Importer Blue Sky the Color of Imagination filed a complaint on Dec. 22 in a customs case at the Court of International Trade on the classification of its planning calendars. The complaint comes on the heels of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejecting the trade court's previous ruling in a separate case brought by Blue Sky that classified the importer's goods as diaries under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 4820.10.2010 (see 2512040019) (Blue Sky the Color of Imagination v. United States, CIT # 22-00008).
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., introduced the Trade Cheating Restitution Act of 2025, which would allow interest on antidumping and countervailing duties collected since 2000 on commodities like honey, crawfish, garlic and mushrooms to be distributed to domestic producers of those products.
Importer Wanxiang America agreed to pay over $53 million to settle claims that the company unlawfully avoided antidumping duties on its car part entries, DOJ announced. The settlement was filed at the Court of International Trade and resolves the government's customs penalty case against Wanxiang in which it was seeking $97 million from the company (see 2512180043).
CBP has released its Dec. 17 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 47), which includes the following ruling action:
As importers everywhere await the Supreme Court's final decision on the fate of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, more and more attorneys are counseling their clients to file preemptive lawsuits at the Court of International Trade to guarantee their right to a refund of the IEEPA tariffs.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Dec. 1-7 and 8-14:
The National Marine Fisheries Service still expects Jan. 1 to be the start date for the agency requiring certifications of admissibility (COA) from companies importing fish and fish products from certain countries that may have U.S.-imposed import restrictions, officials said on a Dec. 16 webinar on the issue.
The Court of International Trade's recent decision finding that no protests are needed to file suit under Section 1581(i) seeking refunds from tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act "applies solely to pending court cases at this time," said attorneys at Grunfeld Desiderio. Protests may have to be filed if the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs and CBP has not taken other steps to effect relief.
The Court of International Trade denied a group of importers' motion for a preliminary injunction against liquidation of their entries subject to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on the basis that the trade court has the power to order reliquidation of the entries if the Supreme Court strikes down the IEEPA tariffs.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 15 denied a motion for an injunction stopping liquidation of entries from a group of importers that filed challenges to International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs. Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif and Jane Restani held that an injunction is unnecessary because the trade court has the authority to reliquidate finally liquidated entries from the importers that filed suit under the court's 28 U.S.C. 1581(i) jurisdiction if the Supreme Court invalidates the tariffs. The judges also noted the government's commitment that it won't fight against CIT's ability to order refunds, finding the U.S. is barred from changing its position in the future.