The National Institute of Standards and Technology posts drafts and changes to foreign technical regulations for manufactured products that may be considered technical barriers to trade. Broker Power delays its publication of these postings for 2 - 3 weeks because there is often a delay until NIST makes the text of the regulations available.
International trade, particularly with China, got an airing during the Oct. 22 Presidential debate, despite the much heavier emphasis on the Middle East and security concerns. President Barack Obama said the U.S. had boosted its exports to China and China's currency was at its most favorable level for the U.S. balance of trade in decades. Republican candidate Mitt Romney said China is in a "silent" trade war with the U.S. and he will label China a currency manipulator "on day one" of his presidency, which he said "allows us to apply tariffs where they're taking jobs."
CBP is adopting a final rule amending its regulations for the preferential tariff treatment and other customs-related provisions of the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA or Peru FTA) by adding a new subpart Q to 19 CFR Part 10, etc., the agency said in a Oct. 18 Federal Register notice. CBP said it received no comments on its interim final rule, adopted in November, and only made a technical change from the interim rule, available (here).
A Minnesota District Court judge vacated a $630.4 million arbitration award against Western Digital, rejecting misappropriation of trade secret claims leveled against it by rival Seagate Technology, Western Digital said.
The Telecommunications Industry Association is "concerned about Brazilian regulator Anatel not accepting test data generated outside of Brazil, except in those cases where the equipment is too physically large and/or costly to transport," it said in comments filed with the U.S. Trade Representative on its Foreign Trade Barriers report.
CBP posted a fact sheet on deployed Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) capabilities as of October 2012. The following capabilities have been delivered in ACE in support of CBP, Participating Government Agencies (PGAs), and the trade community:
The Court of International Trade dismissed Celta Agencies’ challenge of liquidation instructions for its entries subject to the antidumping order on steel concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia (A-449-804). Celta said its entries of reinforcing bars should have been liquidated at the company-specific rate of the producer instead of the all others rate. CIT, however, said it had no subject matter jurisdiction under the 28 USC 1581(a) customs protest denial challenge provision, because Celta was in fact challenging International Trade Administration liquidation instructions, not an action by Customs. CIT said the challenge was correctly filed under the 28 USC 1581(i) residual jurisdiction provision, but the statute of limitations for its use, two years, had already expired.
The Court of International Trade denied without prejudice the government’s motion to amend its complaint in United States v. Active Frontier International because the government didn’t include the actual amended complaint in its motion. CIT had given the government a second chance in its Aug. 30 AFI ruling, where CBP attempted to recover penalties from AFI because of false country of origin markings. CIT said CBP didn’t demonstrate that the false statements were “material” for penalty purposes and denied the government’s penalty claim, but allowed CBP to amend its complaint to demonstrate materiality.
CBP is expanding its Importer Self-Assessment (ISA) program to allow importers that have gone through other stringent government reviews to take advantage of the program, according to an Oct. 5 Federal Register notice. The agency will now allow companies that have gone through a CBP Focused Assessment (FA) audit to take part in ISA without additional reviews. The change formalizes an informal and not widely known practice that CBP has had over the last couple of years, said an industry executive.
Challenges of CBP exclusions of imported merchandise should be heard by U.S. district courts, rather than the Court of International Trade, if the excluded merchandise is seized before the court challenge is filed, said CIT in dismissing PRP Trading’s objection to CBP’s exclusion of its merchandise. CBP originally excluded the merchandise because it suspected false country of origin markings. PRP Trading argued it could challenge the exclusion at CIT, but CIT said it had no jurisdiction because the merchandise was seized by CBP before PRP Trading filed suit, which means the correct forum for the case is a U.S. district court.