What OFAC Defines as a “Sham Transaction” 

Sham transactions occur when blocked persons “give up their property on paper only,” while continuing to benefit from or control the asset. These arrangements often involve: 

• Proxies, straw owners, or front companies acting on behalf of sanctioned individuals. 
• Opaque legal structures, including multi‑layered LLCs, partnerships, or trusts. 
• Transfers to family members or close associates who may serve as facilitators. 
• Commercially unreasonable transfers, such as those lacking adequate consideration. 
• Continued use or control of the asset by the blocked person after the purported transfer. 

Pro Tip: Look beyond legal formalities and identify the economic realities of the transaction. 

Red Flags Identified by OFAC 

The advisory outlines several indicators that a transaction may be a sham designed to evade sanctions. These include: 

• Transfers with no legitimate business purpose or to individuals lacking relevant expertise. 
• Complex corporate structures in high‑risk jurisdictions. 
• Inconsistent or incomplete documentation surrounding the transfer. 
• Timing of the transfer, particularly if it occurs close to a sanctions designation. 
• Evasive or vague responses from intermediaries when questioned about ownership or control. 

Pro Tip: No single factor is determinative; look at the totality of the circumstances instead. 

If your organization needs assistance strengthening sanctions compliance, conducting due diligence, or reviewing internal controls, contact Diaz Trade Law today! 

Learn more: 

• Bloomberg Law: Submitting a Voluntary Self-Disclosure to OFAC 
• Bloomberg Law Feature: Voluntary Self-Disclosures: Recent Guidance From BIS, OFAC & DOJ 
• Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Sanctions Compliance 

Jennifer Diaz, President, Diaz Trade Law

Amber Pirson, Attorney, Diaz Trade Law

FinCEN’s March 30, 2026, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) marks a major step toward fully operationalizing the agency’s whistleblower program, designed to incentivize reporting of Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), sanctions, IEEPA, and other illicit finance violations. The proposal outlines how whistleblowers can securely submit information, how awards will be determined, and what protections will be available.  

This development reflects the Treasury Department’s broader strategy to strengthen financial system integrity and encourage actionable tips that support enforcement efforts. For financial institutions, compliance professionals, and potential whistleblowers, the NPRM provides long‑awaited clarity on program structure and expectations. 

Overview of the Proposed Rule 

FinCEN’s NPRM proposes a comprehensive framework for administering whistleblower submissions and awards. Key elements include: 

• Secure submission procedures for individuals reporting suspected violations of the BSA, OFAC sanctions, and related laws. 
• Eligibility criteria for whistleblower awards, including documentation requirements and timelines. 
• Award ranges of 10–30% of monetary penalties collected when a whistleblower’s information leads to a successful enforcement action. 
• Robust protections for individuals who provide information, including confidentiality and anti‑retaliation safeguards. 

These provisions aim to encourage early, detailed reporting while ensuring whistleblowers are shielded from adverse consequences. 

Why FinCEN Is Prioritizing Whistleblower Incentives 

The NPRM aligns with Treasury’s broader efforts to combat fraud, sanctions evasion, and illicit finance. On the same day, FinCEN issued an advisory highlighting how transnational criminal organizations exploit federal and state health care programs—underscoring the need for timely, credible tips from insiders. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent emphasized that whistleblowers play a critical role in protecting U.S. national security and ensuring taxpayer funds are not diverted to criminal activity. 

By formalizing award structures and protections, FinCEN seeks to increase the volume and quality of reports that can lead to enforcement actions. 

What Financial Institutions Should Know 

Financial institutions should closely review the NPRM and consider how it may affect internal compliance programs. Key considerations include… 

• Enhanced reporting expectations: Institutions may see increased whistleblower activity and should ensure internal reporting channels are well‑defined. 
• Documentation and recordkeeping: Detailed records may become even more important as whistleblower tips could trigger investigations. 
• Training and awareness: Employees should understand both internal reporting options and the existence of FinCEN’s external whistleblower portal. 

FinCEN encourages public comments within 60 days of the NPRM’s publication in the Federal Register. The official notice is available here. 

Whistleblowing and IEEPA 

While the proposed rule offers rewards for reporting fraud-related violations of IEEPA, it is unclear whether FinCEN will consider reports of unpaid IEEPA duties to be valid claims of fraud. Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling, which determined that President Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs was unlawful, companies subject to such whistleblowing reports may have a strong claim of defense.   

Final Thoughts: Take Action Today! 

FinCEN’s proposed whistleblower framework represents a significant shift in how illicit finance violations may come to light. Financial institutions, compliance officers, and legal practitioners should proactively assess the NPRM’s implications and prepare for increased scrutiny and reporting activity. If your organization needs guidance navigating BSA/AML obligations, whistleblower‑related risks, or comment submission strategies, Diaz Trade Law is ready to assist with FinCEN compliance. 

Learn more: 

• DOJ Targets Trade Fraud: Importers Now on Notice as Criminal Division Ramps Up Enforcement 
• Bloomberg Law: Voluntary Self-Disclosures: Recent Guidance From BIS, OFAC & DOJ 
• BIS Issues Guidance to Financial Institutions on Best Practices for Compliance with the Export Administration Regulations 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

• U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is imposing immediate import restrictions on fish and fish products from the New Zealand inshore set net and trawl fisheries deployed in the range of the Maui dolphin, a marine mammal species endemic to the on the west coast of the North Island in response to the United States Court of International Trade order (Slip Op. 22-130) and in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
• CBP has implemented Split Processing at the Fort Erie/Peace Bridge Border Crossing for NEXUS/Free and Secure Trade (FAST) Trusted Traveler Programs (TTP) Enrollment Center. A similar split interview process was previously implemented successfully at the Alexandria Bay, N.Y. Port of Entry and Lansdowne Border Crossing and these initiatives represent key strategies to address ongoing demand.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) 

• The Department of the Treasury announced G7 and Australia, as current members of the Price Cap Coalition, on 2 December 2022 reached consensus on a maximum price of 60 U.S. dollars per barrel for seaborne Russian-origin crude oil in line with the unanimous decision by Member States of the European Union to endorse a price level for the price cap on seaborne Russian-origin crude oil.
• OFAC is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC’s List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
• OFAC is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC’s List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
• OFAC is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC’s List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.

Executive Office of the United States President

• On December 5, the United States and Panama held the third meeting of the Environmental Affairs Council under the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA). Assistant United States Trade Representative for Environment and Natural Resources Kelly Milton led the U.S. delegation, along with the U.S. Department of State’s Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs Jennifer Littlejohn.
  • The Parties highlighted their respective efforts to implement Environment Chapter commitments during the meeting, including their actions to strengthen environmental protection, enforce environmental laws, and promote public participation in environmental decision-making.
• The United States and Bangladesh today convened the sixth meeting of the United States-Bangladesh Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum Agreement (TICFA) Council. The meeting was co-chaired by Christopher Wilson, Assistant United States Trade Representative for South and Central Asian Affairs, and Tapan Kanti Ghosh, Secretary, Bangladesh Ministry of Commerce. Both delegations included officials from trade, labor, agriculture, and other relevant ministries.

The Department of Commerce (DOC)

• The U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders with October anniversary dates. In accordance with Commerce’s regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews.
• DOC preliminarily determines that circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from the Republic of Korea (Korea) was sold at prices below normal value for Husteel Co., Ltd. and not sold at prices below normal value for Nexteel Co., Ltd. during the period of review (POR) November 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.
• DOC determines that Metalco S.A., the sole company subject to the 2020-2021 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on corrosion- resistant steel products from the People’s Republic of China, is part of the China-wide entity because it did not demonstrate its eligibility for a separate rate. The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021.
• DOC determines that POSCO, a producer/exporter of certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to- length plate from the Republic of Korea, received de minimis net countervailable subsidies during the period of review (POR), January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
• DOC preliminarily determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of chlorinated isocyanurates from the People’s Republic of China  during the period of review (POR), January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.
• DOC preliminarily determines that sales of monosodium glutamate from the Republic of Indonesia have been made below normal value during the period of review (POR), November 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.
• DOC published the notice of initiation and preliminary results of changed circumstances reviews of the antidumping duty (AD) order on silicomanganese from India. For these final results, Commerce continues to find that NAVA Limited is the successor-in-interest to Nava Bharat Ventures Limited in the context of the AD order on silicomanganese from India. Furthermore, NAVA is entitled to NBVL’s AD cash deposit rate.
• DOC preliminarily finds that Ratnamani Metals & Tubes Ltd. made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) in the United States during the November 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021, period of review (POR).

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)

• United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai met with the European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis to hold the first Ministerial Meeting of the Working Group on large civil aircraft. They affirmed the U.S.-EU Understanding on a Cooperative Framework for Large Civil Aircraft reached in June 2021 and agreed to continue the Working Group’s efforts to confront the challenges posed by China’s non-market economic policies.
• USTR Katherine Tai, European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis, and U.S. Department of Labor’s Deputy Undersecretary for International Affairs Thea Lee co-hosted the inaugural principals’ meeting of the U.S. – EU Trade and Labor Dialogue at the University of Maryland, College Park.
• The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the U.S. Department of Labor, and the European Commission led today the inaugural principals’ meeting of the United States and European Union tripartite Trade and Labor Dialogue. The meeting included key U.S. and EU labor and business representatives, and focused on identifying opportunities for governments, labor unions, and businesses to collaborate to eliminate forced labor in supply chains.
• USTR announced support for extending the deadline to decide whether there should be an extension of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement to cover the production and supply of COVID-19 diagnostics and therapeutics.

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC)

• The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC)  has received a complaint entitled Certain Environmental Monitors with Side-Viewable Illumination and Components Thereof, DN 3657; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant’s filing pursuant to the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.

If you have questions about these updates, contact our Diaz Trade Law attorneys at info@diaztradelaw.com or call us at 305-456-3830.

To receive an email notification whenever a new post is published, please subscribe to our weekly blog here.

• 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 (87 FR 37881) on June 24, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Accreditation of Commercial Testing Laboratories and Approval of Commercial Gaugers
  • Commercial laboratories seeking to become a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Accredited Laboratory and commercial gaugers seeking to become a CBP Approved Gauger must submit the information specified in 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, respectively, to CBP on CBP Form 6478. After the initial accreditation and/or approval, a private company may apply to include additional facilities under its accreditation and/or approval by submitting a formal written request to CBP. This application process is authorized by Section 613 of Public Law 103–182 (North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act), codified at 19 U.S.C. 1499(b), which directs CBP to establish a procedure to accredit privately owned testing laboratories. The information collected is used by CBP in deciding whether to approve individuals or businesses desiring to measure bulk products or to analyze importations.
  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection (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 (87 FR 39107) on June 30, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Cargo Container and Road Vehicle Certification for Transport Under Customs Seal
  • The United States is a signatory to several international Customs conventions governing cargo container and road vehicle certification procedures that specify the technical requirements that containers and road vehicles must meet to be acceptable for transport under Customs seal. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has the responsibility of administering the procedures within Title 19, Part 115 for the purpose of certifying U.S.-manufactured containers and road vehicles for use in international transport under Customs seal. The certification process involves container and road vehicle manufacturers, owners, or operators submitting applications for approval to the certifying authorities (the entities designated in 19 CFR 115.6: The American Bureau of Shipping; International Cargo Gear Bureau, Inc.; The National Cargo Bureau, Inc.). Applications to request certification approvals from the above-mentioned certifying authorities are submitted directly to these organizations on the appropriate forms (i.e., that are created by the organizations themselves).
  • The certification process is voluntary for manufacturers, and therefore Part 115 does not require certification of said container and road vehicles. A certification of compliance facilitates the efficient movement of containers and road vehicles across international territories. The procedures for obtaining a certification of a container or vehicle are set forth in 19 CFR part 115.
  • 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 (87 FR 34895) on June 8, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Protest (CBP Form 19)
  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form 19, Protest, is filed to seek the review of a CBP decision. This review may be conducted by CBP personnel who participated directly in the underlying decision. This form is also used to request ‘‘Further Review,’’ which means a request for review of the protest to be performed by CBP personnel who did not participate directly in the protested decision or by the Commissioner, or his designee, as provided in the CBP regulations. The matters that may be protested include: the appraised value of merchandise; the classification and rate and amount of duties chargeable; all charges within the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary of the Treasury; exclusion of merchandise from entry or delivery, or demand for redelivery; the liquidation or reliquidation of an entry or any modification of an entry; the refusal to pay a claim for drawback; refusal to reliquidate an entry made before December 18, 2004 under section 520(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930; or refusal to reliquidate an entry under section 520(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930. The parties who may file a protest or application for further review include: the importer or consignee shown on the entry papers, or their sureties; any person paying any charge or exaction; any person seeking entry or delivery, with respect to a determination of origin under 19 CFR 181 Subpart G any exporter or producer of the merchandise subject to that determination, if the exporter or producer completed and signed a Certification of Origin covering the merchandise as provided for in 19 CR 181.11(a); of any person filing a claim for drawback; or any authorized agent of any of the persons described above.
  • CBP Form 19 collects information such as the name and address of the protesting party, information about the entry being protested, detailed reasons for the protest, and justification for applying for further review.
  • 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 (87 FR 34894) on June 8, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Administrative Rulings
  • The collection of information in 19 CFR part 177 is necessary in order to enable Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to respond to requests by importers and other interested persons for the issuance of administrative rulings. These rulings pertain to the interpretation of applicable laws related to prospective and current or completed transactions involving, but not limited to classification, marking, valuation, carrier, and country of origin. The collection of information in Part 177 of the CBP Regulations is also necessary to enable CBP to make proper decisions regarding the issuance of binding rulings that modify or revoke prior CBP binding rulings. This collection of information is authorized by 5 U.S.C. 301, 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202, (General Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States), 1502, 1624, 1625. The application to obtain an administrative ruling is accessible at: https://erulings.cbp.gov/s/ or the public can submit a ruling request by mail (or email).
  • 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 (87 FR 35563) on June 10, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Ajmal Steel Tubes & Pipes Industries v. United States
  • This action is a challenge to the final determination made by the United States Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) in the periodic review of the antidumping (“AD”) order for carbon-quality pipe from the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) covering the period from December 1, 2018, through November 30, 2019.
  • Plaintiff requests that the court hold aspects of Commerce’s final determination unsupported by substantial evidence or otherwise not in accordance with law. The United States (“Government”) asks that the court sustain Commerce’s final determination.
  • Ajmal Steel Tubes & Pipes Ind. LLC (“Ajmal”) is a producer of carbon-quality pipe from the UAE. Since 2016, this product has been subject to an AD order. On March 3, 2020, Commerce selected Ajmal and Universal Tube and Plastic Industries, Ltd. (“Universal”) as mandatory respondents for an administrative review of the anti-dumping order and issued questionnaires with the Section A responses due March 24, 2020. Subsequently, Ajmal submitted an extension of time request (“EOT”) on March 19, 2020, and another EOT on April 3, 2020, for delays “due to the COVID-19 global pandemic.”
  • The Court held that Commerce abused its discretion in denying Ajmal’s First Request for Reconsideration. The Court remanded to Commerce to accept and consider Ajaml’s Section A filing and complete the review.

• Proposed Revocation of Three Ruling Letters and Proposed Revocation of Treatment Relating to the Tariff Classification of Wireless Headphone Sets from China and an Undisclosed Country
  • In NY N022195, NY N022204 and NY N240329, CBP classified wireless headphone sets in heading 8517, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 8517.62.00, HTSUS, which provides for “Other apparatus for transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network): Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus.” CBP has reviewed NY N022195, NY N022204 and NY N240329, and has determined the ruling letters to be in error.
  • It is now CBP’s position that the wireless headphone sets are properly classified in heading 8518, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 8518.30.20, HTSUS, which provides for “Microphones and stands therefor; loudspeakers, whether or not mounted in their enclosures; headphones and earphones, whether or not combined with a microphone, and sets consisting of a microphone and one or more loudspeakers; audio-frequency electric amplifiers; electric sound amplifier sets; parts thereof: Headphones and earphones, whether or not combined with a microphone, and sets consisting of a microphone and one or more loudspeakers: Other.”
• Country of Origin Marking Requirements for Containers or Holders
  • Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1304, requires each imported article of foreign origin, or its container, to be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article or container permits, with the English name of the country of origin. The marking informs the ultimate purchaser in the United States of the country of origin of the article or its container. The marking requirements for containers or holders of imported merchandise are provided for by 19 CFR 134.22(b).
  • 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 (Volume 87 FR Page 39108) on June 30, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Delivery Ticket
  • CBP Form 6043, Delivery Ticket, is used to document transfers of imported merchandise between parties. This form collects information such as the name and address of the consignee; the name of the importing carrier; lien information; the location of where the goods originated and where they were delivered; and information about the imported merchandise. CBP Form 6043 is completed by warehouse proprietors, carriers, Foreign Trade Zone operators and other trade entities involved in transfers of imported merchandise.
  • 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 (87 FR 36867) on June 21, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Customs and Border Protection Recordkeeping Requirements
  • The North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Title VI, known as the Customs Modernization Act (Mod Act) amended Title 19 U.S.C. 1508, 1509 and 1510 by revising Customs and Border Protection (CBP) laws related to recordkeeping, examination of books and witnesses, regulatory audit procedures and judicial enforcement. Specifically, the Mod Act expanded the list of parties subject to CBP recordkeeping requirements; distinguished between records which pertain to the entry of merchandise and financial records needed to substantiate the correctness of information contained in entry documentation; and identified a list of records which must be maintained and produced upon request by CBP.
  • 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 (87 FR 35565) on June 10, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services
  • The Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services (U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form 3171) is used by commercial carriers and importers as a request for permission to unlade imported merchandise, baggage, or passengers. It is also used to request overtime services from CBP officers in connection with lading or unlading of merchandise, or the entry or clearance of a vessel, including the boarding of a vessel for preliminary supplies, ship’s stores, sea stores, or equipment not to be re-laden.
  • This form is anticipated to be submitted electronically as part of the maritime forms automation project through the Vessel Entrance and Clearance System (VECS), which will eliminate the need for any paper submission of any vessel entrance or clearance requirements under the above referenced statutes and regulations. VECS will still collect and maintain the same data but will automate the capture of data to reduce or eliminate redundancy with other data collected by CBP.
  • 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 (87 FR 31252) on May 23, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Holders or Containers Which Enter the United States Duty Free
  • Subheading 9803.00.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), codified as 19 U.S.C. 1202, provide for the release without entry or the payment of duty of certain substantial holders or containers pursuant to the provisions of 19 CFR 10.41b. Section 19 CFR 10.41b eliminates the need for an importer to file entry documents by instead requiring, among other things, the marking of the containers or holders to indicate the HTSUS numbers that provide for duty-free treatment of the containers or holders.
  • For U.S. manufactured serially numbered holders or containers which may be released without entry or the payment of duty under 9801.00.10 HTSUS, 19 CFR 10.41b requires the owner to place the following markings on the holder or container: 9801.00.10, HTSUS (unless the holder or container has a permanently attached metal tag or plate showing, among other things, the name and address of the U.S. manufacturer); the name of the owner; and the serial number assigned by the owner.
  • For serially numbered holders or containers of foreign manufacture for which may be released without entry or payment of duty under 9803.00.50 HTSUS, 19 CFR 10.41b requires the owner to place markings containing the following information: 9803.00.50 HTSUS; the district and port code numbers of the port of entry; the entry number; the last two digits of the fiscal year of entry covering the importation of the holders and containers on which duty was paid; the name of the owner; and the serial number assigned by the owner.
  • 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 (87 FR 34283) on June 6, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Declaration for Free Entry of Unaccompanied Articles (CBP Form 3299)
  • 19 U.S.C. 1498 provides that when personal and household effects enter the United States but do not accompany the owner or importer on his/her arrival in the country, a declaration is made on CBP Form 3299, Declaration for Free Entry of Unaccompanied Articles. The information on this form is needed to support a claim for duty-free entry for these effects.
  • 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 (87 FR 37882) on June 24, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• User Fees (CBP Form 339A, 339C, and 339V)
  • The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) (Pub. L. 99–272, 100 Stat. 82; 19 U.S.C. 58c), as amended, authorizes the collection of user fees by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The collection of these fees requires submission of information from the party remitting the fees to CBP. This collection of information is provided for by 19 CFR 24.22. In certain cases, this information is submitted on one of three forms including the CBP Form 339A for payment upon arrival or prepayment of the annual user fee for a private aircraft (19 CFR 24.22(e)(1) and (2)), CBP Form 339C for prepayment of the annual user fee for a commercial vehicle (19 CFR 24.22(c)(3)), and CBP Form 339V for payment upon arrival or prepayment of the annual user fee for a private vessel (19 CFR 24.22(e)(1) and (2)).
  • 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 (87 FR 39105) on June 30, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Exportation of Used Self-Propelled Vehicles
  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations require a person attempting to export a used self-propelled vehicle to furnish documentation to CBP at the port of export. Exportation of a vehicle is permitted only upon compliance with these requirements. The required documentation includes, but is not limited to, a Certificate of Title or a Salvage Title, the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), a Manufacturer’s Statement of Origin, etc. CBP will accept originals or certified copies of the Certificate of Title. The purpose of this information is to help ensure that stolen vehicles or vehicles associated with other criminal activity are not exported.
  • 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 (87 FR 39107) on June 30, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit (CBP Form I-68)
  • The Canadian Border Boat Landing Permit, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form I–68, generally allows select individuals entering the United States along the northern border by small1 pleasure boats to report their arrival and make entry without having to travel to a designated port of entry for an inspection by a CBP officer. The information collected on CBP Form I–68 allows eligible individuals to be inspected in person only once during the boating season, rather than each time they make an entry. United States citizens, Lawful Permanent Residents of the United States, Canadian citizens, and Landed Residents of Canada who are nationals of the Visa Waiver Program countries listed in 8 CFR 217.2(a) are eligible to apply for the permit.
  • CBP has developed a smart phone application known as ROAM that will in certain circumstances allow travelers participating in the I–68 program to report their arrival in the United States through the ROAM application, instead of by telephone. The ROAM app, implementing the I–68 program, will allow CBP officers to remotely conduct traveler interviews with a phone’s video chat capability, and replace other technologies used for remote inspections that are obsolete or inefficient.
  • 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 (87 FR 34282) on June 6, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Application to Establish a Centralized Examination Station
  • A Centralized Examination Station (CES) is a privately operated facility where merchandise is made available to CBP officers for physical examination. If a port director decides that a CES is needed, he or she solicits applications to operate a CES. The information contained in the application is used to determine the suitability of the applicant’s facility; the fairness of fee structure; and the knowledge of cargo handling operations and of CBP procedures and regulations. The names of all principals or corporate officers and all employees who will come in contact with uncleared cargo are also to be provided so that CBP may perform background investigations. The CES application is provided for by 19 CFR 118.11 and is authorized by 19 U.S.C. 1499, Tariff Act of 1930.
  • 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 (87 FR 36867) on June 21, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
  • The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Oman Fasteners, LLC v. United States
  • Plaintiff Oman Fasteners, LLC seeks relief from defendants’ refusal to allow bonding in lieu of cash deposits for potential liability for duties under a Presidential Proclamation, Proclamation No. 9980, Adjusting Imports of Derivative Aluminum Articles and Derivative Steel Articles Into the United States, 85 Fed. Reg. 5,281 (Exec. Office of the President Jan. 29, 2020) (“Proclamation 9980”), which imposed duties on various imported products made of aluminum or steel, including steel fasteners.
  • Granting Oman Fasteners’ motion in part and denying it in part, we require defendants to exclude Oman Fasteners from a requirement to post cash deposits for potential duty liability under Proclamation 9980 until such time as defendants obtain a further order from this Court or Oman Fasteners voluntarily enters into an agreement with defendants that modifies the terms of this Opinion and Order.
• Garg Tube Export v. United States
  • Before the court is the U.S. Department of Commerce’s second redetermination on remand filed pursuant to the court’s order in Garg Tube Exp, LLP v. United States, 569 F. Supp. 3d 1202 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2022) (“Garg II”) in connection with Commerce’s 2017–2018 administrative review of the antidumping duty (“ADD”) order on welded carbon steel standard pipes and tubes (“CWP”) from India, covering the period of review from May 1, 2017 to April 30, 2018.
  • In Garg II, the court remanded Commerce’s first remand results to reconsider its determination that a particular market situation (“PMS”) existed in India for hot-rolled coil steel (“HRC”) and its regression methodology applying a PMS adjustment or explain its determinations and support them with substantial evidence. Garg II, 569 F. Supp. 3d at 1220–21. On remand, under respectful protest, Commerce no longer finds that a PMS existed, and accordingly no longer applies a PMS adjustment to the costs of production for sales based on constructed value. Pursuant to Ct. Remand, June 9, 2022, ECF No. 98 at 17–22 (“Second Remand Results”). Commerce’s redetermination is supported by substantial evidence and complies with the court’s remand instructions. Therefore, Commerce’s Second Remand Results are sustained.

