Dominican Aluminum Exporter Takes to CIT to Challenge CBP Finding It Used Forced Labor
Aluminum extrusions exporter Kingtom Aluminio, which operates out of the Dominican Republic, brought a complaint to the Court of International Trade on Dec. 23 to challenge CBP’s finding that the exporter had used forced labor (Kingtom Aluminio v. U.S., CIT # 24-00264).
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.
It said it was bringing the complaint to “defend its good name.”
The U.S. published a finding in the Federal Register announcing CBP has determined Kingtom was using forced labor “in a factory in the Dominican Republic” to produce its goods (see 2412030017). It also issued a news release announcing that, in the investigation, it had identified Kingtom as responsible for the International Labour Organization’s forced labor indicators: “abuse of vulnerability, intimidation and threats, deception, withholding of wages, physical and sexual violence, restriction of movement, and excessive overtime.”
In turn, Kingtom alleged the government had failed to provide “evidentiary support, rationale, or explanation” for the finding. Nor had Kingtom even been given notice it was under investigation, it said.
“In its rush to judgment, the Government skipped right over the normal regulatory progression that begins with a withhold release finding as per 19 C.F.R. 12.42(e) and then progresses to a conclusive finding under 19 C.F.R. 12.42(f),” it said.
Normally, the first notice of a forced labor investigation received by an exporter is a withhold release order published by the customs agency, which detains the imports alleged to have been manufactured using forced labor, Kingtom said. After it does, the importer can provide information to CBP that its goods were not made with forced labor. But CBP didn’t issue one for Kingtom’s imports, it said, which meant Kingtom hadn’t had the chance to defend itself.
The exporter also pushed back against CBP’s use of the International Labour Organization’s forced labor indicators, saying that they “do not equate to a determination that there exists a finding of forced labor” as required by U.S. law.
As a result of the finding, Kingtom’s exports are unfairly prohibited from entering the United States, the exporter said, meaning Kingtom can no longer fulfill its contractual obligations to its customers.
It brought two counts against CBP claiming that the agency’s finding that Kingtom used forced and indentured labor was arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion.