CBP's AD/CV Duty Evasion Findings Should Be Public, Shrimp Group Says
CBP 's interim regulations for investigating allegations of antidumping or countervailing duty evasion diminish the effect of the new law by limiting what information is released publicly, the Southern Shrimp Alliance said in comments to CBP (here). "The results of CBP’s investigations will provide invaluable assistance to the trade community in recognizing and avoiding evasion schemes and will improve the informed compliance of importers and other supply chain participants," it said. "But these benefits will only be enjoyed if CBP issues public notices of its actions." The agency has received and responded to at least one allegation since the interim rules went into effect (see 1610190029).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The trade group submitted the comments in response to an interim final rule implementing AD/CV duty evasion language from the customs reauthorization law's Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) (see 1608190014), though the agency recently extended the comment period to Dec. 21 (see 1610200012). The interim final rule seems "to establish an administrative proceeding structure that contains no general public notice element of the agency’s actions," the SSA said. "By declining to provide for the publication of agency actions, CBP is severely undermining the prevention goals of EAPA and [Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act] in general.”
The shrimp group pointed to its past experience with publicly released CBP rulings as evidence that more transparency within the process is necessary. While CBP should amend the regulations to provide for public release, there's nothing within the regulation that prevents such release now, the group said. "CBP should take advantage of current proceedings as opportunities to determine the best and most effective manner by which to publicize notices.”
The market for illegally imported shrimp "is contingent upon plausible claims of ignorance as to the evasion that facilitates the trade in the first instance," the SSA said. "In the absence of public disclosures of enforcement activities, institutional importers, distributors, and purchasers of imported shrimp can point to another party as being responsible for the representations of the merchandise: for a purchaser, the reliance is on the distributor; for the distributor, the reliance is on the importer or broker; for the importer or broker, the reliance is on the foreign exporter." The only other commenter in the proceeding so far, the American Institute for International Steel, asked CBP to give earlier notice for accused evaders (see 1610170012).