Importer Prysmian Cables and Systems again said Aug. 15 that the plain language of the executive order establishing Section 232 exclusion requests doesn’t allow the Commerce Department to base denials on national security considerations (Prysmian Cables and Systems USA v. United States, CIT # 24-00101).
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.
Importers' argument that the tariffs imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act don't arise out of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S. "strains the statutory text past the breaking point," the government argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, D.C. Cir. # 25-5202).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
In the Aug. 13 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 33), CBP published proposals to modify and revoke ruling letters concerning the tariff classification of metal and rubber automotive air springs and suspension bushings, as well as modify ruling letters and revoke treatment relating to the documentary requirements of subheading 9801.00.20.
Sidley trade practice co-lead Ted Muprhy advised clients to prepare now for a potential court ruling overturning International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs by downloading import reports from ACE to demonstrate how much they have paid in IEEPA tariffs since they began. He also said they should do so each month from now on, until there is a final resolution in court.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Four importers recently dismissed their cases at the Court of International Trade regarding President Donald Trump's decision from his first administration to revoke a Section 201 tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels. The importers are Shining Solutions, Light & Hope Energy, JinkoSolar (U.S.) and Longi Solar Technology (U.S.) (Shining Solutions v. U.S., CIT # 22-00301) (Light & Hope Energy v. U.S., CIT # 22-00303) (JinkoSolar (U.S.) v. U.S., CIT # 22-00241) (Longi Solar Technology (U.S.) v. U.S., CIT # 22-00212).
The International Trade Commission urges an approach to the redaction of business proprietary information that "the law forbids," Alex Moss, executive director of the Public Interest Patent Law Institute, said in an Aug. 13 amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case on the commission's redaction policy. Moss said the ITC unlawfully asks the court to "redact judicial records at its request without requiring any justification" (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. #s 24-1566, 25-127).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York: