The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated between Oct. 28 and Nov. 4 with the following headquarters ruling (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
CBP CROSS Rulings
CBP issues binding advance rulings in connection with the importation of merchandise into the United States. They issue the rulings to give the trade community transparency of how CBP will treat a prospective import or carrier transaction. Common rulings include the tariff classification, country of origin, or free trade agreement applicability of merchandise, among other things. These rulings are available in CBP's Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) database.
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
In the Oct. 30 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 58, No. 43), CBP published proposals to revoke ruling letters concerning women's pants and infrared video goggles from China.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Watches that have case backs set with watch glass made of nonprecious materials -- such as synthetic sapphire -- are not considered to have cases made "wholly" of precious metal and are classified differently than watches that do, the Court of International Trade ruled Nov. 1. The holding came as a watch importer’s motion for judgment in a 2018 case wound up being denied, and the government’s was granted, by CIT Judge Jane Restani.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Importer Tingley Rubber Corp. told the Court of International Trade that its latex rubber boot savers should be classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6401.99.30, dutiable at 25%, and not under subheading 6401.92.9000, dutiable at 37.5%. The company filed a complaint on Oct. 31 after initially filing its case in 2020. The company said CBP issued a HQ ruling in 2019 confirming that its boot savers properly fit under subheading 6401.99.30. Tingley's preferred subheading covers footwear that covers the knee and is designed for use without closures. Meanwhile, subheading 6401.92.90 covers other footwear that covers the ankle but not the knee (Tingley Rubber Corp. v. United States, CIT # 20-03711).
The Court of International Trade issued a confidential decision on Oct. 31 remanding in part and sustaining in part CBP's finding that importer Scioto Valley Woodworking wasn't evading antidumping and countervailing duties on wooden cabinets from China. Judge Lisa Wang gave the parties until Dec. 2 to review the decision for confidential information. Petitioner American Kitchen Cabinet Alliance brought the suit to ask whether CBP's Office of Rulings and Regulations can reverse evidence-based evasion findings made by CBP's Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Directorate (see 2403120038) (American Kitchen Cabinet Alliance v. U.S., CIT # 23-00140).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York: