Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings Jan. 2
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Jan. 2 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
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.
H335919: 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.80a; Coastwise Transportation; Passengers; Small Craft; Tendering
| Ruling: The use of Zodiacs for tendering purposes does not violate 46 U.S.C. §55103, provided that the facts above apply. |
| Issue: Does use of the Zodiacs as tenders at the requested locations uses violate the coastwise laws, including 46 U.S.C. § 55103? |
| Item: In many locations there is limited or no infrastructure available for the Vessel to safely dock. Accordingly, the Company desires to make use of non-coastwise-qualified rigid hull inflatable boats (“Zodiacs”) to tender cruise passengers between the Vessel, which will be anchored in U.S. territorial waters, and eleven specified points on land in Alaska. The Company has also requested confirmation of whether Petersburg, Alaska, previously deemed an acceptable location for tendering, remains acceptable as a location for tendering. |
| Reason: CBP has strictly construed the use of non-coastwise qualified vessels as tenders to be limited to use only as a tender for the entirety of the cruise vessel’s voyage within U.S. territorial waters. Accordingly, strictly under the facts as presented, the Zodiacs may be used as tenders without violating 46 U.S.C. § 55103. However, using the Zodiacs for any other purpose, only to use the same Zodiac as a tender at a later point, would violate either the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 55102, or the PVSA, 46 U.S.C. § 55103, or both, depending on what is transported. |
| Ruling Date: Dec. 26, 2023 |
H307771: Application for Further Review of Protest Number 390119101517; Section 232; Time of Entry; 19 C.F.R. § 141.68; Arrival Date
| Ruling: The legal entry date of the entries is June 5, 2018, subsequent to the June 1, 2018, effective date for the Section 232 duties imposed on the entered merchandise. Accordingly, CBP properly liquidated Essar’s entries with the assessment of Section 232 duties. The protest should be denied in full. |
| Issue: What are the legal dates of entry of Essar’s entries? |
| Item: Essar imported three entries of steel from Canada in 2018. There is no dispute that Essar’s entries would be subject to the Section 232 duties imposed by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) if entered for consumption on or after the effective date of the duties, i.e., June 1, 2018. Essar said a Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement filed May 7 indicates the goods arrived prior to June 1, 2018. However, the vessel arrival date transmitted in ACE by the ship's captain came on June 5, 2018. |
| Reason: “Merchandise will not be authorized for release, nor will an entry or an entry summary which serves as both the entry and entry summary be considered filed or presented, until the merchandise has arrived within the port limits with the intent to unlade.” Consequently, the date of entry cannot occur prior to the date of arrival within the limits of a port with the intent to unlade. Given that ACE is CBP’s official system of record, and CBP is accorded a presumption of correctness arising from “the presumption of regularity that attaches to Customs’ recordkeeping,” the merchandise within all three of Essar’s entries actually arrived within port limits with the intent to unlade on June 5, 2018. |
| Ruling Date: Nov. 2, 2023 |