group (IPPG) said in a July 6 brief opposing the stay. The stay motion wants to halt proceedings at CIT so a covered merchandise referral can be issued to the Commerce Department, but the plaintiffs said that such a referral is not possible, the case has been narrowed to record issues and the move signals a concession on the facts (Norca Industrial Company v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00192).

The Commerce Department verified that countervailing duty respondent Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co. and its U.S. customers did not benefit from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program (EBCP), in remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade on July 8. However, Commerce said that it still believes that the use of adverse facts available over the program is warranted since the Chinese government did not provide the requested information supposedly needed for a full analysis of whether the respondent and its U.S. customers benefitted from the EBCP (Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00166).

The Court of International in a July 7 opinion upheld CBP's decision to deny Shuzhen Zhong a customs broker's license. Zhong, appearing pro se and seeking to get to a passing grade of 75% or higher on a customs broker license exam, appealed the answers to two questions. Judge Jane Restani ruled that CBP's decision to deny credit for both questions was backed by substantial evidence.