The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:

Members of the Select Committee on China led a letter from 66 House members to the leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee, complaining that the expiration of the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program has benefited China and led importers who had capitalized on GSP to return to China.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of June 26 - July 2 and July 3-9:

The lack of disclosure in Enforce and Protect Act evasion proceedings and the deferential standard of review "stack the deck" in favor of the alleger, giving importers "a lot to complain about in the EAPA process," customs lawyer Larry Friedman of Barnes/Richardson said in a July 6 blog post. Even importers who believe they have conducted reasonable due diligence may have serious unexpected liabilities that come out during the investigation, he said.

The lack of disclosure in Enforce and Protect Act evasion proceedings and the deferential standard of review "stack the deck" in favor of the alleger, giving importers "a lot to complain about in the EAPA process," customs lawyer Larry Friedman of Barnes/Richardson said in a July 6 blog post. Even importers who believe they have conducted reasonable due diligence may have serious unexpected liabilities that come out during the investigation, he said.

The Court of International Trade on June 30 granted importer Environment One's bid to dismiss its case seeking Section 301 refunds. The case concerns 31 entries classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8536.50.7000, a duty-free provision subject to Section 301 tariffs. Environment One filed a protest challenging the liquidation, claiming a Section 301 exclusion granted after entry. The company then took to the trade court to claim that the government violated the law by creating a protest requirement for Section 301 refunds despite that statute applying to only certain CBP decisions (see 2210260011) (Environment One v. United States, CIT # 22-00124).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

International trade attorney Benjamin Bay has moved from Schagrin Associates to The Bristol Group, as of counsel, according to his LinkedIn page. At Schagrin, Bay focused on antidumping and countervailing duty litigation along with Section 232 and 301 proceedings. Notices at the Court of International Trade confirmed Bay's departure from Schagrin.

The ability to import low-value packages without paying duties is a benefit to consumers and businesses, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other trade groups that use de minimis are arguing, as they lobby against bipartisan efforts to curtail de minimis eligibility.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 19-25: