Customs duty

Alvarez & Marsal Taxand hired Michael McGee to lead the consultancy's new Global Trade and Customs practice, it said in a May 12 news release. McGee was previously the global director of International Trade Regulations at BP America. “The political landscape and the pandemic have led to more regulations, increasingly complex tax regimes and the need to redraw supply chains. As a result, there is greater demand for expert tax advisory services, including for global trade and tariffs and duties,” said Ernesto Perez, managing director of the Houston firm. “In line with A&M’s leadership, action, results approach, A&M Taxand is responding to the shifting business environment by expanding and strengthening specialized tax services to maximize value for clients.” A&M said McGee has “expert knowledge of U.S. Customs Law, Department of Commerce Export Administration Regulations, Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Asset Control, and Department of Commerce Antiboycott Regulations.”

An increase in CBP bond increase letters in recent years doesn't seem likely to dissipate anytime soon, International Bond and Marine Brokerage said in a blog post. The increased tariffs during the Trump administration led to more bond notices from CBP (see 1807260011) and during April, "IB&M saw its highest level of monthly bond increases since former President [Donald] Trump was in office," it said. "What does that mean for customs brokers and their importing clients? More of the same we’re afraid," it said. "Higher Tariffs on Chinese merchandise and ensuing Bond Increase letters do not appear to be going away any time soon. We recommend customs brokers advise importers not to simply take the bare minimum bond amount requested on CBP's increase demand letter. We instead recommend importers go with a bond amount based on CBP’s guidance to Forecast the next 12 months of anticipated duties to avoid Bond-Stacking Liability. Customs Brokers should use entry data from CBP and work closely with clients to avoid insufficiency letters, demurrage, unnecessary collateral, cash tie-ups, and additional single entry bond fees."

Nike shoes that include Bluetooth connectivity, data processing, flash memory and auto-fit technology are classifiable as shoes, CBP said in an April 30 ruling. The company had argued the shoes should be classified based upon the Bluetooth transceiver, similar to smartwatches that rely on Bluetooth to transmit data, under subheading 8517.62. "Wearable 'smart' technology is a growing segment of the marketplace," CBP said. "Without a doubt, these types of goods will require individual, or case-by-case, analyses in order to determine their essential character." Jeffrey Whalen, a lawyer for Nike, requested the tariff classification ruling from CBP.

Trade groups whose members would have to pay foreign digital services taxes and trade groups whose members would have to pay if tariffs are hiked up to 25% on products from the countries imposing DSTs agree that DSTs are wrong and that the government should use all its persuasive power to convince countries like India, the United Kingdom and Spain not to impose these taxes. But the internet trade groups split on whether tariffs are the right tool to convince countries to roll back or never pass DSTs, and retailers and apparel and footwear companies say the tariffs will hurt American businesses and consumers more than the targeted exporters.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on April 26 upheld a recent lower court ruling that found an active pharmaceutical ingredient imported by Janssen Ortho eligible for duty-free treatment. In line with a February 2020 Court of International Trade decision, the Federal Circuit found darunavir ethanolate, the active ingredient in a Janssen HIV medication, is encompassed by a listing in the tariff schedule's Pharmaceutical Appendix for darunavir.

The Court of International Trade found that New York-based importer NYWL Enterprises is on the hook for over $4 million in unpaid duties and civil penalties after the court found the importer knowingly misclassified its entries of Siamese coaxial cable from China. In an April 16 decision, Chief Judge Mark Barnett ordered NYWL to pay the U.S. $379,665.83 in unpaid duties and a civil penalty of $3.76 million plus post-judgment interest, and costs.” The U.S. had alleged fraudulent violations of 19 USC 1592, which Barnett accepted as true after NYWL failed to defend itself.

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai's conversations with her counterparts from Italy and the Netherlands addressed global overcapacity in steel, according to summaries of the video calls released April 16. The administration has suggested that Section 232 tariffs on aluminum and steel cannot be removed until overcapacity has been addressed, even when the countries subject to those tariffs are not dumping steel or aluminum in their exports to the U.S.

The Office of Management and Budget should restart consideration of a proposal to end the de minimis exemption for goods subject to Section 301 tariffs, the National Council of Textile Organizations said in an April 14 letter to acting OMB Director Robert Fairweather. The review of the proposal began at OMB last year (see 2009040026) but was removed as part of a broad regulatory freeze after President Joe Biden took office (see 2101210039). OMB should reopen the review and “grant approval to this much needed change in CBP regulations,” NCTO said.

Broad disagreement separates the HMTX-Jasco plaintiffs from the government in the massive Section 301 litigation over the issue of whether importers who prevail on the merits of the case would be entitled to tariff refunds on customs entries for which liquidations become final, according to a joint status report filed April 12 with the Court of International Trade.

Christopher Kane, partner at Simon Gluck, expressed optimism over a recent U.S. Court of International Trade ruling striking down an extension of President Donald Trump's Section 232 tariffs to aluminum and steel derivatives (see 2104050049). He believes the ruling spells good news for the massive litigation involving more than 3,700 companies challenging the expansion of the Section 301 tariffs on goods from China. Although based on a different law, Kane believes CIT's April 5 ruling demonstrates the court's willingness to hold the president to account over laws and regulations. In the case of the derivatives, the tariff expansion was eliminated because it was imposed after a 105-day period during which the president can impose Section 232 tariffs after receiving a report on the need for the duties from the Commerce Department.