CBP Denies Apparel Company Protest Over Goods Held Due to Possible Use of XPCC Cotton
Efforts by Uniqlo to prove that no connection exists between a shipment of men's shirts and cotton from the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps in China were insufficient, CBP said in a May 10 ruling. CBP stopped a shipment at the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach in January, about a month after the agency issued a withhold release order on all cotton products made by XPCC (see 2012020071).
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.
Uniqlo responded in March to the port, which soon after told Uniqlo that the shipment would be excluded from the U.S., CBP said. The company filed a protest with an Application for Further Review on April 19, the agency said. Even though the protest filing was beyond the three-month deadline, because the port's exclusion notice was “premature” CBP said it would consider the issue.
The company told CBP that because “the raw cotton used to produce the subject cotton garments did not originate from XPCC or, for that matter, in China, they are not subject to the WRO, and should therefore be released.” But, “Uniqlo has not provided substantial evidence to establish that the entities within the XPCC that processed that cotton into the subject goods did so without the use of forced labor,” CBP said.
CBP's detention letter in January asked for “evidence such as 'list of production steps and production record for the yarn, including records that identify the cotton and cotton producer of the raw cotton'” and other information that “would be required to establish that the subject goods were not produced by the use of forced labor.” Uniqlo's submission lacked several pieces of information that the agency said it would need for proof that XPCC cotton wasn't involved, CBP said.
“Although Uniqlo has provided evidence relating to the sale, acquisition, source location, transportation, and delivery of the raw cotton used to produce the subject cotton garments,” the company didn't “provided any probative evidence to establish that their imported cotton garments were not produced in part by forced labor by the XPCC,” CBP said. Uniqlo “will be afforded the opportunity to export the goods,” CBP said.