Chinese Automobile Equipment Exporter Asks CIT for Section 301 Tariffs Exemption
A Chinese automobile accessories exporter sought summary judgment at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 7 in its case contesting CBP's imposition of 25% Section 301 tariffs on its products (Keystone Automotive Operations v. U.S., CIT # 21-00215).
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.
Keystone Automotive Operations, a Chinese company that manufactures specialty automobile equipment and accessories, filed its initial complaint in September 2021, saying its 2020 entry of steel bars that attach to the sides of motor vehicles should have been exempt from the tariffs (see 2109020050).
Keystone said CBP properly classified its products under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8708. However, it said, it should have qualified for an exemption for “side protective attachments” under subheading 9903.88.56. CBP liquidated the entries under subheading 9903.88.03 without the exemption.
In an email to Keystone after it initially classified Keystone's entry, CBP said it considered the products to be side steps intended to help passengers enter vehicles, not protective attachments.