Import Archives | Customs & International Trade Law Blog

Customs Bulletin Weekly, Vol. 56, November 16, 2022, No. 45

Below is a recap for this week’s Customs Bulletin.

African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) Textile Certificate of Origin
- The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was adopted by the U.S. with the enactment of the Trade and Development Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106–200). The objectives of AGOA are (1) to provide for extension of duty-free treatment under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) to import sensitive articles normally excluded from GSP duty treatment, and (2) to provide for the entry of specific textile and apparel articles free of duty and free of any quantitative limits from eligible countries of sub-Saharan Africa.
- For preferential treatment of textile and apparel articles under AGOA, the exporter or producer is required to prepare a certificate of origin and provide it to the importer. The certificate of origin includes information such as name and address of the exporter, producer, and importer; the basis for which preferential treatment is claimed; and a description of the imported article(s). The importers are required to have the certificate in their possession at the time of the claim, and to provide it to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) upon request. The collection of this information is provided for in 19 CFR 10.214, 10.215, and 10.216.
- CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-11-17T09:53:38-05:00November 21, 2022|COVID-19, Federal Register, Import, International Business, International Law, International Trade, U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Uncategorized|0 Comments

Customs Bulletin Weekly, Vol. 56, November 2, 2022, No. 43

Below is a recap for this week’s Custom’s Bulletin.

Elimination of Customs Broker District Permit Fee
- Section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1641), provides that individuals and business entities must hold a valid customs broker’s license and permit to transact customs business on behalf of others. The statute also sets forth standards for the issuance of broker licenses and permits; provides for disciplinary action against brokers in the form of suspension or revocation of such licenses and permits or assessment of monetary penalties; and, provides for the assessment of monetary penalties against other persons for conducting customs business without the required broker’s license.
- On June 5, 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (85 FR 34549), proposing the elimination of customs broker district permit fees in parts 24 and 111.
- Consistent with the June 5, 2020, notice, CBP is publishing a final rule to, among other things, eliminate customs broker districts (see ‘‘Modernization of the Customs Broker Regulations’’ RIN 1651–AB16). Specifically, CBP is transitioning all brokers to national permits and expanding the scope of the national permit authority to allow national permit holders to conduct any type of customs business throughout the customs territory of the United States. As a result of the elimination of customs broker districts, CBP is amending in this document the regulations to eliminate customs broker district permit fees.
Modernization of the Customs Broker Regulations
- This document adopts […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-11-03T10:21:31-04:00November 7, 2022|301 INVESTIGATIONS, AD/CVD, China Trade War, Customs Broker, Import, International Law, International Trade, U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|Comments Off

Customs Bulletin Weekly, Vol. 56, October 26, 2022, No. 42

Below is a recap for this week’s Custom’s Bulletin.

Period of Admission and Extensions of Stay for Representatives of Foreign Information Media Seeking to Enter the United States
- This rule amends Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations to better facilitate the U.S. Government’s ability to achieve greater reciprocity between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) relative to the treatment of representatives of foreign information media of the respective countries seeking entry into the other country.
- For entry into the United States, such foreign nationals would seek to be admitted in I nonimmigrant status as bona fide representatives of foreign information media. Currently, foreign nationals who present a passport issued by the PRC, with the exception of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) or Macau SAR passport holders, may be admitted in or otherwise granted I nonimmigrant status until the activities or assignments consistent with the I classification are completed, not to exceed 90 days.
- This rule amends the DHS regulations to remove the set period of stay of up to 90 days and to allow the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to determine the maximum period of stay, no longer than one year, for PRC I visa holders, taking into account certain factors.
- This rule also announces the Secretary has determined the maximum period of stay for which a noncitizen who presents a passport issued by the PRC (other than a Hong Kong SAR passport or a Macau SAR passport) may be admitted in or […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-10-27T09:51:20-04:00October 31, 2022|AD/CVD, Federal Register, Import, International Law, International Trade, U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|Comments Off

Customs Bulletin Update – Vol. 56, October 19, 2022, No. 41

Below is a recap for this week’s Custom’s Bulletin.

