The origin of electric vehicle motors and the applicability of Section 301 tariffs depends on where the two most important components of the engine are made, said CBP in a recently released ruling. In response to a country of origin ruling request from LG Electronics, CBP considered multiple manufacturing scenarios for the motors.
Country of origin cases
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade's newest judge, Stephen Vaden, issued his first opinion with the court on April 21, dismissing tire importer Strategic Import Supply's challenge of CBP's assessment of countervailing duties on its imports of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. Vaden found that the importer's protest was filed too late, holding the 180-day deadline for protests runs from the date of liquidation, rather than the date CBP received updated assessment instructions from Commerce after Commerce amended rates set in the relevant CV duty administrative review.
The following are short summaries of CBP rulings recently added to the agency's CROSS database (any rulings that warrant a more detailed summary will be in another Trade Law Daily article):
The Commerce Department continued on course in a remand redetermination on cold-rolled steel from South Korea submitted to the Court of International Trade April 19. The agency offered further explanation in response to a December 2020 Federal Circuit decision that struck down aspects of its final determination in the original CV duty investigation on cold-rolled steel, but did not make any changes to its findings to address concerns over a finding that electricity offered at less than adequate remuneration (LTAR) was not a countervailable subsidy. The Federal Circuit had remanded because Commerce had purportedly relied on its old “preferentiality” standard, and failed to address a second South Korean electricity producer.
Following a Court of International Trade opinion that appeared to question first sale import valuations from non-market economies, the court's observations may not be as disruptive as they first appear, KPMG said in an April 19 analysis. The judge's questioning of whether first sale could be used on non-market economies was non-binding and an issue only lightly explored at the agency level and during litigation, the firm said.