Importing goods into the U.S. requires navigating a web of regulations that spans 47 federal agencies. If you are the importer of record, it is your duty to exercise “reasonable care” in meeting these obligations. As part of this duty, importers must take adequate steps to properly classify and determine the value of imported goods, provide information to CBP in properly assessing duties, and determine whether other applicable legal standards and requirements have been met.

When importing drones into the U.S., importers need to be mindful of several requirements including classification, intellectual property, additional duties, and a changing U.S. trade policy.

Classification

When importing goods into the United States, importers must correctly classify their products. The Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) is the primary resource for classifying goods and determining which tariffs apply.

The HTSUS is issued annually by the International Trade Commission (ITC). It is comprised of a 10-digit import classification system that is specific to the United States. This 10-digit code encompasses the World Customs Organization’s (WCO) six-digit uniform classification system shared among more than 200 countries.

An HTSUS is formatted to list the first 6-digits set forth by the WCO, also known as a heading and subheading and the last four digits assigned by the ITC that are specific to the U.S.

Prior to 2022, the HTSUS has lacked classifications specific to Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). Importers had to classify under codes applicable to crewed aircraft systems. In December 2021, President Biden issued a proclamation adopting 11 new HTSUS codes for UAS. Importers are responsible for properly identifying which of these codes applies to their product.

Penalties for incorrect classification can be severe – CBP may issue penalties for negligence, gross negligence or fraud – depending on the degree of culpability CBP believes the importer had at the time of non-compliance.

Intellectual Property Rights

Importers need to be vigilant about intellectual property (IP) issues when dealing with U.S. Customs. CBP actively enforces IP rights at the border, and can seize counterfeit and infringing goods to protect trademark and copyright holders. Importing products that violate these rights—whether knowingly or unknowingly—can result in costly seizures, fines, and legal complications. To avoid these risks, importers should ensure that their goods comply with IP regulations, verify the authenticity of their suppliers, and stay informed about any trademarks or copyrights that may affect their shipments.

If you are a trademark owner, you can leverage CBP’s e-recordation program to ensure your goods are protected from infringement. The program allows trademark and copyright holders to obtain border enforcement of their IP rights. CBP will look for infringing goods and detain, seize, forfeit, or destroy them.

Duties & Country of Origin

Importers must accurately determine and declare the country of origin when bringing goods into the U.S. The country of origin affects duty rates, eligibility for preferential trade programs, trade sanctions, and import quotas. Incorrect or misleading declarations can lead to penalties, shipment delays, and even the seizure of goods by U.S. Customs. To avoid these risks, importers should carefully review manufacturing processes, supply chains, and applicable rules of origin to ensure that their declarations are accurate and precise.

The importer is ultimately responsible for calculating and paying duties. Calculating duties correctly isn’t always a straightforward process, and may require the assistance of an expert. For example, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) from China are subject not only to standard import duties but also have an additional 25% section 301 duty. Section 301 refers to the section of the Trade Act that allows the United States Trade Representative to impose restrictions or tariffs on imports in response to unfair trade practices.

Some lawmakers are calling for even higher duties on Chinese imported drones.

Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)

On January 3, 2025, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) put out an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public comment on issues related to transactions involving unmanned aircraft from China and other foreign countries. It stated that “Once the President declares a national emergency, [the International Emergency Economic Powers Act] IEEPA empowers the President to, among other acts, investigate, regulate, prevent, or prohibit any ‘acquisition, holding, withholding, use, transfer, withdrawal, transportation, importation or exportation of, or dealing in, or exercising any right, power, or privilege with respect to, or transactions involving, any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’” (Emphasis added). While this is just an advanced notice of proposed regulations, it does give us an idea on the trajectory on future unmanned aircraft import issues down the road.

Forced Labor

Forced Labor is the third most lucrative illicit trade, behind only drugs and weapons, and has an annual trade value of roughly $150 billion. Right now, over 40 million people around the world are victims of some type of forced labor, including modern slavery, human trafficking, child labor, etc.

Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1307) prohibits the importation of all goods and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign country by forced labor, convict labor, and/or indentured labor under penal sanctions, including forced child labor.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the only U.S. government agency, and one of the few in the world, with the legal authority to take action against goods produced with forced labor to prevent entry into domestic commerce. On June 21, 2022, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) was enacted to further reinforce the United States’ prohibition against the importation of goods made with forced labor. The UFLPA establishes a rebuttable presumption that goods mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China or by an entity on the UFLPA Entity List are prohibited from importation into the United States under 19 U.S.C. § 1307.

In many ways, the UFLPA heightened the standard for forced labor compliance in comparison to its predecessor / parallel enforcement system, Withhold Release Orders. However, if an Importer of Record can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the goods in question were not produced wholly or in part by forced labor the Commissioner of CBP may grant an exception to the presumption.

It is an importers responsibility to know how their goods are made, from raw materials to finished goods, by whom, where, and under what labor conditions.

CBP has made clear that they will continue to prioritize forced labor enforcement and has in the past targeted certain Chinese drone manufacturers citing forced labor concerns.

Bottom Line: Exercise Reasonable Care and Seek Help from an Expert

Exercising reasonable care in the import process is not just a best practice—it’s a necessity to ensure compliance with U.S. Customs regulations. The complexities of customs laws, from proper classification and valuation to country of origin and intellectual property considerations can be challenging to navigate alone. Partnering with an experienced customs expert can provide invaluable guidance, helping importers meet their obligations, streamline operations, and protect their business. This is vital so you don’t have your drone shipments hung up in customs. With proper due diligence, some of these headaches can be prevented.

Learn more

• Bloomberg Law: What is an Importer’s Reasonable Care Standard?
• Bloomberg Law: Tariff Classification Basics
• Bloomberg Law: S. Customs Targets the Use of Forced Labor
• Webinar: Importing 101
• Webinar: Basics on Tariff Classification
• Webinar: Navigating CBP Regulations: Essential Practices for Import Success
• Know Your Supply Chain: Forced Labor
• New Tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada: Key Updates for Importers

What is CBP Recordation? 

The purpose of recording a copyright or trademark with CBP is to partner with the agency to prevent the unauthorized import or export of merchandise which bears a recorded trademark or copyright. CBP has the authority to seize, detain, forfeit, and even destroy merchandise entering or leaving the U.S. if it infringes on a valid trademark or copyright that has been subsequently recorded with the agency.

Once a trademark or copyright is recorded with CBP, the owner’s information is entered into an electronic database accessible to over 60,000 U.S. Customs officers in the United States and overseas. CBP uses the information to target shipments and physically examine merchandise which ultimately prevents the importation or exportation of infringing goods. As of 2021, the number of active recordations with CBP is 20,756.

Gray Market Protection

Some IP owners may also be eligible for “gray market” protection, which pertains to genuine products bearing a trademark or brand name approved for use in a country outside the U.S. Gray market goods are different from counterfeit goods markets because counterfeit goods are never genuine.

CBP provides limited protection to rights owners against importations of certain gray market goods. Only trademarks and trade names recorded with CBP are entitled to gray market protection. Gray market protection is only offered when the following two conditions are met:

• The U.S. and foreign marks are not owned by the same person.
• The U.S. and foreign mark owners are not a parent or subsidiary of one another or otherwise subject to common ownership or control.

The bar to qualify for gray market protection is high, be sure to work with a CBP attorney when seeking your gray market recordation.

Advantages of Recording your IP with CBP

There are significant benefits of partnering with CBP to enforce your IP rights.

Lessens the Monitoring Burden

CBP monitors and seizes infringing merchandise at all 328 ports of entry, vastly assisting trademark or copyright holders protect their IP against infringers. CBP’s proactive approach streamlines the monitoring process and makes it easier to identify and prosecute unauthorized distributors, importers, and retailers.

Aids in the Prosecution of Counterfeiters 

CBP has the authority to impose monetary fines (for civil penalties the amount of which is the MSRP if the items were legitimate) on individuals facilitating the introduction of counterfeit merchandise into the U.S. The agency can also request the U.S. Attorney’s Office to criminally prosecute those engaged in illegal activities under the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984. Criminal penalties for first-time violators include up to ten years imprisonment and/or a $2 million fine. Repeat offenders face up to 20 years imprisonment and/or up to a $5 million fine.

CBP collaborates with foreign law enforcement agencies and coordinates global raids on counterfeit production facilities. Customs officers stationed at American embassies worldwide regularly share information for the criminal prosecution of exporters and manufacturers of counterfeit goods.

Does CBP Really Care About Infringing Merchandise?

CBP takes Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) enforcement very seriously. CBP even monitors shipments that are not even destined for the U.S. but are merely in transit.

The agency employs a multi-layered, risk-based approach to enforce IPR that includes targeting shipments based on intelligence and engaging in collaborative operations between CBP, industry, and rights holders.

CBP also participates in industry-led product identification trainings where rights holders educate officials about their specific products and help them distinguish between authentic and inauthentic products.

CBP has an impressive enforcement track record. 2021, CBP made over 27,000 seizures with an estimated MSRP of over $3.3 billion, representing an increase of 152% over the previous Fiscal Year. In 2021, CBP, along with ICE-HSI, arrested 388 individuals, obtained 155 indictments, and received 100 convictions related to intellectual property crimes.

How to File with CBP

Trademark and copyright recordations are filed online through the U.S. Customs’ IPR e-Recordation system, adhering to the regulations outlined in 19 C.F.R. Part 133.

Rights holders must submit the following information for recordation:

• Description of copyright or trademark registered with the USPTO
• Country of manufacture of goods bearing the trademark or country of manufacture of phonorecords or genuine copies of the copyright work
• USPTO Registration Number
• Names of any subsidiaries, parent companies, or other entities that are under common control or share any ownership interest or relationship with, the U.S. trademark owner, or the names of all parties authorized to reproduce or use the copyrighted work

CBP charges a flat fee of $190 per class of goods you wish to record. Once your recordation application has been approved, you may view your CBP recordation using the Intellectual Property Rights Search (IPRS) database.

You must also renew your recordation every 10 years (note the renewal for CBP coincides with your USPTO renewal date for TM’s).

Work With a Customs Attorney to Record Your IPR with CBP

CBP can be a company’s greatest and most cost-effective ally when it comes to trademark and copyright enforcement. However, CBP’s enforcement capability is only as good as the information you provide to them. Diaz Trade Law works with you to provide detailed information regarding your IPR so that CBP is in the best position to monitor and enforce against infringers. For help with your recordation, get in touch with us at info@diaztradelaw.com.

Read more about CBP’s recordation program:

• U.S. Customs – Your Personal Policeman at the Border
• What is a Recordation with U.S. Customs and Border Protection?

• 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.

Many companies mistakenly believe that registering a trademark or copyright with the U.S. Government provides sufficient protection and remedies. However, there is an additional step that can significantly enhance protection—recording trademarks or copyrights with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (U.S. Customs).  

This blog explores the distinct goals of these processes and the advantages of recording intellectual property with the U.S. Customs. 

I. Registering with USPTO and Recording with U.S. Customs: Different Goals

• Registering with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or U.S. Copyright Office gives public notice of ownership. 
• Recording with U.S. Customs aims to prevent unauthorized importation of merchandise bearing the registered intellectual property. 
• U.S. Customs serves as a critical partner in halting counterfeit and infringing products from entering or leaving the United States.

II. Benefits of Recording Trademarks or Copyrights with U.S. Customs

Seizure and Monitoring: 

• U.S. Customs monitors and seizes infringing merchandise at ports of entry, alleviating the burden on trademark or copyright holders. 
• This proactive approach eliminates the need to individually locate and prosecute every unauthorized importer, distributor, or retailer, safeguarding intellectual property rights.

Impressive Results in IP Protection: 

• In 2021, U.S. Customs seized over 27,000 shipments with an estimated manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) of $3.3 billion. 
• Collaboration with the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Center led to 388 arrests, 155 indictments, and 100 convictions related to IP crimes. 

• Apparel/accessories accounted for 30% of seized merchandise, with watches and jewelry valued at over $1.18 billion. 
• Notably, U.S. Customs seized counterfeit and unapproved COVID-19 products, reflecting their adaptability to emerging challenges. 
• Approximately 57% of counterfeited goods seized in 2021 were manufactured in China, amounting to an estimated MSRP value of $1.9 billion.

Authority to Issue Fines and Prosecute: 

• U.S. Customs possesses the authority to impose monetary fines on individuals involved in facilitating the introduction of seized and forfeited counterfeit merchandise into the United States. 

• U.S. Customs can request the U.S. Attorney’s Office to criminally prosecute those engaged in illegal activities under the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984. 
• Penalties for first-time violators include up to ten years imprisonment and/or a $2 million fine, while repeat offenders face up to 20 years imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $5 million. 

International Raids and Cooperation: 

• U.S. Customs collaborates with foreign law enforcement agencies and coordinates raids on counterfeit production facilities globally. 
• Customs officers stationed at American embassies worldwide regularly share information for the criminal prosecution of manufacturers and exporters of counterfeit goods. 

III. Customs e-Recordation System and Gray Market Protection
 

Trademark and copyright recordations are filed online through the U.S. Customs’ IPR e-Recordation system, adhering to the regulations outlined in 19 C.F.R. Part 133. 

The following is a checklist of the information necessary to submit an trademark or copyright recordation with CBP: 

• Description of trademark or copyright registered with the USPTO 
• USPTO Registration Number 
• Country of manufacture of protected goods bearing the trademark or country of manufacture of genuine copies or phonorecords of the protected copyright work 
• Names of any parent companies, subsidiaries, or other entities that are under common control with, or share any type of ownership interest or relationship with, the U.S. trademark owner, or names of all parties authorized to use or reproduce the copyrighted work 

For those eligible, it is worthwhile to pursue “gray market” protection, which pertains to genuine products bearing a trademark or brand name approved for use in a country other than the U.S. Gray market goods are different from goods bearing counterfeit markets because goods bearing counterfeit marks are never genuine. According to CBP guidance, CBP provides limited protection to trademark owners against importations of certain gray market goods. Only trademarks and trade names that are recorded with CBP are entitled to gray market protection, and gray market status is determined at the time of recordation with CBP. Gray market protection is only offered if you have the following in place: 

• The U.S. and foreign trademarks are not owned by the same person 

• The U.S. and foreign trademark owners are not a parent or subsidiary, or otherwise subject to common ownership or control 

Currently, Phillip Morris is an example of a company that has been able to meet this stringent burden and CBP offers its trademarks gray market protections. The image below is a search result from the CBP IPRS database. 

As a final thought, it is extremely beneficial for a company to record its registered trademark or copyright with CBP, as CBP may be a company’s greatest, and most cost effective ally, when it comes to trademark and copyright enforcement. For help with any pre-compliance matters such as the CBP recordation process or for assistance with enforcement actions such as seizures and penalties, please contact info@diaztradelaw.com and visit our website www.diaztradelaw.com.

We’d love to hear your feedback!

Russia – Sanctions & Export Controls

• On February 25, 2022, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a new General License to expand authorizations for commercial and financial transactions in Afghanistan, including with its governing institutions. This aims to ensure that U.S. sanctions do not prevent or inhibit transactions and activities needed to provide aid and support the basic human needs of the people of Afghanistan. In addition, it underscores the U.S. commitment to working with the private sector, international partners and allies, and international organizations to support the people of Afghanistan.
• On February 24, 2022, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is issuing Russia related Directive 2 and Directive 3 under Executive Order 14024 and Russia-related General License 5, General License 6, General License 7, General License 8, General License 9, General 10, General License 11, and General License 12. OFAC is also issuing Belarus General License 6 and General License 7.
• On February 25, 2022, the United States continued to impose sanctions on President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov, along with other members of Russia’s Security Council. These sanctions, together with previous actions responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, impose unprecedented diplomatic and economic costs on Russia and isolate it from the global financial system and international community.
• On March 2, 2022, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued new public guidance to cut off avenues for potential sanctions evasion by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. This guidance makes clear that there should be no loopholes for Russia to evade the unprecedented prohibitions by the United States to lock up Russia’s war chest.
• On March 2, 2022, the White House released a statement detailing the imposition of additional economic costs on Russia and Belarus in response to President Putin’s brutal invasion of Ukraine. The announced actions include sweeping restrictions on Belarus to choke off its import of technological goods, full blocking sanctions on Russian defense entities, export controls targeting oil refining, targeting entities supporting the Russian and Belarusian Military, and banning Russian aircraft from entering and using domestic U.S. airspace.
• On March 2, 2022, Changpeng Zhao, founder and chief executive of Binance, one of the world’s biggest crypto-currency exchanges, ruled out restricting ordinary Russians from using the service saying, “We differentiate between the Russian politicians who start wars and the normal people.”, and “Many normal Russians do not agree with war.”.
• On March 2, 2022, the Ukrainian port city of Kherson became the first key city to fall by Russia, after heavy fighting, since it was invaded a week ago. Its mayor, Igor Kolykhaev, said Russian troops had forced their way into the city council building and imposed a curfew on residents. The capture of Kherson – located on the banks of the Dnieper River where it flows into the Black Sea – is significant because it could allow Russia to create a base for the military there as it seeks to push further inland.
• On March 3, 2022, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issued a final rule implementing sanctions against Russia under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. Specifically, these sanctions add new Russia license requirements and licensing policies to the EAR and took effect February 24, 2022.

CBP 

• U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of Field Operations officers at the Portal Port of Entry targeted and investigated a rail container destined to arrive in North Dakota, discovering counterfeit entertainment systems that were in violation of intellectual property rights (IPR) regulations. CBP seized 6,464 of the counterfeit entertainment systems with an estimated manufacturer’s suggested retail price of $2,068,480 had the goods been genuine.

If you have questions about these updates, contact our Customs and International 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.

Below we share some of our top 2021 success stories with you.

Successfully Mitigated Liquidated Damages Claims 

• For failure to timely refile rejected entries subject to AD/CV duties:
  • After DTL’s strategic involvement CBP substantially mitigated approximately $5 MILLION in claims down to $26,365.00, successfully saving our client over $4.7 MILLION dollars
  • Our client received 36 liquidated damages notices from CBP totaling over $567,000. After Diaz Trade Law’s successful negotiation with CBP, all 36 cases were canceled by CBP, saving our client $over $567,000!!
• CBP sent our client a liquidated damages claim in the amount of $150,000. As a result of Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition, CBP mitigated the liquidated damages claim down to $1,500!
• CBP issued a liquidated damages claim in the amount of $50,000.00. After DTL successfully petitioned CBP, the claim was cancelled!
• CBP issued a liquidated damages claim in the amount of $36,033.00. After DTL successfully petitioned CBP, the claim was mitigated to $360.33 (the best potential mitigation!).

CBP Detention Assistance 

• Mere days after being retained, Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted in negotiating with CBP and numerous trademark owners proving that our clients detained goods (collectively valued over $1,000,000.00) were legitimate, receiving either consent TM holder, and/or convincing CBP to release legitimate merchandise that should not have been detained.
• After CBP detained our client’s electronic merchandise to verify admissibility with the Department of Transportation (DOT)
  • CBP released the electronic goods after DTL proved the merchandise, LED driving lights, were eligible for an “off road” use exception and DOT providing such confirmation.
• After CBP detained our client’s electronic merchandise to verify the validity of a trademark on the product packaging.
  • Diaz Trade Law proactively communicated with the trademark holder and CBP, who, with the authorization of the trademark holder, permitted the importer to manipulate the merchandise and import the goods saving our client from a costly and lengthy seizure case that potentially exposed our client to CBP penalties.
• After CBP detained our client’s electronic merchandise to verify the validity of a trademark on the product packaging.
  • After Diaz Trade Law’s immediate involvement in arguing the product was “confusingly similar” and not counterfeit, DTL persuaded CBP to apply the relief afforded to “confusingly similar” seized merchandise and ultimately CBP permitted the exportation – which is relief that is rarely granted for detained products. DTL saved our client from a seizure case and potential penalties.
• CBP detained 28 containers of our client’s cargo.
  • Diaz Trade Law successfully negotiated with CBP to permit the goods to be reexported and avoid substantial demurrage expenses.

4647 Responses 

• CBP issued our client a CBP Form 4647 – Notice to Mark, because its electronic car accessories labels had both a country of origin marking and a “Designed in the USA” claim (in separate locations on the label).
  • After 48 hours of Diaz Trade Law’s successful escalation and negotiation with the Electronic Center of Excellence and Expertise, CBP granted a rarely used marking waiver permitting the merchandise to be imported as is, saving our client both money and time.
• CBP issued our client a CBP Form 4647 – Notice to Mark, because over 1,000 electronic car accessory units did not bear a country of origin marking.
  • Diaz Trade Law successfully and efficiently guided our client through the marking process. Ultimately, the goods were marked and authorized for distribution within recording timing – less than 10 days from the issuance of the 4647, saving our client both money and time.
• CBPO’s at Port Everglades detained two of our client’s shipments and issued two separate CBP Form 4647s – Notices to Mark because the imported merchandise valued at $98,744.00 did not bear a country of origin marking.
  • Diaz Trade Law successfully and efficiently guided our client through the marking process. Ultimately, the goods were marked and authorized for distribution with record timing – within 7 days from the issuance of the 4647, saving our client both money and time.
• Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted our client in responding to CBP’s Notice to Redeliver (CBP Form 4647) and provided CBP confirmation that the intellectual property rights displayed on the goods was authorized and our client’s merchandise was released in record timing!

Successfully Assisted Numerous Importers Battle Alleged Intellectual Property Rights Violations

• Our client’s merchandise was seized by CBP due to an alleged trademark violation.
  • After Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition, CBP issued a decision authorizing our client to relabel and export its legitimate merchandise.
• CBP detained several shipments of our client’s cargo for both Country of Origin (COO) and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) reasons.
  • Diaz Trade Law advocated for our client and within less than one week convinced CBP to release our client’s legitimate merchandise detained at numerous ports of entry nationwide.
• Our client’s designer handbags were seized by CBP due to an alleged counterfeit violation.
  • After Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition, proving that the handbags were legitimate, CBP released our client’s legitimate merchandise.
• CBP detained our client’s goods valued at $98,744.00 for an alleged IPR validation.
  • Our firm immediately communicated with the appropriate CBP CEE and submitted evidence supporting the legitimacy of the imported goods requesting their immediate release. The CBP CEE agreed with our request and recommended the local port release the shipment, saving our client from a costly and lengthy seizure case.
• Diaz Trade Law successfully negotiated with CBP on behalf of an aftermarket car part importer to permit the exportation of goods detained for alleged IPR violations, saving the importer from a costly and lengthy seizure and potential penalty.
• Our client imported electronic merchandise which contained a trademark-violating processing system.
  • After Diaz Trade Law’s successful intervention, Diaz Trade Law received authorization from the trademark holder to permit the violative components to be removed and destroyed, and the larger shell merchandise to be imported in its current form. CBP agreed to these terms, and issued a disposition order authorizing the manipulation and release of the goods as Diaz Trade Law had requested.

Successfully Mitigated Penalty Actions Issued by CBP to our Clients 

• For importing noncompliant Wood Packaging Material:
  • $91,714 mitigated to 3% of penalty to $2,751.42, saving our client $88,962
  • $69,900 mitigated to 3% of penalty to $6,990, saving our client $60,000
  • $28,478 mitigated to 10% of penalty to $2,847, saving our client $25,631
  • $27,857 mitigated to 10% of penalty to $2,786, saving our client $25,071
  • $19,980.00 mitigated to 10% of penalty to $1,998, saving our client $17,982
• For filing incorrect Electronic Export Information (EEI)
  • $14,194 mitigated down to $500 (the best possible relief)!
  • $14,194 mitigated to 10% of penalty to $1500, saving our client $12,694

CBP 28 / CBP 29 Responses / CBP Investigations and Rejections

• Our client received a CBP 28 for a U.S. Australia Free Trade Agreement verification.
  • After Diaz Trade Law filed a successful response proving the imported goods were eligible for preferential duty-free treatment, CBP closed the 28 with a positive CBP 29 (Notice of Action).
• Our client received a CBP 28 Request for Information from U.S. Customs to verify GSP eligibility.
  • After Diaz Trade Law submitted a substantive response proving the GSP claim was valid, CBP issued a CBP 29 determining that the merchandise qualifies for GSP and no duties are owed to CBP!
• Our client received a Request for Information (CBP 28) from CBP.
  • Diaz Trade Law filed a 28 response which included a Prior Disclosure. The 28 was closed out, and the disclosure was accepted by CBP resulting in no 1592 penalties being issued to our client.
• CBP physically inspected our client’s cargo at the time of entry and identified that the commercial invoice and packing slip submitted to CBP did not include one model number included in the cargo. Diaz Trade Law immediately negotiated with CBP to accept an updated invoice and packing list. CBP accepted and released the complete cargo with no further enforcement action taken, saving our client costly demerge fees and other expenses.
• CBP rejected and refused an importation of tires because CBP alleged the importer did not have a right to make entry. After three uphill battles with CBP and DTL’s strategic recommendation to change the import transaction model, the importer was successfully able to act as IOR and its merchandise was admitted into the US.

USTR/China Tariffs

• Diaz Trade Law assisted over 100 importers in filing complaints with the Court of International Trade challenging Section 301 tariffs imposed for imported goods under for List 3 and List 4a, requesting full refunds.
• Diaz Trade Law filed numerous exclusions for goods subject to the Section 301 List 3 and List 4. USTR agreed and granted our client’s exclusion!
• Numerous clients that were subject to 301 duties used Diaz Trade Law to actively monitor 301 exclusions to ensure they were notified when refunds were a possibility. Diaz Trade Law assisted with not only actively monitoring the relevant exclusions, but also interpreting the applicability, and fighting for refunds via the Protest or PSC process. CBP has accepted numerous Protests, and hundreds of thousands of dollars of refunds were sent to our clients!
• As a result of Diaz Trade Law’s closely monitoring Section 301 China tariff exclusions, Diaz Trade Law found an applicable exclusion for our client to use and filed two Protests with CBP requesting that CBP refund the China tariffs paid. Our client’s protests were approved by CBP, resulting in a refund of $64,678.00.

Export Compliance and Enforcement Mitigation Assistance

• Diaz Trade Law is actively assisting exporters:
  • Vetting proposed export transactions
  • Providing voluntary self-disclosures to Census and OFAC
  • Developing an effective export compliance plan
  • Developing export compliance training
  • Mitigation and corrective action
  • Presenting export report cards to clients based upon an analysis of ACE data
  • Analyze export trade data
  • With mitigation of export seizures and penalties
• Our client needed urgent assistance to ensure it understood the requirements to properly export hazardous materials. Diaz Trade Law successfully and expeditiously secured Competent Authority Approvals for the hazardous material from the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) as well as the Competent Authority of Turkey and Finland.

OFAC/FAA/HSI 

• Our client’s incoming wire payments of $842,918.92 from Venezuela were blocked by its U.S. bank for possible violations of U.S. sanctions laws.
  • After Diaz Trade Law filed a specific license application with the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), OFAC issued a specific license authorizing the legitimate funds to be unblocked and returned to our client.
• Our client was being investigated by FAA as a result of a hazardous materials incident.
  • As a result of Diaz Trade Law’s successful involvement, the FAA closed the matter with an informal action!
• Our client was being investigated by HSI for possible criminal liability.
  • After Diaz Trade Law’s intervention, HSI closed its investigation into our client.

 Protests

• Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted our client in filing two Protests with CBP. These approvals saved our client over $600,000!!
• After Diaz Trade Law’s successful Protest of CBP’s AD/CVD bills, our client’s protest was approved by CBP, saving our client over $200,000!!

Binding Rulings

• Diaz Trade Law successfully requested and received binding rulings for numerous clients confirming:
  • the correct country of origin for its prospective imported merchandise.
  • the correct harmonized tariff schedule (HTSUS) for its imported merchandise.
  • both the origin of their merchandise and appropriate CBP country of origin marking
  • the applicability of a free trade agreement.

Assisted Numerous Importers in Filing Prior Disclosures and Voluntary Self-Disclosures Accepted by CBP 

• Diaz Trade Law successfully submitted a perfected prior disclosure for underlying classification, valuation, quantity, and 301/China tariff errors. While reviewing ACE data, we identified offsets for the duties owed to CBP. Ultimately, CBP agreed with our assessment and accepted our prior disclosure and tender, resulting in a refund of over $25,000 to our client and ensuring no future penalties would be assessed for our client’s past importing errors.
• After discovering Electronic Export Information (EEI) filing errors made by one of our clients, Diaz Trade Law assisted our client in proactively filing a Voluntary Self-Disclosure (VSD) with the U.S. Census Bureau and assisting our client in fixing all past errors. The VSD filing was accepted and resulted in the U.S. Census Bureau closing out the matter without penalties being assessed.
• On behalf of a client, Diaz Trade Law filed a voluntary disclosure with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), disclosing potential sanctions violations.
  • Diaz Trade Law worked proactively with OFAC and received this “No Action letter” with no penalties assessed to our client.
• Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted our client in filing a Voluntary Self-Disclosure (VSD) with the U.S. Census Bureau for violations of the Foreign Trade Regulations.
  • Diaz Trade Law proactively worked with the Census Bureau and corrected past filing errors. The VSD was successfully closed out with no penalties assessed.
• Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted our client in filing a Prior Disclosure. CBP accepted the prior disclosure with no 1592 penalties being assessed!

Bonded Warehouse

• After Diaz Trade Law’s successful application, our client’s Bonded Warehouse Application was approved!
• After its bonded warehouse was activated by CBP, our client realized it wanted to change the total square footage. Diaz Trade Law successfully assisted our client alter its customs bonded warehouse space.

Successfully Assisted Numerous Importers in Various Seizure Cases 

• CBP seized our client’s vehicle after believing it could have been used to import illegal substances. After Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition proving our client’s innocence, CBP released the vehicle with no penalty assessed
• $20,868.81 of our client’s currency was seized by CBP. After Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition, $19,868.81 was returned to our client!
• $15,795 of our client’s currency was seized by CBP. After Diaz Trade Law’s successful petition, $14,795 was returned to our client!
• $12,157.95 worth of jewelry was seized by Customs after our client failed to declare it. After Diaz Trade Law’s successful Petition, CBP released the jewelry within 22 days.

Awards

• In 2021, Diaz Trade Law founder Jennifer Diaz was again Chambers ranked in International Trade: Customs – USA – Nationwide

Publications

Key publications written by Diaz Trade Law in 2021 were:

• Bloomberg Law, Introduction to U.S. Export Controls: Part 2, November, 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, Protecting Intellectual Property Rights in China, October 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, Incoterms 2020, May 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, Submitting Voluntary Self-Disclosures to Bureau of Industry & Security, May 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, Submitting a Voluntary Self-Disclosure to Census, April 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, Submitting a Voluntary Self-Disclosure to OFAC, April 2021.
• Bloomberg Law, U.S. Customs Targets Use of Forced Labor, January 2021.
• Customs and International Trade Bar Association, An Overview of China’s New Export Controls Regime,
• Customs and International Trade Bar Association, COVID-19’s Impact on 2020 Trade Flows,

Customized Training Programs & Webinars

Key compliance programs taught by Diaz Trade Law in 2021 were:

• Intellectual Property Rights and Customs – Amazon Brand Registry
• CTPAT Program: Is CTPAT a Right Fit
• Successfully Navigating the U.S. Customs Detention and Seizure Process
• How to Navigate FDA Enforcement Action: Detentions, Warning Letters, and Import Alerts
• Requests For Information (CBP Form 28) and Prior Disclosures
• How to Build and Maintain an Effective Import Compliance Plan
• How to Build and Maintain an Effective Export Compliance Plan
• Importing Food in Compliance With U.S. FDA and Surviving A FSVP Audit
• Importing Medical Devices in Compliance With U.S. FDA
• 6 Months In – Insights on Biden & Congress on Trade
• Is it a Cosmetic, a Drug, or Both? FDA Enforcement Actions
• ACE: Auditing Your Export History
• ACE: Auditing Your Import History
• Introduction to Export Controls
• Importing 101 – Introduction to U.S. Customs
• Anti-Circumvention / EAPA / Dumping Duties & the Spreadability of Cases (Coated Paper)
• Other Trade Remedies 101 – Every Administration has a Favorite!
• Basics on AD/CVD
• Cleaning for Covid-19 – Importing Cleaning Products: Who Regulates You?
• Forecasting the Next 4 Years of Biden on Trade

Diaz Trade Law values you and appreciates your trust in us to be your Customs and International Trade Law Expert! Contact us at info@diaztradelaw.com to schedule your consultation or customized training today.

