The president must strictly adhere to statutory timelines when setting Section 232 tariffs, and can’t subsequently modify or adjust those tariffs beyond those legal deadlines without conducting another formal investigation, the Court of International Trade said in a July 14 decision. The court found that President Donald Trump acted outside of these deadlines when he raised tariffs on Turkish steel from 25% to 50% in August 2018 (see 1808100003), granting two importers refunds of duties collected as a result of the tariff increase.
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
An importer must pay nearly $1 million in penalties for customs fraud, after the Court of International Trade on July 9 found the importer knowingly misclassified its entries to save on duty, despite repeated instructions from CBP on the correct classification of the merchandise.
A three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade will hear a recently filed Section 232 challenge that opens a new front in the battle of steel importers against the tariffs. Maple Leaf Marketing (MLM), distributor of oil industry pipe that is exported from the U.S. to Canada for processing before being re-imported in improved form, says that CBP in April illegally expanded Section 232 tariffs to cover U.S. goods returned under subheading 9802.00.0050 (see 2004130056).
No new lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade, nor any appeals of CIT decisions filed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, during the week of June 29 - July 5.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 2 affirmed a lower court ruling that found plastic Apple iPad 2 “smart cover” cases are classifiable in the tariff schedule as articles of plastic, not as accessories for automatic data processing machines, despite their additional function as a stand.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 22-28:
The Commerce Department will decrease antidumping duty cash deposit rates in effect for four exporters of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from China (A-570-979), implementing a recent Court of International Trade decision that ordered Commerce to recalculate rates set in an administrative review completed in 2017 (see 1708240027), it said. As a result of its recalculation, AD duty cash deposit rates for Jiawei Solarchina Co. Ltd., Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd., Star Power International Limited, and Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd., will fall to 3.19% (from 7.82%). The new rate will apply to subject merchandise entered on or after June 25, 2020.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for June 22-26 in case they were missed.
The Commerce Department will reconsider its denial of Section 232 exclusions for an importer of steel pipe, after the Court of International Trade on June 25 granted the government’s request to be allowed to reopen and add to the administrative record Commerce had previously presented the court and revisit its decision.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 15-21: