Export Compliance Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login
“301” articles
to
articlessource documents
Refine Search

Search Primer

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons.

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match (e.g. "China import").

Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead.

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., +CBP).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Always use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted (multi-word) term, you want to only include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

CAFC Schedules Oral Argument for Section 301 Case
November 25, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit scheduled oral argument for the massive litigation involving thousands of companies against the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 China tariffs. The argument will be held Jan. 8 at 10 a.m. EST in Courtroom 203 (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity, Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity, Section 301 tariffs
Importer Drops Suit Seeking Section 301 Exclusions for Electric Motors
November 21, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

Importer Coulisse Distribution voluntarily dismissed its customs suit at the Court of International Trade on its DC (direct current) electric motors, filing a notice of dismissal Nov. 14. Coulisse filed the suit seeking an exclusion from Section 301 duties under Harmonized Tariff Schedule secondary subheading 9903.88.67. The motors were classified under subheading 8501.10.4060, dutiable at 4.4%, and secondary subheading 9903.88.01. Counsel for the importer didn't respond to our request for comment (Coulisse Distribution v. U.S., CIT # 23-00245).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity
CIT Has Jurisdiction to Hear Suit on Section 301 Tariff Hike on Needles, Syringes, Importer Says
November 21, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

The Court of International Trade has jurisdiction over importer Retractable Technologies' suit against the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's 100% Section 301 rate hike on needles and syringes, given that the court has already acknowledged its ability to hear cases on agency action taken under presidential direction, Retractable said. Responding to the government's motion to dismiss the case Nov. 19, Retractable pointed to the trade court's recent decision in the case granting a preliminary injunction (PI) on the liquidation of the importer's entries subject to the duties (Retractable Technologies v. U.S., CIT # 24-00185).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity