CBP Arbitrarily Declined to Accept True Value of Steel Product Imports, Importer Argues
CBP improperly declined to accept the proper valuation of various iron and steel products imported by NOA Brands America, the importer argued in an April 10 complaint at the Court of International Trade (NOA Brands America v. United States, CIT # 23-00109).
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.
NOA Brands said it brought in a single entry of iron and steel "Neckcaps" in 2021 under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7326.90.8688. The importer said its customs broker incorrectly reported to CBP that the value of the products was $594,500, leading to a total duty of $165,865.50 and processing fee of $538.40.
Startled by the "wildly inaccurate" valuation, NOA Brands said it conducted an internal review and found that the errant reporting "stemmed from an inaccurate commercial invoice NOA Brands received from its supplier, Xiamen Yishengteng Industry and Trade Co." that the customs broker used in preparing the entry. The invoice "incorrectly listed both the unit value of the merchandise, and the total value of the merchandise in U.S. Dollars (USD) instead of Chinese Renminbi (RMB)," the complaint said.
The importer then filed a post summary correction with CBP, claiming that the duty should have been $428.54. The complaint said the evidence it submitted to the agency includes a corrected invoice from Xiamen denoting the value of the merchandise in USD, "at the proper unit price, and correct calculation of total value." The value aligned with the proof of payment from NOA Brands to Xiamen and "corresponded to both the invoice number" and the purchase order, the brief said.
NOA Brands added that not all of the orders were entered in the U.S. A wire transfer statement from the importer to Xiamen shows a "lump sum payment of $62,169," which includes payment for the subject merchandise. When this amount is added to the payment for the other invoices, "the total wire payment is a direct match with the total value for all the denoted invoices," the complaint said.
"None of the other invoices listed in the supplier payment log" are linked with the entry, "and none of the other merchandise has been imported into the United States on any other entry," NOA Brands said. CBP's refusal to accept the importer's protest in light of this evidence "was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law," the complaint said.