The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate on Oct. 14 in a case affirming the Court of International Trade's rejection of excise tax drawback regulations. The Aug. 23 opinion held that CBP cannot limit the amount of drawback that can be claimed on excise taxes, finding that the CBP regulation defied the "clear intent of Congress" (see 2108230036). The decision struck down a 2018 rule that was issued as part of a broader overhaul of drawback regulations following the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (The National Association of Manufacturers, et al. v. Department of the Treasury, et al., CIT #19-00053).
Drawback
A duty drawback is a refund by CBP of the duties, taxes, or fees paid on imported goods, which were imposed upon importation. More broadly, a drawback also includes the refund or remission of other excise taxes pursuant to other provisions of law. CBP's duty drawback scheme under the Customs Act of 1962 allows exporters to receive a refund on customs duties they paid on imported products that are then used or incorporated into other products for export or remain unused until importation.
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Sept. 24 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
If the Commerce Department is to deduct Section 232 national security tariffs from exporter Noksel Celik Boru Sanayi's U.S. price in an antidumping duty rate calculation, it should do it at the original 25% rate and not the increased 50% margin subsequently announced by President Donald Trump and later invalidated by the Court of International Trade, the plaintiff said in a Sept. 3 CIT brief at the Court of International Trade (Noksel Celik Boru Sanayi A.S. v. United States, CIT #21-00140).
Russell Semmel, former Arent Fox attorney, joined international law firm Bryan Cave's New York office as counsel in the International Trade Practice, the firm announced Aug. 30. With more than a decade of experience, Semmel will continue to advise importers on issues of “tariff classification and valuation; free trade agreements and preference programs; country of origin and marking; drawback; seizures and forfeitures; civil customs penalties; antidumping and countervailing duties; and other laws and regulations enforced by" CBP, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the Department of Commerce and the International Trade Commission, Bryan Cave said.
Operations including the oiling of a machine, the fitting of a transformer to adjust electrical voltage and the uploading of software patches to a machine tool do not constitute manufacturing or use, and do not render the machine tool ineligible for unused merchandise drawback, CBP said in a recent ruling. The operations do not transform the machine tools into a new product but merely make them operational for the end customer, CBP told Knuth Machine in HQ H290897, issued July 28 and publicly released Aug. 26.
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Aug. 26 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
CBP cannot limit the amount of drawback that can be claimed on excise taxes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an Aug. 23 opinion upholding the Court of International Trade's ruling. Holding that the CBP regulation defied the "clear intent of Congress," the appellate court ruled against the government appeal of CIT's decision, providing a win for the plaintiffs, the National Association of Manufacturers and The Beer Institute.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with the Court of International Trade's rejection of CBP regulations that limit the amount of drawback that can be claimed on excise taxes, the CAFC said in a ruling. "We conclude that the expansive definition in the Rule, which extends drawback to situations in which tax is never paid or determined, conflicts with the unambiguous text of the statute," said the CAFC.
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Aug. 17 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):