• 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 as final, with changes, proposed amendments to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations modernizing the customs broker regulations. CBP is transitioning all customs brokers to a single national permit 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.
  • To accomplish this, CBP is eliminating broker districts and district permits, which in turn removes the need for the maintenance of district offices, and district permit waivers. CBP is also updating, among other changes, the responsible supervision and control oversight framework, ensuring that customs business is conducted within the United States, and requiring that a customs broker have direct communication with an importer. These changes are designed to enable customs brokers to meet the challenges of the modern operating environment while maintaining a high level of service in customs business.
  • Further, CBP is increasing fees for the broker license application to recover some of the costs associated with the review of customs broker license applications and the necessary vetting of individuals and business entities (i.e., partnerships, associations, and corporations).
  • Additionally, CBP is announcing the deployment of a new online system, the eCBP Portal, for processing broker submissions and electronic payments. Lastly, CBP is publishing a concurrent final rule document to eliminate all references to customs broker district permit user fees (see ‘‘Elimination of Customs Broker District Permit Fee’’ RIN 1515–AE43) to align with the changes made in this final rule document.
  • This final rule is effective December 19, 2022.
• BGH Edelstahl Siegen GmbH v. United States and Ellwood City Forge Company, et al.
  • Before the court was BGH Edelstahl Siegen GmbH’s (“BGH”) Rule 56.2 motion for judgment on the agency record challenging various aspects of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s (“Commerce”) final determination in its countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigation of forged steel fluid end blocks (“Fluid End Blocks”) from the Federal Republic of Germany (“FRG”).
  • BGH challenged Commerce’s Final Results on three grounds, arguing (1) that Commerce improperly initiated its CVD investigation and impermissibly expanded the CVD investigation to include new subsidy programs, (2) failed to include ex-parte communications in the record, and (3) incorrectly determined that seven programs used by BGH during the period of investigation were countervailable subsidies.
  • Defendants argued that Commerce’s decisions to initiate and expand its CVD investigations were in accordance with law because the petition to initiate the CVD investigation “included the relevant laws and policies that provided the countervailable subsidies, tied those facts to the legal framework, and established a reasoned basis to conclude that BGH received subsidy benefits[,]” and that Commerce may consider new subsidy programs uncovered during its investigation.
  • Defendants further argued that the record for the CVD investigation is complete because the ex parte communication that BGH asserts is missing from the record pertained to the antidumping investigation, not the CVD investigation, and therefore need not be included in the record. Finally, Defendants argued that Commerce correctly determined the Contested Programs are countervailable.
  • The CIT held:
    • 1. That Commerce’s Final Results are sustained with respect to the initiation of the CVD investigation, the determination that the administrative record is complete, the determination that the provisions of the Electricity Tax Act and the Energy Tax Act, the EEG and KWKG Reduced Surcharge Programs, the ETS Additional Free Emissions Allowances, and the CO2 Compensation Program are countervailable subsidies, and the determination that Commerce’s calculations for the EEG and KWKG Reduced Surcharge Programs, the ETS Additional Free Emissions Allowances, and the CO2 Compensation Program are supported by substantial evidence;
    • 2. That Commerce’s Final Results are remanded for further explanation or reconsideration consistent with this opinion with respect to its determination that the KAV Program is a specific subsidy;
    • 3. That Commerce’s Final Results are remanded for further explanation or reconsideration consistent with this opinion with respect to its calculations of the CVD rates for the Electricity Tax Act and the Energy Tax Act; and it is further ORDERED that Commerce shall file its remand redetermination with the court within 90 days of this date;
    • 4. That Commerce shall file the administrative record within 14 days of the date of filing of its remand redetermination;
    • 5. That the parties shall file any comments on the remand redetermination within 30 days of the date of filing of the remand determination;
    • 6.That the parties shall have 30 days to file their replies to the comments on the remand redetermination;
    • 7. That the parties shall file the joint appendix within 14 days of the date of filing of responses to the comments on the remand redetermination.
• Keirton USA v. United States
  • Before the court was Keirton USA, Inc.’s (“Keirton”) Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings.
  • Keirton challenged CBP’s protest denial arguing possession and importation of the subject merchandise is permissible because Washington State law authorizes the possession and importation of marijuana paraphernalia.
    • Keirton sells Twisted Trimmers to companies in the State of Washington that process marijuana plants.
  • Defendant United States argued that, although Washington State repealed its laws criminalizing possession of marijuana paraphernalia like the Twisted Trimmer, that repeal does not explicitly authorize Keirton to use the subject merchandise to manufacture, possess, or distribute marijuana paraphernalia under Federal law.
  • The CIT held that it is lawful for Keirton to possess and import its merchandise into the state of Washington. Therefore, Keirton’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted, and Defendant’s cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

• Customs and Border Protection(CBP) initiated a formal investigation under Title IV, Section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, commonly referred to as the Enforce and Protect Act (“EAPA”), for Pitts Enterprises, Inc. (“Pitts”).
• CBP issued a determination on February 23, 2022, against Splendid Trading Co. (also doing business as NGY Group (Chino) Inc.) (collectively, Splendid Trading) and Superior Granite and Marble by Vivaldi LLC (also doing business as Vivaldi Interiors LLC and Vivaldi Commercial LLC) (collectively, Superior) for evading customs duties in Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) Case 7607.
• CBP announced it has added Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act (UFLPA) Region alert that will require a new mandatory data element for reporting imports via ACE system.
• CBP reminds that the Period 3 (August 8, 2022 to November 7, 2022) 300,000 quota for large residential washing machines is open.  
• CBP officers, working with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the Food and Drug Administration, in the span of just two days, seized eight shipments involving counterfeit merchandise and FDA violative cosmetics at a local express consignment facility in Kenner.
• CBP officers that inspect packages at the Louisville Port of Entry seized one package concealing bracelets, necklaces, and earrings would total over $2.5 million had the merchandise been genuine. 
• CBP has initiated an investigation into Double L Group, LLC, to determine whether they have violated the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) by evading antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders.
• CBP will deploy the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Region Alert enhancement to the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) on a date to be determined. This enhancement will provide an early notification to importers of goods that may have been produced in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) which would be subject to UFLPA restrictions per H.R. 6256. 

Federal Maritime Commission (FMC)

• Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) member Carl Bentzel proposed to carry extra transparency to the ocean delivery business. Bentzel unveiled his plan on the American Affiliation of Port Authorities’ annual conference Oct. 17. 

United States Department of Commerce (DOC)

• Department of Commerce (DOC) and USITC determine that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) order on 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R–134a) from the People’s Republic of China (China) would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, Commerce is publishing a notice of continuation of the AD order. 
• DOC determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of stainless steel flanges (steel flanges) from India during the period of review, January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
• DOC, as a result of expedited sunset reviews, finds that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) orders on welded ASTM A–312 stainless steel pipe (WSSP) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping.  
• DOC each year announces during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation, an interested party, may request the DOC conduct an administrative review of AD/CVD order, finding, or suspended investigation.  
• DOC’s National Marine Fisheries Service issued a proposed rule to implement Amendment 52 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Commercial King and Tanner Crab Fisheries of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (Crab FMP) and a regulatory amendment to revise regulations on Economic Data Reports (EDR) requirements for groundfish and crab fisheries off Alaska. 
• DOC and USITC determines that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (China), would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping, net countervailable subsidies, and material injury to an industry in the United States, Commerce is publishing a notice of continuation of the AD and CVD orders. 
• DOC preliminarily determines that producers and exporters of hot-rolled steel flat products (hotrolled steel) from Japan, sold subject merchandise in the United States at prices below normal value during the period of review (POR) October 1, 2020, through September 30, 2021. 
• DOC finds, as a result of a sunset review, that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) order on furfuryl alcohol from the People’s Republic of China (China) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the dumping margins.
• DOC has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders with September anniversary dates.
• DOC finds, as a result of this expedited sunset review, finds that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) order on dioctyl terephthalate (DOTP) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping.  
• DOC determines that producers and/or exporters of large diameter welded pipe (welded pipe) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) received countervailable subsidies during the period of review (POR), January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
• DOC and USITC, based on affirmative final determinations, is issuing an antidumping duty order on sodium nitrite from the Russian Federation.  
• DOC preliminarily determines that certain preserved mushrooms (preserved mushrooms) from Poland are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 
• DOC preliminarily determines that certain preserved mushrooms (preserved mushrooms) from Spain are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 
• DOC preliminarily determines that certain preserved mushrooms (preserved mushrooms) from the Netherlands are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 
• DOC preliminarily determines that white grape juice concentrate (WGJC) from Argentina is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 
• DOC, through the Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (‘‘OTEA’’) of the International Trade Administration, has received an application for an amended Export Trade Certificate of Review (‘‘Certificate’’). 
• DOC announced on January 6, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Jose Martin Gallegos-Luevanos (‘‘Gallegos-Luevanos’’) was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. 554(a) for fraudulently and knowingly attempting to export from the United States to Mexico, one Barret .50 caliber bolt rifle, three FA Cugir Romanian AK–47 rifles, seven Century Arms VSKA AK–47 rifles, one Century Arms WASR AK–47 rifle, and 85 assorted magazines, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 554. 
• DOC and USITC, based on affirmative final determinations, is issuing an antidumping duty order on sodium nitrite from the Russian Federation.

U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

• U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. 
• OFAC took action on October 28, 2022, against the 15 Khordad Foundation, an Iran-based foundation that has issued a multi-million-dollar bounty for the killing of prominent Indian-born, British-American author Salman Rushdie. 
• OFAC on November 1, 2022, took action against the Islamic State in Somalia (ISIS-Somalia), its first designations against this affiliate of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). 

United States International Trade Commission (USITC)

• U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has received a complaint entitled Certain Video Processing Devices and Components Thereof, DN 3651; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant’s filing pursuant to the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. 
• USITC has given notice that on September 16, 2022, the presiding Chief Administrative Law Judge (‘‘Chief ALJ’’) issued an Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337.
• USITC invites comments from the public on whether changed circumstances exist sufficient to warrant the institution of a review pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 regarding the Commission’s affirmative determination in investigation No. 731–TA–860 (Final). 
• USITC announces they will be holding the Sunshine Act meetings on November 4, 2022, in Washington D.C. and it will be opened to the public.  
• USITC hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on high pressure steel cylinders from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. 
• USITC hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury.  
• USITC hereby gives notice that it has determined not to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 70) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) granting respondent Google LLC’s (‘‘Google’’) unopposed motion to terminate the modification proceeding based on withdrawal of its petition for modification. 
• USITC had a complaint filed with them on August 23, 2022, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Daedalus Prime LLC of Bronxville, New York.
• USITC on the basis of the record developed in the subject investigation, determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of sodium nitrite from Russia, provided for in subheading 2834.10.10 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’).
• USITC instituted Investigation No. 332–593, U.S.- Pacific Islands Trade and Investment: Impediments and Opportunities following receipt on September 29, 2022, of a request from USTR.

Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)

• Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is amending the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to implement necessary controls on advanced computing integrated circuits (ICs), computer commodities that contain such ICs, and certain semiconductor manufacturing items. 

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS)

• Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, intends to request a revision of a currently approved information collection for the Refined Sugar Re-Export Program, the Sugar-Containing Products Re-Export Program, and the Polyhydric Alcohol Program. 

United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

• United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend the color additive regulation to increase the fee for certification services. The change in fees will allow FDA to continue to maintain an adequate color certification program as required by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). 

United States Trade Representative (USTR)

• United States Trade Representative (USTR) Katherine Tai and Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh released on October 27, 2022, the following statements after workers at a Saint Gobain facility in Cuautla, Mexico elected a new, independent union to represent them in collective bargaining agreement negotiations. 
• USTR received on September 8, 2022, a petition requesting an investigation of certain alleged acts, policies, and practices of the government of Mexico concerning seasonal and perishable agricultural products.  
• USTR Katherine Tai, and Julio José Prado, Minister of Production, Foreign Trade, Investment and Fisheries of Ecuador met on October 28, 2022, in Washington, DC, and agreed to establish a Fair Trade Working Group and explore potential negotiations on labor, environment, and digital trade.
• USTR on October 17, 2022, announced its request for comments on “the effectiveness of the actions in achieving the objectives of the investigation, other actions that could be taken, and the effects of such actions on the United States economy, including consumers.” USTR has posted the list of Four-Year Review Questions that it will work to determine whether tariffs should be maintained; whether the approach to China regarding trade needs to be changed; or whether the tariffs should end entirely.  

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

• Department of Homeland Security (DHS), CBP will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). 

The White House

• President Biden on September 15, 2022, issued Executive Order further elaborating upon current statutory factors and add national security factor the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States must consider in its review process of covered transactions.  
• Government officials from the United States and Jordan convened the fourth Labor Subcommittee under the United States-Jordan Free Trade Agreement on October 31, 2022. 

If you have questions about these updates, contact our Diaz Trade Law attorneys at info@diaztradelaw.com or call us at 305-456-3830.

To receive an email notification whenever a new post is published, please subscribe to our weekly blog here.

