The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated between Dec. 17 and Dec. 20 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):
In response to a Georgia woman’s claim that the customs broker license exam “lacked sufficient information” on four questions, resulting in her failure to pass (see 2402160040), the U.S. said the woman was “entirely incorrect” regarding the questions’ ambiguity (Skeeter-Jo Stoute-Francois v. U.S., CIT # 24-00046).
Importer Generac Power Systems brought on Dec. 20 two complaints to the Court of International Trade alleging CBP, in 2020, applied Section 301 tariffs to multiple of its entries despite excluding “substantially identical” merchandise (Generac Power Systems v. U.S., CIT # 20-03882, -03920).
The International Trade Commission on Dec. 23 published a summary of administrative protective order (APO) breach investigations related to proceedings under title VII and section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 conducted during fiscal year 2024. The commission said that, over time, it has added to its report of breaches in proceedings other than title VII and violations of the ITC's rules, including the rule on bracketing business proprietary information.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. Dec. 16 supported its motion to dismiss the amended complaint of aluminum rod importer Prysmian Cables and Systems, saying that the importer’s arguments failed to state a claim, aren’t subject to the “continuing violation doctrine” and don’t have a six-year statute of limitations (Prysmian Cables and Systems v. U.S., CIT # 24-00101).
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) improperly rejected 63 Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests filed by California-based importer Mirror Metals, the company argued in a Dec. 20 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Mirror Metals said that if BIS applied the standards laid out in its regulations, the "only reasonable conclusion" it could have drawn was that the company "cannot obtain the subject steel in the U.S. market in a sufficient quantity or quality, on a timely basis to replace the steel it currently imports" (Mirror Metals v. United States, CIT # 24-00260).
Importer Seneca Foods Corp. will appeal a Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's rejection of eight Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests, the company said in a notice of appeal (see 2410240029). In the decision, the trade court found that the rejections were backed by substantial evidence and in line with agency practice. The court also sustained Commerce's focus on "prospective evidence of steel production" and rejected Seneca's claim that Commerce's approach gives "short shrift to course-of-dealing evidence" that suggests that an objecting U.S. company won't actually deliver the goods (Seneca Foods Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00243).
Importer Ideavillage Products Corp. on Dec. 19 voluntarily dismissed at the Court of International Trade its customs suit regarding the tariff classification of its shavers and replacement cutting heads. The company challenged CBP's classification of the goods under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8510.30.0000, dutiable at 4.2%, claiming they should be classified under subheading 8510.10.0000, free of duty. Counsel for Ideavillage declined to comment (Ideavillage Products Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00332).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York: