The processing operations in China on frozen roasted eel from the U.S. or Europe are close enough to filleting to result in a substantial transformation, CBP said in a Dec. 16 ruling. Law firm Grunfeld Desiderio asked CBP on behalf of American Eel Depot for a further review of protest after multiple entries of the eels were entered as products of China and subject to Section 301 duties. The company argued that the eels should instead be of U.S. or European origin.
Many expect trade policy under the Biden administration to be more worker-focused than consumer-focused, but many specifics remain undecided. “The jury is still out on what that pro-worker trade policy will look like in practice,” said Joshua Boswell, a lawyer at Crowell & Moring. Boswell spoke to a webinar audience Feb. 17 on the 2021 trade outlook and said such predictions don't tell you much about tariffs, free trade negotiations or trade remedies in and of themselves.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb.8-14:
TCL Communication Technology Holdings’ North American smartphone subsidiary became one of the largest importers to join the massive Section 301 litigation when it filed a complaint Feb. 12 in the Court of International Trade. Like the roughly 3,500 other lawsuits inundating the court, TCT Mobile (US) seeks to get the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods vacated and the duties refunded with interest. TCT's claims “accrued with each and every entry of products” with List 3 or List 4A tariff exposure, the company said. The “instant action” was filed within two years of the date that TCT paid the lists 3 and 4A duties, it said, satisfying the court’s two-year statute of limitations on the timeliness of complaints.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Feb. 8-12 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The U.S. Court of International Trade plans to “proceed first” on choosing a “representative sample” of test cases to manage the roughly 3,500 Section 301 complaints inundating the court, said an order signed Feb. 16 by the three-judge panel of Mark Barnett, Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves. All the suits seek to get the List 3 and List 4A Chinese tariffs vacated and the duties refunded with interest. “The court expects that the number of sample cases identified will be small enough to permit the efficient disposition of this litigation while allowing the court to consider all claims raised by the various Plaintiffs,” the order said. “The court anticipates issuing a stay of all Section 301 cases assigned to the panel that are not selected to proceed as sample cases.”
Board members and people who provide services to foreign-trade zones talked about what the National Association of Foreign-Trade Zones should work on now that it lost the battle on USMCA rules of origin treatment for goods produced in those zones. “Now that provision’s back in the act, it’s going to be a real challenge,” said Melissa Irmen, chair of the NAFTZ board. The group wants to make sure a U.S.-United Kingdom free trade agreement doesn't prohibit goods made in FTZs from qualifying for rules of origin, as USMCA does. “They are concerned that the USMCA approach could be a precedent.”
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative says in a Federal Register notice to be published Feb. 12 that in light of the January revision to the tariff targets, the government and industry agree there is no need for revision this month regarding the Section 301 investigation involving “the enforcement of U.S. rights in the World Trade Organization dispute involving Large Civil Aircraft subsidies provided by certain current or former member States of the European Union.” This exception to the periodic revisions is effective Feb. 8.
The Court of International Trade will use a “master case” to reduce the time and expense of duplicate filings in the more than 3,700 lawsuits against President Donald Trump's lists 3 and 4A Section 301 China tariffs, CIT Judge Mark Barnett said in a Feb. 10 order. Barnett also gave the government defense until March 12, 2021, to submit its first defense, barring no motions to extend time to file. These procedural steps pertain to the copious number of Section 301 cases that were assigned to a three-panel judge at CIT on Feb. 5 (see 2102050008).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb.1-7: