An importer challenging new Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum derivatives is now seeking to bar CBP from collecting the tariffs only on its own entries, and not on entries from all importers subject to the new duties. PrimeSource Building Products, after “further consultations” with the government, withdrew its original motion for a universal temporary restraining order on Feb. 12 (see 2002060075), and filed a new motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction barring the government “from collecting duty deposits pursuant to Proclamation 9980 … on entries by PrimeSource Building Products Inc. filed on or after 12:01 am February 8, 2020.” Oman Fasteners on Feb. 7 filed a similar request for an order that only affects its own entries, in a separate challenge to the Section 232 tariffs. In a letter about PrimeSource’s request, the government said it does “not consent to a temporary restraining order or injunction.” A teleconference on the case is scheduled for Feb. 13.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 3-9:
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Feb. 3-7 in case they were missed.
Customs duties are estimated at $72 billion in the current fiscal year, and the White House projects that number will climb to $92 billion in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. It projects that duties then will fall to $54 billion the following year.
CBP will be posting “the active Section 232 product exclusions in ACE” to its website on a weekly basis, it said. “If you are unable to file an entry with one of these active product exclusion numbers, contact your CBP client representative.”
New Section 232 tariffs on finished products of steel and aluminum face a court challenge just before they’re set to take effect. PrimeSource, a Texas company that bills itself “one of the largest purveyors of fasteners in the world,” says the tariffs on steel and aluminum “derivatives” violate the statutory requirements of Section 232 and importers’ constitutional rights.
The effort to give Congress more say on Section 232 tariffs that has stalled so far is not broad enough to ensure that erratic tariffs are not levied, according to experts who spoke during a Feb. 5 briefing held by Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla., a Ways and Means Committee member who has hosted trade sessions three times in the last few months. No other members of the committee responsible for trade attended, but Rep. Jim Cooper, Rep. Donna Shalala and Rep. Jim Costa, all Democrats, listened for at least part of the session, in addition to many Hill staffers and some lawyers, diplomats and industry representatives.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 27 - Feb. 2:
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Jan. 27-31 in case they were missed.
The coming expansion of Section 232 tariffs to finished steel and aluminum goods will not apply to immediate transportation entries that are accepted before Feb. 8, CBP said in a Feb. 4 CSMS message. The message gives guidance for filers affected by the new 10 percent tariffs on some finished aluminum goods and 25 percent tariffs on some finished steel goods that start on Feb. 8 (see 2001280072). Eligible immediate transportation entries “shall be subject to the duty rates in effect when the immediate transportation entry was accepted at the port of original importation,” the agency said. CBP used a similar policy when the previous Section 232 tariffs took effect (see 1804050027).