Importer American Eel Depot filed a pair of complaints at the Court of International Trade on June 27 to contest CBP's classification of its frozen roasted eel under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 1604.17.10 and secondary subheading 9903.88.03, subjecting the goods to Section 301 duties. The company argued that its goods aren't products of China but, in fact, have a country of origin of the U.S. (American Eel Depot v. United States, CIT # 21-00278, -00279).

Importer American Eel Depot filed a pair of complaints at the Court of International Trade on June 27 to contest CBP's classification of its frozen roasted eel under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 1604.17.10 and secondary subheading 9903.88.03, subjecting the goods to Section 301 duties. The company argued that its goods aren't products of China but, in fact, have a country of origin of the U.S. (American Eel Depot v. United States, CIT # 21-00278, -00279).

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

Two former general counsels from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative disagreed sharply about the need for the current aggressive tariff hikes. But Jennifer Hillman, who is helping to write amicus briefs for members of Congress challenging the legality of International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs, and Steven Vaughn, who served in the first Trump administration, agree what would happen if the current administration loses the case.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and 25 other House Democrats asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to tell them by July 10 whether the administration is going to carve out baby products from tariffs on Chinese goods. In a letter publicized June 26, the members noted that Bessent said exempting baby products was under consideration on May 7, and that the president also said he would "take a look at it" in response to questions that day.

At an appearance at the Washington International Trade Association, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., criticized the Trump administration for instituting an "on-again, off-again tariff structure, that, in some instances, are higher than even the Smoot-Hawley levels."

The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 16-22:

Responding to a U.S. cross-motion for judgment in its classification dispute, computer parts importer Atlas Power said the government was trying to raise a new argument that none of Atlas’ entries in question were eligible for a Section 301 tariff exclusion because they were entered under a privileged status into a foreign-trade zone (Atlas Power LLC v. United States, CIT # 23-00084).

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