CBP detained cargo worth some $55.5 million due to withhold release orders during fiscal year 2020, the agency said in a recent update of trade statistics. That is up from $1.2 million in FY19, the agency said. During FY20, CBP made 324 WRO-related cargo detentions, up from 12 the previous fiscal year, it said. The increases reflect the issuance of more WROs, with 14 issued in 2020, up from six the year before, it said.
The Coalition for a Prosperous America published advice to the transitioning Joe Biden administration, which includes a call to continue and intensify the kind of tariff and sanctions policies used by the Trump administration, and to go further, such as by raising the bound tariffs at the World Trade Organization. The CPA also asked for countrywide withhold release orders for forced labor, a reduction of the $800 de minimis level and a change in the makeup of the Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee. “The membership of COAC should equal representation by domestic businesses and labor harmed by unlawful imports, rather than being dominated by multinationals and importer interests,” they said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 23-29:
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Nov. 23-27 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The lawyer who filed dozens of Section 301 complaints on a single day at the U.S. Court of International Trade (see 2011200023) said his spate of filings had more to do with the constraints of working remotely during the pandemic than any rush to meet the court’s filing deadlines. Attorney Elon Pollack of Stein Shostak in Los Angeles filed most of the new cases on behalf of importers with List 4A tariff exposure, leaving List 3 claims out of his complaints. He designated Aug. 20, 2019, when the List 4A notice was published in the Federal Register, as the date the court’s two-year statute of limitations clock began ticking. He said he believes the two-year statute of limitations runs from the date an importer actually paid the tariffs, not when the duties were announced. All Pollack’s complaints, like the roughly 3,700 others filed since Sept. 10, allege that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its 1974 Trade Act authority by imposing retaliatory tariffs against the Chinese and that the agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running sloppy rulemakings that lacked transparency. The Section 301 litigation seeks to get the rulemakings vacated and the tariffs refunded. Pollack said his cases will be included under whatever test case and procedures the court designates for the Section 301 litigation. His filings list the first-filed suit by HTMX in the Section 301 litigation as a related case.
The U.S. Court of International Trade granted Akin Gump’s motion to amend the summons in its first-filed Section 301 complaint to include Jasco Products as the suit’s newest plaintiff (see 2011240030). Though the CIT has assigned no judges to this case or the roughly 3,700 complaints that followed, Tuesday’s order (in Pacer), the first issued by the court in the 3-month-old docket, was signed by Judge Lee Gordon. All the complaints allege that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its 1974 Trade Act authority by imposing Lists 3 and 4A tariffs as retaliatory against the Chinese and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running sloppy rulemakings that lacked transparency. All seek to get the Lists 3 and 4A rulemakings vacated and the tariffs refunded.
The U.S. Court of International Trade granted Akin Gump’s motion to amend the summons in its first-filed Section 301 complaint to include Jasco Products as the suit’s newest plaintiff (see 2011240030). Though the CIT has assigned no judges to this case or the roughly 3,700 complaints that followed, Tuesday’s order (in Pacer), the first issued by the court in the 3-month-old docket, was signed by Judge Lee Gordon. All the complaints allege that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its 1974 Trade Act authority by imposing Lists 3 and 4A tariffs as retaliatory against the Chinese and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running sloppy rulemakings that lacked transparency. All seek to get the Lists 3 and 4A rulemakings vacated and the tariffs refunded.
A Finding Nemo story and picture book doesn't meet the classification requirements for heading 4903, which covers “Children’s picture, drawing or coloring books,” CBP said in a Sept. 15 ruling. CBP previously ruled that the book wasn't classifiable as a children's book and the company, Phidal Publishing in Montreal, requested reconsideration of that ruling. CBP's earlier ruling found the book to be classifiable in heading 4901 for “printed books.”
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative set a Dec. 10 deadline for filing requests to testify at a Dec. 29 online hearing on the agency's Trade Act Section 301 investigation into alleged Vietnamese currency manipulation (see 2010070047). Post-hearing rebuttals are due Jan. 7, says a USTR notice for Wednesday's Federal Register. The agency originally planned to forego a public hearing even virtually due to COVID-19 concerns. USTR is seeking testimony into the "nature and level of burden or restriction on U.S. commerce caused by the undervaluation of Vietnam’s currency," among other areas, said the notice. U.S. importers source about a fifth of all smartphone shipments from Vietnam.
Akin Gump moved to amend the summons served on the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and other defendants in the first-filed Section 301 litigation at the U.S. Court of International Trade to include Jasco Products as an additional plaintiff. The firm filed its original complaint Sept. 10 on behalf of HMTX Industries, and amended it Sept. 21 to include Jasco (see 2009210047) but never amended the summons, said its motion (in Pacer) Tuesday. Akin Gump said DOJ has no objection to the motion. The HMTX litigation spawned roughly 3,700 complaints alleging USTR overstepped its 1974 Trade Act authority by imposing retaliatory tariffs against the Chinese and violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running sloppy rulemakings that lacked transparency. All the suits seek to get the Lists 3 and 4A rulemakings vacated and the duties refunded.