The Court of International Trade's recent decision finding that no protests are needed to file suit under Section 1581(i) seeking refunds from tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act "applies solely to pending court cases at this time," said attorneys at Grunfeld Desiderio. Protests may have to be filed if the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs and CBP has not taken other steps to effect relief.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 denied the government's motion for reconsideration of the trade court's previous decision to vacate CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor. Although Judge Timothy Reif said he made a mistake of fact in the initial decision, the mistake was a "harmless error," and that no mistake of law was made.

The U.S. on Dec. 11 filed its opposition to a motion for a preliminary injunction in dozens of cases filed by Crowell & Moring seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (AGS Company Automotive Solutions v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00255).

As lawsuits seeking refunds of International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs at the Court of International Trade continue to mount, lawyers remain uncertain of the refund process that would be followed should the Supreme Court strike down the tariffs, including whether refunds will come via judicial or administrative pathways.

CBP improperly denied importer Software Brokers of America, doing business as Intcomex, the temporary exclusion from International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs on China for in-transit merchandise, the importer argued in a Dec. 5 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Software Brokers of America d/b/a Intcomex v. United States, CIT # 25-00381).

A Wisconsin federal court on Dec. 1 dismissed a case from a former prisoner at the Nunan Chishan Prison in China against Milwaukee Electric Tool and its parent company, Techtronic Industries, for allegedly importing goods made with forced labor. Judge Brett Ludwig of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin held that the civil remedy of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), which is the statute the prisoner sued under, doesn't apply to conduct occurring outside the U.S. (Xu Lun v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp., E.D. Wis. # 24-803).

DOJ's Trade Fraud Task Force plans to model its tariff enforcement efforts after the DOJ Health Care Fraud Unit's "data-drive playbook to develop leads," DOJ Criminal Division Senior Counsel Cody Herche said at the American Conference Institute's annual anti-corruption conference, according to attorneys at Morgan Lewis. The attorneys said Herche's comment indicates "potential criminal violations of US tariff laws," including the False Claims Act and the statute against smuggling goods into the U.S.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 24-30:

Following the Supreme Court's oral argument in the lead cases on whether the president can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs, various trade lawyers speculated that the high court now appears poised to strike down the tariffs.

Electronics importer Harman International Industries agreed to pay more than $11.8 million to settle allegations it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties on aluminum extrusions from China, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Michigan announced on Nov. 26.