The Commerce Department had no legal grounds to find that Hyundai Steel Company received a countervailable benefit from the South Korean government's provision of port usage rights, Hyundai argued in a brief at the Court of International Trade. Commerce ignored its own standard over port usage rights that says that these rights can be countervailed only if the benefit were "excessive," the brief said. The port usage rights afforded to Hyundai were given as payment for a debt to Hyundai and thus not a countervailable benefit, Hyundai argued (Hyundai Steel v. U.S., CIT #21-00304).
The Court of International Trade in a July 27 order denied plaintiff Second Nature Designs' bid for a test case and suspension of another action at the trade court. Judge Gary Katzmann said that the U.S.'s opposition to the motion was denied as moot in light of the court's recent ruling in Cyber Power v. U.S., which found that the government does not have the legal authority to file a counterclaim in a customs case. Following the order, the two cases will continue separately (see 2207200052) (Second Nature Designs v. U.S., CIT #17-00271).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a July 28 opinion held that CBP timely liquidated or reliquidated 10 entries of wooden bedroom furniture. The court ruled that the first unambiguous indication that an injunction against liquidation had ended came from liquidation instructions from the Commerce Department that were sent within the six months prior to liquidation, making the liquidation of the entries timely.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
A centrist think-tank says that red tape at the border costs U.S. exporters more than twice what they pay in tariffs, and says that the U.S. should continue to push for trade facilitation measures. The World Trade Organization passed a Trade Facilitation Agreement, but developing countries did not have to implement it immediately, and even five years after it went into force about 23% of its provisions have not been implemented. Only half of signatories have established a single window, which helps exporters and importers file most documents electronically. The WTO estimated that full implementation would reduce trade costs by 14.3%.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 18-24:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
CBP's findings in its Enforce and Protect Act investigation on wooden cabinets and vanities from China were arbitrary and an abuse of discretion, Skyview Cabinet said in a July 18 motion for summary judgment at the Court of International Trade. "Simply put, CBP failed in its investigation duty, believing that it was confronted with evidence of basic transshipments,” Skyview said (Skyview Cabinet USA v. United States, CIT #22-00080).
The Court of International Trade ruled that the U.S. can't file a counterclaim in a customs case brought by Second Nature Designs, according to a July 25 order by Judge Gary Katzmann (Second Nature Designs v. U.S., CIT #21-00271).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade: