Tim Warren

CBP provided some more detail on the requirements of importers and brokers for duty-free claims under subheading 9801.00.10, in a recent CSMS message. The update revises a guidance issued by CBP in 2017 on legislative changes that allowed for duty-free treatment of products of the U.S. returned within any time frame after having been exported, or products of other countries returned within three years after having been exported, and not advanced in value or improved in condition (see 1702010047). CBP said it plans to propose regulatory changes to "align" the regulations with the law.

The Aluminum Association's Section 232 working group recently met with Commerce Department and Office of U.S. Trade Representative staff “with a recommendation on how to navigate the ongoing aluminum tariff dispute between the U.S. and European Union,” it said in its weekly newsletter. The U.S. and the EU said in June they hoped to reach an agreement on Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum by year-end (see 2106150070). “Rather than a hard tariff rate quota (TRQ) to replace the 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports from the EU, the Aluminum Association is proposing that the tariff be gradually reduced until it reaches parity on a U.S./EU Most Favored Nation basis,” it said.

CBP's use of a new “de minimis” standard for allowing imports of goods in which forced labor played a minimal role will depend on the specifics of individual cases, a CBP spokesperson said by email. The standard was first mentioned as part of a set of frequently asked questions about a withhold release order aimed at silica-based products produced by Hoshine Silicon Industry, a company located in China's Xinjiang province, and its subsidiaries (see 2106240062). CBP said in the FAQs that it may consider a product outside the scope of the statute that prohibits forced labor goods if the forced labor contribution is “insignificant” (see 2108050019).

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Aug. 9-13 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representatively should allow for goods that were subject to Section 301 tariffs at the time of entry to a foreign-trade zone to be tariffed at whatever rate is in effect when the goods are removed from the FTZ, the National Associations of Foreign-Trade Zones said in a recent letter to the USTR. The trade group offered support for the suspension on Section 301 duties that were related to digital services taxes, and said that "the notices confirm the application of Sec. 301 duty rates in effect at the time of Customs entry for subject merchandise admitted into a U.S. foreign-trade zone (FTZ) in mandated privileged-foreign (PF) status."

Car seat frames assembled in Mexico that include various Chinese-origin components aren't subject to Section 301 duties because the components are substantially transformed in Mexico, CBP said in a recent ruling. The ruling came in response to a request from Page-Fura lawyer Jeremy Page, who presented four scenarios that use different countries of origin for the components. Each of the scenarios involves similar production processes.

CBP's plans to extend the Part 102 marking rules from NAFTA to USMCA determinations of country of origin for nonpreferential claims and procurement under USMCA (see 2107010045) lacks the legal justifications needed to finalize the proposal, Novolex Holdings, a packaging conglomerate owned by the Carlyle Group, said in comments to the agency. "As proposed, such origin determinations would no longer abide by the precedent developed in over a century of determinations by the federal courts," the company said. The comments were posted Aug. 11 in the docket.

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Aug. 2-6 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

CBP's proposed use of Part 102 marking rules to determine the country of origin for nonpreferential claims and procurement under USMCA (see 2107010045) should be made optional for importers or withdrawn by the agency, Cisco and the Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA) said in comments recently filed in the docket. While CBP says the use of tariff shift rules should result in the same origin finding as the alternative “case-by-case” review, “in practice there are cases where the two methods yield different origin determinations,” CompTIA said in its comments. “This is particularly the case with technology products where programming or software can have an impact on substantial transformation. The Part 102 rules consider only a tariff shift of hardware components and ignore any impact of programming and software on substantial transformation.”

A recent set of frequently asked questions about the withhold release order aimed at silica-based products produced by Hoshine Silicon Industry, a company located in China's Xinjiang province (see 2108030026), provides some insights on how CBP views its enforcement role, Miller & Chevalier lawyers said in an alert. CBP's list of example products subject to the WRO showed that the agency views the detention order as “far-reaching,” including both raw materials and “downstream products that contain silicon metals sourced from Hoshine or any [of] its subsidiaries, regardless of where the later-stage products (e.g., ingots, wafers, cells, and modules) are physically made.”