Electronics Groups Prevent Customs Gray Market 'Known Importer' Program
The Electronic Components Industry Association and other trade groups stopped an industry recommendation from going forward for a Customs and Border Protection pilot program to test a new approach to gray market imports, said the ECIA in a Sunday news…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
release. It said the ECIA, Semiconductor Industry Association and U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposed the recommendation during a recent Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Working Group session. Gray market products are imported goods that were intended for sale outside the U.S. The proposed "Known Importer Program" for gray market products "would have established a known importer status for unauthorized sellers to bypass detention and inspection of shipments at the borders," said the ECIA. "The proposal called for trade associations to administer the program by designating which of its members met the program’s criteria for a known importer. The proposal, if it had been adopted, would have set up a pilot program to test the concept for importers of electronic components." The COAC is made up of industry members that make recommendations to CBP, which ultimately decides whether a COAC-endorsed initiative will be taken up. CBP and a co-chair of the COAC Trade Enforcement and Revenue Collection Subcommittee, which the IPR Working Group is part of, didn't comment Tuesday. "This proposal would have seriously impaired the integrity of the authorized distribution channel for electronic components," said Robin Gray, ECIA general counsel. "Our zealous opposition to the proposal was clearly a determining factor in the [IPR working group's] decision not to recommend the program."