The U.S. sought partial dismissal May 27 of power cables importer PowerTec Solutions’ 2022 case seeking Section 301 duty refunds. Specifically, it said that one of the importer’s administrative protests was insufficient to support a subsequent legal challenge (PowerTec Solutions International v. United States, CIT # 22-00322).
House Select Committee on China Chairman John Moolenaar, R-Mich., said his vision of revoking Permanent Normal Trade Relations status for China is not to move Chinese goods to Column 2, but to create a new tariff schedule just for Chinese goods, with high rates reserved for strategic goods. Moolenaar, who has sponsored legislation to end PNTR (see 2501240061), described the approach he'd like to see at a Center for a New Security conference June 3.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of May 19-25 and May 26 - June 1:
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
CBP created Harmonized System Update 2520 on May 31, containing 11 Automated Broker Interface records and three Harmonized Tariff Schedule records. HSU 2520 includes the extension of Section 301 Exclusions 9903.88.69 and 9903.88.70 to Aug. 31 and a partner government agency update.
An importer is liable for duties on merchandise that it sought to import in 2019, despite arguing that it didn't consent to having its broker designate it as an importer of record, according to a recent CBP ruling.
Georgetown University law professor Jennifer Hillman said that while she expects the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to take months to decide if the tariff actions under emergency powers weren't legal, the court might not stay the vacation of the orders during that time.
Importer Mitsubishi Power Americas will appeal a Court of International Trade decision from April 29 on the classification of the company's catalyst blocks, according to a notice of appeal. The trade court said the catalyst blocks were filters or purifiers and properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8421 and not as "other" catalytic reactors under heading 3815 (see 2504300067). Mitsubishi had requested Section 301 exclusions for its products but the importer failed to specify a particular HTS heading for the exclusion. However, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's exclusion that would apply to the products didn't actually cover Mitsubishi's goods, but even if had, the exclusion was drafted to cover products under heading 3815, the court said (Mitsubishi Power Americas, Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00573).
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has extended by three months certain current exclusions to its Section 301 investigation related to U.S. trade with China.
Georgetown University law professor Jennifer Hillman said that while she expects the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to take months to decide if the tariff actions under emergency powers weren't legal, the court might not stay the vacation of the orders during that time.