The Court of International Trade has jurisdiction to hear a case over CBP's failure to issue full Section 301 refunds, importer FD Sales Company argued in an Oct. 8 reply brief. Although CBP "approved" the importer's protest covering 60 entries seeking the refunds, FD Sales argued that the protest was effectively denied when CBP failed to fully grant the refunds, thus giving CIT jurisdiction under Section 1581(a) (FD Sales Company, LLC v. United States, CIT #21-00224).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

Importers shouldn't cancel entries to "take advantage of pending or potential decreases in Section 301 duties and/or approval/extension of exclusions in violation of the applicable regulations," CBP said in a CSMS message. Cancellation requests are allowed in some instances but must comply with the appropriate regulations, it said.

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Oct. 4-8 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The U.S. summary of a weekend call between U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai and China's Vice Premier Liu He, the lead negotiator of the phase one agreement, did not use the word tariffs, though it said the two countries would "consult on certain outstanding issues."

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is seeking comments on whether to reinstate certain previously extended exclusions to the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods that mostly expired Dec. 31, says Friday’s Federal Register. USTR will evaluate the possible reinstatement of each exclusion on a “case-by-case basis,” focusing on whether a particular product remains available only from China, despite the imposition of the tariffs that began with the List 1 duties in September 2018, said the agency. USTR also wants to know what supply chain changes have happened in the past three years and what efforts importers have made to source products from countries other than China, including from the U.S. Any exclusions that are reinstated will be retroactive to Tuesday, when USTR’s public docket for comments opens. The docket closes Dec. 1. USTR Katherine Tai said this week that reinstating a "targeted" exclusion process would be a near-term component of the Biden administration's trade policy toward China (see 2110040025).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

CBP has assessed about $123.5 billion in duties under the major trade remedies started during the Trump administration, as of Oct. 7, according to CBP's trade statistics page. That includes $108 billion in duties from the Section 301 tariffs on goods from China, and $1.1 billion in Section 301 tariffs on goods from the European Union. CBP also has assessed about $8.8 billion under the Section 232 tariffs on steel and $2.7 billion under tariffs on aluminum. The Section 201 trade remedies on washing machines and washing machine parts account for about $277 million and the solar cells tariffs account for $2.7 billion in assessed tariffs.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued a request for comments on the possible reinstatement of certain exclusions in the Section 301 investigation of China’s acts, policies and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property and innovation. The notice, which reiterates previously published details about where and when to petition, will be published in the Federal Register Oct. 8. Comments may be submitted in writing online starting Oct. 12, and must be submitted no later than Dec. 1 to be assured of consideration.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade: