Ford Motor Company Settles Claims Relating to Under-Valued Vehicles for $365M

Ford Motor Company has agreed to pay $365 million for allegedly misclassifying and understating the value of hundreds of thousands of vehicles.

According to the Department of Justice, Ford engaged in a scheme to avoid higher duties by misclassifying cargo vans. Between 2009 and 2013, the company imported Transit Connect cargo vans into the United States but presented them to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with temporary seats and other features to make them appear to be passenger vehicles. The seats were never intended to carry passengers and Ford removed them as part of post-importation processing. The inclusion of the seats allowed Ford to avoid paying the 25% duty rate for cargo vehicles and instead they paid a duty rate of just 2.5%.

This case dates back to February 2012 when the Port of Baltimore advised Ford it was initiating an investigation into Ford’s classification practices. (Typically, prior to investigating an entity, CBP sends a request for information first. For more information on how this process typically begins read “Now, More than Ever, Be Wary of and Responsive to a CBP Form 28!”).

In 2013 Customs determined that the vans were improperly classified and liquidated the vehicles at the 25% duty rate. Ford protested, and Customs denied the protest. Ford then filed a complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT). The CIT agreed with Ford, finding that Ford engaged in legitimate tariff engineering. The government appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit where […]

By |2024-03-15T14:50:57-04:00March 15, 2024|Import, Penalty|Comments Off on Ford Motor Company Settles Claims Relating to Under-Valued Vehicles for $365M

Proposed 25% Tariffs on Section 301 Digital Service Taxes – Comment Now

Background on Section 301 Digital Service Taxes

In 2020, the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) initiated Section 301 investigations with respect to certain Digital Service Taxes (“DSTs”) being adopted or under consideration by a number of countries. DSTs are taxes on revenues that certain companies generate from providing certain digital services to users in those jurisdictions. According to USTR, available evidence suggests that DSTs are expected to target large, U.S.-based technology companies.

[…]

By |2021-10-12T14:40:02-04:00April 1, 2021|301 INVESTIGATIONS, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, Investigation, Trade Policy, U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)|Comments Off on Proposed 25% Tariffs on Section 301 Digital Service Taxes – Comment Now

PAYING CHINESE TARIFF’S & YOUR COMPETITORS AREN’T?

Now that the Section 301 tariffs are effective, importers are required pay additional duties – but not all are doing so. We found that while some importers know their product is subject to one of the 3 Chinese tariff lists, they are either using HTS’s not on the list (even though that is not the correct HTS for their product), or using an HTS subject to additional tariffs, but, not paying the additional tariffs. If you are an honest importer paying the correct amount of additional duties, this may leave you unable to compete in the current market.

If you’ve noticed that some of your competitor’s pricing has not been affected by the additional tariffs and you have been forced to increase your prices to stay in business, you have an option to help equal the playing field.

[…]

U.S. issues additional Chinese Tariffs – Is Your Product on the List?/ EE.UU. Emite Aranceles Adicionales a Bienes Chinos: ¿Su Producto Está En La Lista?

On June 15, President Trump kept true to his May 29th promise of imposing additional tariffs against Chinese goods. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has officially released the “Section 301 Product List”. The additional duties are effective on or after July 6, 2018.

History […]

Free Trade Agreements: Good or Bad?

I am still troubled by the Wall Street Journal lead article on October 4, 2010 with the headline "Recession-Weary Americans Sour on Free Trade." I asked myself why would Americans who live in an economy built successfully on the principles of capitalism and free enterprise be against international trade? My bold prediction is that 2011 will be the year that the Obama Administration successfully finalizes free trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia, and then Congress passes laws approving them.

Go to Top