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, the Court of International Trade said in a decision released to the public March 19. Apple had argued for its classification as an accessory because it also functions as a stand, but CIT agreed with a CBP ruling that found the cases are explicitly excluded from classification in Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States heading 8473.
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.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 12 issued a decision affirming a lower court ruling that upheld antidumping and countervailing duties on solar products from China, finding Commerce was permitted to apply a different country of origin test in those orders from the orders it issued concurrently on Taiwan.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 4-10:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision in Trek Leather continues even now to be a major point of contention among customs lawyers, more than four years after it was issued (see 14091703). "There's a lot of uncertainty out there," said Michael Cone, a FisherBroyles lawyer, who moderated a March 8 panel on enforcement during the International Trade Update at the Georgetown University law school. Patricia McCarthy, assistant director for the Department of Justice commercial litigation branch, said despite the concerns within the trade, there remains a high bar for individual liability in Section 1592 cases.
A lawyer representing the American Institute for International Steel recapped the arguments he made when announcing a June 2018 lawsuit over the constitutionality of Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act (see 1806270036), while a lawyer representing the American Iron and Steel Institute said that while the importers may disagree with the policy of worldwide tariffs, that doesn't make it unconstitutional.
The Court of International Trade on March 5 rejected a Commerce Department scope ruling that found refrigerated merchandising and display structures are subject to antidumping and countervailing duties on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from China (A-570-914/C-570-915), sending it back down to Commerce for reconsideration. Stein Industries (dba Carlson Airflo) had argued its products, though steel and mostly rectangular, were not covered by AD/CV duties because, prior to importation, parts had been welded on perpendicularly, making the entire cross-section no longer rectangular. Stein also said that they are downstream products that the International Trade Commission had considered to be outside of scope. According to CIT, Commerce did not adequately address either argument in its May 2018 scope ruling (see 1807160041), remaining silent as to whether products that are not uniformly rectangular can be covered by the scope, and misconstruing Stein’s argument that the downstream products are exempt. CIT gave the agency until June 3 to file its redetermination.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 25 - March 3:
Machines for dosing, packing and dispensing pharmaceuticals are classifiable as packing machines of Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8422, the Court of International Trade said in a Feb. 28 decision. Overturning CBP’s initial classification and a subsequent ruling letter, the trade court held that the principal use of McKesson Canada’s Pacmed machine is packing, and that measuring and other functions of the machines are incidental to that function.
No new lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 18-24.
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 15 issued a two-page order mandating the reliquidation of certain entries of festive articles imported by Russ Berrie that had been subject to a nearly three-decade-long tariff classification dispute. Appended to the order are several attachments listing the products and entries that are set to be reliquidated, either because of an August 2018 CIT decision that reclassified a few entries (see 1808310039), or because the government and Russ Berrie reached agreement before that decision that the goods should be classified in heading 9505.