Revocation of three ruling letters, modification of one ruling letter, and revocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of certain step stools
- Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), CBP is revoking NY N294603, dated March 2, 2018, NY N196451, dated December 27, 2011, NY M84487, dated June 27, 2006, and modifying NY N235681, dated December 5, 2012, and revoking or modifying any other ruling not specifically identified to reflect the analysis contained in HQ H305377, set forth as an Attachment to this notice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is revoking any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.
- It is now CBP’s position that a one-step step stool is classified according to its constituent material in heading 3924, if made of plastics or in heading 4421, if made of wood. Accordingly, pursuant to GRI’s 1 and 6, the plastic one-step step stools in NY N294603 and NY N196451 are classified in subheading 3924.90.56, which provides for “Tableware, kitchenware, other household articles and hygienic or toilet articles, of plastics: Other: Other”. The one-step step stool made of MDF in NY N235681 and the wooden step stool in NY M84487 are classified in subheading 4421.99.97, which provides for “Other articles of wood: Other: Other: Other: Other
Proposed modification of one ruling letter and proposed revocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of paper face masks
- Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(1), CBP is proposing to […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-10-21T17:24:05-04:00October 24, 2022|CTPAT, Import, International Law, International Trade, IPR, Trademarks and Logos, U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Uncategorized|Comments Off

Customs and Trade Weekly Snapshot

Here is a recap of the latest customs and international trade law news:

[…]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-09-09T15:59:48-04:00September 9, 2022|301 INVESTIGATIONS, China, China Trade War, EAR, Export, Import, International Trade, IPR, Trademarks and Logos, IRAN, Pre-compliance, Reasonable Care, Snapshot, Supply Chain, Trade Policy, U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)|Comments Off

U.S. Customs – Your Personal Policeman at the Border

Many companies mistakenly believe that registering a trademark or copyright with the U.S. Government provides sufficient protection and remedies, and, therefore, do not take the extra step to record trademarks or copyrights with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (U.S. Customs).

The processes achieve two completely different goals.

Registering a trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office gives public notice of one’s ownership of the trademark or copyright. On the other hand, the purpose of recording a trademark or copyright with U.S. Customs is to partner with the agency in preventing the unauthorized importation of merchandise that bears a recorded trademark or copyright. U.S. Customs prevents counterfeit and otherwise infringing products from entering or exiting the United States for registered trademark or copyright holders who have recorded their trademarks or copyrights with Customs.

U.S. Customs officials may detect infringing merchandise at the time of entry into the United States. When you record trademarks or copyrights with Customs, the information is entered into an electronic database accessible to U.S. Customs officers around the world. U.S. Customs uses this information to target suspect shipments for the purpose of physically examining merchandise which ultimately prevents the importation or exportation of infringing goods.

Advantages to Recording a Trademark or Copyright with Customs

The first and most obvious advantage to recording a trademark or copyright with U.S. Customs is that the agency will monitor and seize infringing merchandise at the ports of entry. Because U.S. […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-09-08T18:54:54-04:00September 8, 2022|China, Counterfeits, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, IPR, Trademarks and Logos, Pre-compliance, Speaking, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|Comments Off

Customs and Trade Law Weekly Snapshot

Here is a recap of the latest customs and international trade law news:

[…]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-09-02T14:23:21-04:00September 2, 2022|AD/CVD, Export, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Department of State (DOS), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|Comments Off

Customs and Trade Law Weekly Snapshot

Here is a recap of the latest customs and international trade law news:

[…]

Customs and Trade Law Weekly Snapshot

Here is a recap of the latest customs and international trade law news:

[…]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-07-28T09:05:25-04:00July 29, 2022|Export, Import, International Law, International Trade, Snapshot, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. Department of State (DOS), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|2 Comments

Bloomberg: A Comparison of Customs IPR Protection in the U.S. & China

Diaz Trade Law’s President, Jennifer Diaz, is enthusiastic to announce Bloomberg Law published another one of our articles, “A Comparison of Customs IPR Protection in the U.S. & China“! We want to thank Wen Peng, trademark attorney of Chofn Intellectual Property for her contributions. Below is the article reproduced with permission for your reading pleasure. You can read the article here (where you’ll have the ability to access all of the great hyperlinks). Please note you cannot click on the hyperlinks below.