BIS

• BIS Publishes Report on Effect of Uranium Imports on National Security
• BIS Publishes First Military End User List

Bloomberg

• Bloomberg Law – Introduction to U.S. Export Controls: Part 2
• Protecting Intellectual Property Rights in China
• Incoterms 2020
• Submitting Voluntary Self-Disclosures to Bureau of Industry & Security
• Submitting a Voluntary Self-Disclosure to Census
• Submitting a Voluntary Self-Disclosure to OFAC
• U.S. Customs Targets Use of Forced Labor

Customs and International Trade Bar Association 

• New CITBA Article – An Overview of China’s New Export Controls Regime
• COVID-19’s Impact on 2020 Trade Flows

China

• OFAC Issues Clarifying Guidance on Communist Chinese Military Companies Sanctions
• Hong Kong’s Initiates Dispute Regarding U.S.-Origin Marking Requirement
• CBP Issues WRO on Cotton, Tomato, & Downstream Products Made in Xinjiang
• Future of First Sale Rule in Question

Crypto

• OFAC Targets Russian Crypto Platform
• Why China’s Cryptocurrency Miners are Moving to Texas

Covid-19

• Recent Government Data Indicates that Florida Trade is Rebounding Fast Despite Pandemic Hit

Export

• What are Routed Export Transactions?
• Understanding the Computer Export License Exception (APP)
• Understanding the GOV Export License Exception
• Vegas Woman Charged with Iran Sanctions Violations
• Do’s and Don’ts of Filing a Commodity Jurisdiction Request
• Understanding Strategic Trade Authorization
• Building a Strong Export Compliance Plan
• Commerce Department Issues Rule Securing Digital Supply Chains Against Foreign Adversaries

Import/CBP

• UK Joins Kimberley Diamond-Trading Process
• FTC issues a Record Breaking $1.2 Million Penalty
• Customs Issues Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Broker Continuing Education – Comments Open
• Comment Now – CBP Proposed Rule on Country of Origin Determination for Imports under USMCA
• 9801.00.10: Updated Requirements for Returned Goods
• Customs Valuation 101
• Breaking News – New Federal Law Expands Furniture Flammability Testing Standard

AD/CVD

• New Antidumping Petition Against Imports of Certain Honey Products
• New AD/CVD Petition Against Imports of Certain Chinese Mobile Access Equipment

Buy America

• Biden Executive Order Strengthens Buy American Government Procurement Laws

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

• Trading in Wildlife? You May Need a License

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

• FDA Seeks Public Comments on Proposed Final Order for OTC Sunscreen Safety
• FDA OPENS NEW FSVP PORTAL FOR IMPORTERS
• FDA Further Extends UFI Flexibility For Food Facility Registrations
• OTC Drug Manufacturers are Required to Pay FDA Facility User Fees by May 10, 2021
• FDA Import Alert on Mexican Hand Sanitizer
• Comment on FDA’s Proposed Rule – French Dressing

USITC

• An Introduction to Safeguard Investigations

OFAC 

• Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Conflicting U.S. & EU Sanctions Policies Towards Iran
• OFAC Sanctions & Licensing
• The CAPTA List – An Introduction
• Treasury Imposes Further Sanctions on Iran
• Trump Administration Designates Cuba State Sponsor of Terrorism

Section 301

• Want Your 301 Exclusion Back? Comment Now!
• Potential Relief from China Tariffs Coming
• 301 Exclusion Extensions for COVID-19 Related Products
• Proposed 25% Tariffs on Section 301 Digital Service Taxes – Comment Now
• USTR Announces Special 301 Review – Comments Due January 28
• US Imposes Additional Tariffs on EU Goods
• USCIT Invalidates 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum Derivatives

Podcasts

• 3-Part Podcast Miniseries – Importing, Exporting, and AD/CVD

Trade Snapshots

• Customs and Trade Law Snapshot
• Customs and Trade Law Weekly Snapshot

USDA 

• Understanding Organic Equivalency Arrangements
• USDA National Organic Program – Enforcement & Compliance Overview

Webinar

• Want Customs to Police Your IPR at all 328 Ports of Entry?
• Customs Classification – A Key Component of an Import Compliance Manual
• Keysight Technologies Pays $6.6M to State Department for Export Violations
• Food Importers: How to Import Food Compliantly & Survive a FSVP Audit
• Don’t Let FDA Target Your Medical Device Company
• Insight on Last 6 Months of Biden/Congress on Trade
• Diaz Trade Law Invites the Trade Community to Two Free Webinars this Summer!
• Don’t be a Target, Learn Best Practices to Mitigate FDA Enforcement
• ACE: Auditing Your Export History
• ACE: Auditing Your Import History
• Exporting 101 – Introduction to Export Controls
• Anti-Circumvention, EAPA, Dumping Duties & the Spreadability of Cases
• Cleaning for COVID-19 – Importing Cleaning Products: Who Regulates You?
• REGISTER TODAY! NEI Accredited Webinar Importing 101 – Introduction to U.S. Customs
• Biden Administration Commits to Modernizing Regulatory Review

If you have any questions on the topics above, contact us at info@diaztradelaw.com.

CBP 

• In Fiscal Year 2021, CBP at the LA/Long Beach Seaport seized More Than $760 Million in Counterfeit and Prohibited Products, a 652% increase over the previous year.
• CBP issues guidance regarding the extension of product exclusions from additional Section 301 China duties on certain medical-care products to address COVID-19.
• With changes to the HTSUS classification systems possibly coming as early as January 1, 2021, U.S. importers should review their classifications and ensure compliance with U.S. regulations

BIS

• The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) requests public comment regarding areas and priorities for U.S. and EU export control cooperation under the Trade and Technology Council.
  • Comments are due by January 14, 2022
• On November 26, 2021, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a final rule adding 27 foreign entities and individuals to the Entity List for engaging in activities that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.

