Despite objections from importer Shah Brothers, the Court of International Trade on Dec. 27 dismissed a challenge to CBP’s tariff classification of the company’s tobacco product after the government conceded defeat. The decision to reliquidate the “gutkha” as chewing tobacco instead of snuff will result in a refund of excess excise taxes paid on the entries to Shah Bros. The importer wanted to continue its lawsuit on the grounds that CBP would continue to classify the Indian smokeless tobacco as snuff unless the court mandated a change to agency procedure. But the court said no controversy remained to litigate, and told Shah Bros. it could file another lawsuit if it found fault with CBP’s treatment of a future entry.
The International Trade Commission issued its annual summary of violations of ITC administrative protective orders for calendar year 2012. The commission said no violations of APOs, which protect confidential business information, occurred during antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings in 2012, and no rules violations occurred either. Two violations of APOs occurred in Section 337 investigations.
Best Key Textiles asked the Court of International Trade on Dec. 23 to reconsider its dismissal of the company’s challenge to CBP’s revocation of a ruling on the company’s metallized yarn. As a challenge under the Administrative Procedure Act to CBP’s alleged misconduct during the revocation proceeding, CIT can hear the case if it chooses, said Best Key. But if not, the interests of justice would best be served by transferring the case to a federal district court so Best Key can get a fair hearing, it said.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 slapped yet more penalties on a Laredo-based customs broker whose violations were already the subject of another civil suit and a criminal case. The court ordered Alejandro Santos to pay $30,000 for misclassifying two shipments of pesticides and failing to file the notice of arrival required by the Environmental Protection Agency. The court had already ordered $19,000 in penalties against Santos in December 2012 for unrelated violations of customs laws. Santos also faces prison time after pleading guilty in May to a criminal customs case in the Southern Texas District Court.
CBP denied a further review of protest submitted by Item House, the importer, challenging a Port of Tacoma, Wash. classification of raincoats that were imported and liquidated in 2010. The company sought a further review of protest because "CBP has not determined whether a garment with the particular combination of features that the subject garment possesses is classified as an anorak or similar garment," said the agency. CBP found the coats were properly classified at liquidation as 6202.13.40 and maintains a 27.7 percent duty rate. The agency noted that while there may be some discrepancy between the relevant Informed Compliance Publication (ICP) and past rulings, the company should defer to the rulings.
Data brokers can be more transparent. It’s the one theme consumer advocates, industry associations, lawmakers, federal agencies and data brokers have agreed on in studies, recommendations, hearings and interviews. The problem is in the details. FTC Commissioner Julie Brill suggests a self-regulatory initiative she calls “Reclaim Your Name.” Consumers should have the right -- and a user-friendly online portal -- to access data collected about them, she has said in speeches, op-eds and interviews.
Data brokers can be more transparent. It’s the one theme consumer advocates, industry associations, lawmakers, federal agencies and data brokers have agreed on in studies, recommendations, hearings and interviews. The problem is in the details. FTC Commissioner Julie Brill suggests a self-regulatory initiative she calls “Reclaim Your Name.” Consumers should have the right -- and a user-friendly online portal -- to access data collected about them, she has said in speeches, op-eds and interviews.
Importers must have skin in the game to get retroactive benefits from court-mandated antidumping and countervailing duty rate revisions, said the Court of International Trade Dec. 16 as it dismissed a challenge from Snap-on, an importer of aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-867/C-570-868). Although all importers are subject to revised rates after the court affirms the new rate on remand, only importers that have had liquidation suspended because they either participated in the court challenge or in administrative reviews will have the new rate applied to past entries, said CIT.
The FTC’s “vague and ambiguous” Section 5 authorities are a “worthy target of reform” and the agency “has the tools needed” to take on net neutrality issues if need be, said Commissioner Joshua Wright Monday at a TechFreedom event. The event coincided with the release of a lengthy report (http://bit.ly/1heY3r5) -- compiled by TechFreedom, attorneys, academics and former FTC officials, directors and commissioners, including one former chairman, Republican Timothy Muris, who served from 2000-2004 -- asking a “series of questions” about the commission’s exercise of its discretion in data security, privacy and unfair-competition cases, said TechFreedom President Berin Szoka at the event. “Both of these cases involved the core question of how to define unfairness under Section 5 of the FTC Act,” the report said. Future reports during the yearlong project will answer the questions and provide recommendations for the FTC, Szoka said.
The FTC’s “vague and ambiguous” Section 5 authorities are a “worthy target of reform” and the agency “has the tools needed” to take on net neutrality issues if need be, said Commissioner Joshua Wright Monday at a TechFreedom event. The event coincided with the release of a lengthy report (http://bit.ly/1heY3r5) -- compiled by TechFreedom, attorneys, academics and former FTC officials, directors and commissioners, including one former chairman, Republican Timothy Muris, who served from 2000-2004 -- asking a “series of questions” about the commission’s exercise of its discretion in data security, privacy and unfair-competition cases, said TechFreedom President Berin Szoka at the event. “Both of these cases involved the core question of how to define unfairness under Section 5 of the FTC Act,” the report said. Future reports during the yearlong project will answer the questions and provide recommendations for the FTC, Szoka said.