• 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 otherwise granted I nonimmigrant status is one year
  • This rule was effective on October 13, 2022.
• Arrival Restrictions Applicable to Flights Carrying Persons Who Have Recently Traveled From or Were Otherwise Present Within Uganda
  • This document announces the decision of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to direct all flights to the United States carrying persons who have recently traveled from, or were otherwise present within, Uganda to arrive at one of the United States airports where the United States government is focusing public health resources to implement enhanced public health measures.
  • For purposes of this document, a person has recently traveled from Uganda if that person departed from, or was otherwise present within, Uganda within 21 days of the date of the person’s entry or attempted entry into the United States.
  • Also, for purposes of this document, crew and flights carrying only cargo (i.e., no passengers or non-crew), are excluded from the measures herein.
  • The arrival restrictions apply to flights departing after 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on October 10, 2022. Arrival restrictions continue until cancelled or modified by the Secretary of DHS and notice of such cancellation or modification is published in the Federal Register.
• Proposes Revocation of Two Ruling Letters and Proposed Revocation of Treatment Relating to the Tariff Classification of Pan Masala Betel Nut Food Product
  • In NY 830068 and DD H890859, CBP classified the pan masala betel nut food product in heading 2106, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 2106.90.6099, HTSUS Annotated (HTSUSA) (currently subheading 2106.90.99, HTSUS, under the 2022 HTSUS), which provides for “Food preparations not elsewhere specified or include Other: Other: Other: Other.”
  • CBP has reviewed both NY 830068 and DD H890859 and has determined the ruling letters to be in error.
  • It is now CBP’s position that pan masala betel nut food product is properly classified, in heading 2008, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 2008.19.9090, HTSUSA, which provides for “Fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, otherwise prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or spirit, not elsewhere specified or included: Other, including mixtures: Other, including mixtures: Other: Other.”
• Nucor Corporation v. United States
  • Plaintiff Nucor Corporation (“Nucor”) challenges the U.S. Department of Commerce’s (“Commerce” or “the agency”) final results in the 2018 administrative review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate (“CTL plate”) from the Republic of Korea (“Korea”).
  • Nucor challenges Commerce’s determination not to initiate an investigation into the alleged provision of off-peak electricity for less than adequate remuneration (sometimes referred to as “LTAR”) and Commerce’s determination that mandatory respondent POSCO and its affiliate POSCO Plantec (“Plantec”) do not meet the requirements necessary to find a cross-owned input supplier relationship.
  • The Court ordered the following:
    • 1. That Commerce’s Final Results are sustained in part and remanded in part.
    • 2. On remand, Commerce shall reconsider or further explain its determination not to investigate the alleged off-peak sale of electricity for less than adequate remuneration.
    • 3. On remand, Commerce shall reconsider or further explain its determination not to treat Plantec as a cross-owned input supplier in connection with the supply of scrap.
    • 4. Commerce shall file its remand redetermination on or before January 3, 2023.
    • 5. Subsequent proceedings shall be governed by US-CIT Rule 56.2(h); if, however Commerce determines to investigate whether off-peak electricity is provided for less than adequate remuneration, the Parties may instead file a joint status report addressing the timing of any necessary further administrative proceedings.
    • 6. Any comments or responsive comments must not exceed 4,000 words.

• 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 modify HQ 088173 and to revoke or modify any other ruling not specifically identified to reflect the analysis contained in the proposed HQ H311239, set forth as Attachment B to this notice. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)(2), CBP is proposing to revoke any treatment previously accorded by CBP to substantially identical transactions.
  • It is now CBP’s position that if imported separately, paper face masks are properly classified in heading 4818, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 4818.90.00, HTSUS, which provides for “Toilet paper and similar paper, cellulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibers, of a kind used for household or sanitary purposes, in rolls of a width not exceeding 36 cm, or cut to size or shape; handkerchiefs, cleansing tissues, towels, tablecloths, table napkins, bed sheets and similar household, sanitary or hospital articles, articles of apparel and clothing accessories, of paper pulp, paper, cellulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibers: Other”
• Ship’s Store Declaration
  • CBP Form 1303, Ship’s Stores Declaration, is used by the carriers to declare articles to be retained on board the vessel, such as sea stores, ship’s stores (e.g., alcohol and tobacco products), controlled narcotic drugs or bunker fuel in a format that can be readily audited and checked by CBP
  • Proposed Change: This form is anticipated to be submitted electronically as part of the maritime forms automation project through the Vessel Entrance and Clearance System (VECS), which will eliminate the need for any paper submission of any vessel entrance or clearance requirements under the above referenced statutes and regulations. VECS will still collect and maintain the same data but will automate the capture of data to reduce or eliminate redundancy with other data collected by CBP.
  • 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 (87 FR 33179) on June 1, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments
• Importers of Merchandise Subject to Actual Use Provisions
  • In accordance with 19 CFR 10.137, importers of goods subject to the actual use provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) are required to maintain detailed records to establish that these goods were actually used as contemplated by the law, and to support the importer’s claim for a free or reduced rate of duty. The importer shall maintain records of use or disposition for a period of three years from the date of liquidation of the entry, and the records shall be available at all times for examination and inspection by CBP
  • 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 (87 FR 29757) on May 16, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments
• Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) and CTPAT Trade Compliance Program
  • 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 (87 FR 12473) on March 04, 2022, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
  • Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
    • (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
    • (2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
    • (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
    • (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval.
  • All comments will become a matter of public record.
• Copyright, Trademark, and Trade Name Recordations
  • The following copyrights, trademarks, and trade names were recorded with U.S. Customs and Border Protection in Septem[1]ber 2022. A total of 168 recordation applications were approved, consisting of 3 copyrights and 165 trademarks
  • Recordations can be viewed on pages 35-42 of the bulletin
• RKW Klerks v. United States
  • In a case that involved the classification of two types of net wrap, both of which were synthetic fabrics used to wrap round bales of harvested crops, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection properly classified the net wraps under HRSUS subheading 6005.39.00;
  • The wraps were not “parts” of harvesting or agricultural machinery classifiable under HTSUS subheadings 8433.90.50 or 8436.99.00 because they were not integral to the functioning of round hay balers and were a disposable input and not a part of round baling machines.
  • Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied and defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment granted.

We’d love to hear your feedback!