China

• In their most substantial talk since President Biden took office, Chinese President Xi Jinping has warned that encouraging Taiwanese independence would be “playing with fire”.
• On November 12, 2020, the President declared a national emergency to deal with the extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by certain companies of the People’s Republic of China.
• Airbnb subject to regulatory risk under U.S. law with more than a dozen homes available for rent in China’s Xinjiang region on land owned by an organization sanctioned by the U.S. government for complicity in genocide and forced labor.
• On December 6, 2021, President Biden announced a U.S. diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympic Games over concerns about China’s human rights record.

Commerce Department

• The Department of Commerce invites the general public to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections to allow for submission of exclusions requests from the remedies adjusting imports of steel and aluminum into the United States.
• Comments are due by January 24, 2022.
• On December 1, 2021, the Department of Commerce announced the opportunity to request an annual administrative review for products that are currently subject to antidumping and countervailing duties.

FDA

• The FDA is sharing a grant opportunity to cover COVID-19-related expenses for eligible FDA-regulated food producers, processors and growers.
  • Applications are due November 22
    • How to Apply – USDA’s Pandemic Response and Safety Grant Program – YouTube
    • Eligibility – USDA’s Pandemic Response and Safety Grant Program – YouTube
    • DUNS Number Registration – USDA’s Pandemic Response and Safety Grant Program – YouTube

Export Controls/Sanctions

• On November 18, 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned senior Houthi military officer Saleh Mesfer Alshaer, for the seizure of property in Yemen valued at greater than 100 million dollars, using a variety of unlawful tactics, including extortion.
• On November 18, 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned six Iranian individuals and one Iranian entity for attempting to influence the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
• On November 24, 2021, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) amended the Syrian Sanctions Regulations to expand the authorizations for nongovernmental organizations (NGO) to engage in certain transactions and activities that ensure the continued provision of humanitarian assistance, including certain early-recovery activities, that benefit the Syrian people.
• On November 24, 2021, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued Venezuela-related General License 8I, authorizing  limited transactions with Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. or the wind down of operations in Venezuela for certain entities.
• On December 2, 2021, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced the expansion of sanctions against Belarus to include 35 new designations to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Entities List and the issuance of a related wind-down license, General License 5.
• On November 8, 2021, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned 57 cryptocurrency addresses and one exchange for facilitating ransomware and money laundering

DST and Section 301 Investigations

• As part of the to address tax challenges arising from the digitalization of the world economy, the U.S. Trade Representative has determined to terminate the Section 301 Digital Services Tax Investigations of Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom.
• U.S. and India reach agreement regarding the treatment of Digital Services Taxes prior to full implementation of Pillar 1 of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) agreement.  As part of the agreement the United States will terminate the currently suspended additional duties on goods of India that had been adopted in the DST Section 301 investigation.
• On November 22, 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) issued a joint statement with Turkey regarding a transitional approach to Turkey’s Digital Service Tax (DST) prior to entry into force of Pillar 1. The joint statement reflects a political agreement in which the U.S. Trade Representative has determined to terminate the section 301 action taken in the investigation of Turkey’s DST.

USTR/Trade Policy

• On November 17, 2021, the United States and Japan announced the formation of the “U.S.-Japan Partnership on Trade” to deepen cooperation between the two countries and reaffirm their alliance through regular engagement on trade-related matters.
• United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai and United States Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo published an op-ed touting the agreement reached with the European Union that preserves the long-term viability of our steel and aluminum industries by tackling global excess capacity and creates a framework for reducing the carbon intensity of those sectors.

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

Did you know in FY2020, U.S. Customs seized more than 26,000 shipments worth more than $1.3 BILLION due to alleged intellectual property rights (IPR) violations? Ensure you’re on the right side of CBP enforcement and register for Diaz Trade Law’s next webinar “Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and Customs (Including an Update on the Amazon Registry) – Amazon Brand Registry“ taking place on December 15, 2021. This one-hour webinar will provide best practices and TOP tips on how one can protect their IPR using U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and effective methods to go after IPR infringers.

Register today to hear directly from DTL’s president, Jennifer Diaz, Associate Attorney, Denise Calle and Of Counsel and IPR Specialist, Augusto Perera, as they teach attendees about intellectual property rights and the best ways to protect them.

Why Should I Register for this Webinar?

In FY2019 and FY2020, U.S. Customs (CBP) seized more than 53,000 shipments worth more than $2.8 BILLION because of alleged IPR violations. The vast majority of goods seized have come from China and Hong Kong. During FY2020, CBP reported 18,757 active recordations – more than each of the previous two years.  Importers must be aware of how to import in compliance with IPR laws as well as how to protect their own intellectual property rights

In response to enforcement discussed above, Diaz Trade Law is hosting a NEI accredited webinar, “Intellectual Property Rights and Customs – Amazon Brand Registry” to train industry on top tips to avoid enforcement, and best practices to proactively protect their own brands.

In this webinar, you will learn the basics of intellectual property considerations for your business, how to use Amazon Brand Registry to build your brand, how protecting your brand is an ongoing commitment and the steps you need to take to ensure you do so proactively.

Importers, in-house legal counsel, owners, executives, marketing professionals, and others interested in intellectual property are encouraged to attend either live on December 15, 2021 at 12:00 PM, or on demand thereafter. Register HERE!