International Trade Today is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login

321 de minimis

De minimis is a policy described in 19 U.S.C. 1321 that allows the import of low value articles duty and tax free, provided their aggregate fair retail value does not exceed $800 in the country from which the articles are imported.  Additionally, the articles must be imported by only one person on one day. The previous de minimis threshold was $200, but the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 increased it to $800. Increasing volumes of de minimis merchandise, along with enforcement concerns related to fentanyl and counterfeit merchandise, among other things, have prompted calls to restrict the pathway. De minimis goods may be cleared off manifest, or qualifying goods may be entered under the informal Type 86 entry type.

to
articlessource documents
Refine Search
Clear Terms

Search Primer

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match together (e.g. "China import").

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons to find either word (e.g. AD/CVD antidumping).

Acronyms: Use all capital letters (e.g., ACE).

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., CBP +releases).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted term, include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

U.S. TELECOM CARRIERS RAISE COMPETITION CONCERNS TO USTR
February 1, 2001 by Mary Greczyn|Miscellaneous

While countries such as Japan and Mexico are starting to remove obstacles to competition, serious problems persist, telecom companies and equipment makers told U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office. USTR sought comments in Jan. as part of annual review on effectiveness of U.S. trade agreements involving telecom products and services, including World Trade Organization’s (WTO) basic telecom agreement. Commenters also pointed frequently to competition hurdles in European Union (EU) member states, urging U.S. in some cases to seek stricter implementation of existing EU directives. Concerns raised by telecom companies, which in part centered on interconnection rates, provide road map of lingering telecom market-opening issues that would face USTR under Bush nominee Robert Zoellick.

COURT ACTION RAISES QUESTIONS ON FCC SEPARATE SUBSIDIARY MODEL
January 11, 2001 by Edie Herman|Miscellaneous

U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., ruling Tues. that rejected SBC’s advanced services subsidiary (CD Jan 10 p1) appeared to have raised more questions than it answered. Observers questioned Wed. whether decision might pressure Congress to revise Telecom Act to account for advanced services, how ruling would affect similar arrangement at Verizon and how it might play out under new Republican FCC. Court overturned trade-off FCC made with SBC: FCC allowed SBC to provide advanced services free of interconnection requirements if company formed separate affiliate to provide those services. In response to appeal filed by Assn. of Communications Enterprises (ASCENT), court ruled FCC didn’t have authority to forgo interconnection requirements of Sec. 251(c) just because SBC was providing advanced, rather than basic, services and using separate subsidiary. ASCENT represents competitive carriers, particularly those that resale ILEC service.