The Department of Justice motion for case management procedures to navigate the thousands of Section 301 tariff complaints before the Court of International Trade (see 2009240026) was “procedurally defective” because it wasn’t served on any other plaintiffs who filed cases involving the original HMTX Industries lawsuit, said an opposition Sept. 28 from Paulsen Vandevert, lawyer for importers GHSP and Brose North America. The more than 3,400 complaints seek to have the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings vacated and the paid duties refunded. GHSP, a supplier of electromechanical systems to the automotive industry, and Brose, a distributor of mechatronic parts for motorized car seats, are in “full agreement” with DOJ that the many complaints will require case management procedures, Vandevert said. But his clients “strongly object” to designating the three “first-filed” complaints as test cases, he said.
Section 301 (too broad)
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Sept. 21-25 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Department of Justice ignored the rules of the Court of International Trade when it filed its motion for case management procedures (see 2009240026) in the original Section 301 litigation docket and not those of the other complaints, Husch Blackwell argued in court papers Sept. 25. The firm sued on behalf of 3A Composites USA and more than seven dozen other importers Sept. 18, and filed a second complaint for Flexfab Horizons International and five other plaintiffs Sept. 21. Both complaints, like the more than 3,400 others, seek to vacate the List 3 and List 4A tariffs and get the duties refunded. DOJ’s motion gave no explanation of why it “believes it needs to rush to put the procedures it suggests in place, or why its failure to follow the Court’s rules is justified,” Husch Blackwell said. The firm “only became aware of this Motion” through “a reference to it in the trade press, at which time we retrieved a copy of the Government’s Motion in the HMTX case from the Court’s docket in that separate case,” it said.
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
While some individual companies in the medical and protective equipment sector testified that advantaging U.S. production will prevent shortages in the next pandemic, trade groups generally emphasized that stockpiling is the best solution, and that production needs to be globalized for the lowest risk. All were testifying across two days this week to the International Trade Commission, which was tasked with investigating the U.S. production and trade in goods needed for COVID-19 pandemic response, and supply chain challenges revealed in the crisis.
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
The Court of International Trade should use a case management approach for the numerous Section 301 tariff lawsuits similar to the one used for litigation over the harbor maintenance tax (HMT), the Department of Justice said in a Sept. 23 filing. That should include the selection of a “test case” and a stay of all other cases involved, DOJ said. The filing marks DOJ's first since HMTX Industries filed suit to force refunds of Section 301 tariffs paid on lists 3 and 4 goods from China (see 2009110005).
An auto parts company founded by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is among the thousands that filed a lawsuit at the Court of International Trade seeking a refund of tariffs paid on lists 3 and 4 of the Section 301 tariffs. International Automotive Components Group North America filed its suit Sept. 18, represented by solo practitioner Kyl Kirby. While Ross is no longer directly involved with IAC and is not named as defendant in the lawsuit, he has been supportive of the administration's broad use of tariffs. The Commerce Department didn't return a request for comment. A spokesperson for IAC said “we cannot comment on pending legal matters.”
The International Trade Commission issued Revision 22 to the 2020 Harmonized Schedule on Sept. 22, implementing extensions to exclusions from List 3 and List 4 Section 301 tariffs that had been set to expire Sept. 20 (see 2009170037). The extended exclusions are to be filed under new subheadings 9903.88.58 and 9903.88.59, respectively. The ITC also made changes to an already extended exclusion, as directed by USTR in a notice issued Sept. 16 (see 2009150051). The ITC also made technical corrections to a General Note 11 provision on USMCA regional value content for passenger vehicles and light trucks, as well as a Chapter 98 note on the third-country fabric provision for the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
House Ways and Means Committee Trade Subcommittee Chairman Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., cast doubt on Congress voting to renew the Generalized System of Preferences trade benefits program before it expires, and on passing a new Miscellaneous Tariff Bill to cover imports in 2021 and 2022. He told an online audience at the Washington International Trade Association Sept. 23 that it's too soon to say whether a vote would be possible.