CBP Releases More Details on Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region WRO
CBP posted answers to set of frequently asked questions Feb. 12 about the withhold release order aimed at goods produced using forced labor in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. The Jan. 13 WRO applies to cotton and tomato products produced in China’s Xinjiang province (see 2101130053). The FAQs add some more details for how CBP will be administering the regional WRO, which elicited some logistical questions, given the breadth of order and the number of goods it covers.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
CBP in the document details the types of information it may seek to determine whether forced labor was involved in an imported good. Importers that argue that forced labor isn't involved “must submit the Certificate of Origin signed by the foreign seller” and a “detailed statement from the importer,” CBP said. “A standard Certificate of Origin is not acceptable. The required format for the certificate of origin is detailed in 19 C.F.R. § 12.43(a). This paragraph includes the exact wording of the certificate that should be signed by the seller/manufacturer.”
Detentions will result in a notice from the port of entry to the importer, it said. Among the documentation that will be requested for cotton products within a detention notice are: affidavits from yarn producers and raw cotton sourcing information, as well as production and transportation records. Also requested will be “supporting documents related to [employees] that picked the cotton, time cards or the like, wage payment receipts, and daily process reports that relate to the raw cotton sold to the yarn producer,” it said. Other documents may also be requested. The agency will ask for similar documentation around tomato products from the region that are detained.
The “evidence that a particular shipment was not produced with forced labor should be submitted to the port of entry where the shipment is detained,” CBP said. The agency will allow for importers to enter goods that aren't subject to the WRO but are within the same containers, it said. “When goods subject to a WRO are only a portion of a shipment, the importer may file a request for a manipulation permit with the Port of Entry,” the agency said. “Upon approval of the request for a manipulation permit by the Port of Entry, the importer may choose to amend the entry to secure the release of the goods that are not subject to the WRO. If the importer intends to contest that the goods are subject to the WRO, those goods may be entered into a bonded warehouse. Alternatively, the goods may be exported or destroyed.”
The WRO also applies to “goods entered from a FTZ or warehouse on or after” the Jan. 13 effective date of the WRO, it said. In response to a question about the treatment of “imported goods within the scope of the WRO” that “were imported and/or received prior to the WRO being put in place,” CBP said: “Redelivery may be ordered on goods within the scope of the WRO. Generally, demand for redelivery will be made no later than 30 days after the date that the merchandise was released, or 30 days after the end of the conditional release period, whichever is later.”