The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Importer Midwest Air Technologies' swaged line and corner posts should be classified as parts for structures under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 7308, and not under a heading 7306 as "other tubes," Midwest Air said in a Nov. 14 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The company said that a prior customs ruling covering "the same or substantially similar merchandise" shows that swaged line and corner posts fit under heading 7308 and not 7306, freeing the company of Section 232 steel and aluminum duty liability (Midwest Air Technologies v. United States, CIT # 23-00240).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Nov. 9-13 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Nov. 7 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The Commerce Department erroneously used Malaysian tariff schedule subheading 4402.90.1000 as the surrogate value for coal-based carbonized materials in an antidumping review of activated carbon instead of the broader Harmonized System subheading 4402.90, exporters Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. and Carbon Activated Corp. argued. Filing their opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the exporters said Commerce's decision was based on "inaccurate and unsupported factual findings" (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2135).