Lacey Act Sentencing

Of all the things compliance people need to worry about, the Lacey Act is one of the craziest. Not that it is not an important and valuable law. As originally drafted, it was intended to prevent poaching of wild game and is used to enforce laws against trafficking in endangered species. But, the Lacey Act has been expanded to require that importers of plants and plant-based materials make a declaration of the botanical name of the species involved and that it was harvested and exported legally. This is very tough when the importer is several steps removed from the person who harvested the tree, for example. Consider a car company in Germany that uses lovely rosewood in its interior trim. The importer in the U.S. needs to know that the wood making up the trim was harvested legally. That is way outside the usual visibility of the supply chain.

That is just me grousing.

In a much more typical case, the Justice Department recently announced the conviction and sentencing of an antiques dealer who illegally importer sperm whale teeth and narwhal tusk. That is worth 33 months of prison time.

Since there is no copyright on government documents, I'll give you the highlights rather than a link.

WASHINGTON—David L. Place, owner of Manor House Antiques Cooperative in Nantucket, Mass., was sentenced to 33 months in prison for illegally importing and trafficking in Narwhal tusks and Sperm Whale teeth, the Department of Justice and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) announced today.
On Nov. 19, 2010, a federal jury in Boston convicted Place of eight counts including conspiracy, Lacey Act violations and smuggling for buying and illegally importing Sperm Whale teeth and Narwhal tusks into the United States, as well as selling the teeth and tusks after their illegal importation. The market value of the teeth and tusks illegally imported and sold by Place was determined to be between $200,000 and $400,000. One of Place’s co-conspirators, Andrei Mikhalyov of Odessa, Ukraine, pleaded guilty in federal court in Boston on related charges. Mikhalyov served a nine month prison sentence and was deported to the Ukraine.
Sperm Whales are listed as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and are listed on Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Narwhals are listed as “threatened” under the ESA, and are listed on Appendix II of CITES. It is illegal to import parts of either the Sperm Whale or the Narwhal into the United States without the requisite permits/certifications, and without declaring the merchandise at the time of importation to U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
“The unlawful importation of endangered species is a serious crime that the Justice Department is committed to stopping,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. “We will not tolerate the illegal market in endangered species such as the Narwhal and the Sperm Whale, and we will continue to prosecute those who violate the law.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CAFC Decision in Double Invoicing Case

The Federal Circuit has issued a decision on the merits in United States v. Inn Foods, Inc.  There had been a previous decision on jurisdiction, which was followed by a trial at the Court of International Trade and then this appeal on the substance. The initial issue is whether Inn Foods' invoicing practice amounts to fraud.  Inn Foods had been receiving an invoice from growers in Mexico that had a relatively low sales prices on it.  Subsequent to entry, Inn Foods created a second invoice at something more similar to market value, retaining the original invoice number, and paid at that higher amount.   Superficially, this looks like a standard-issue double-invoicing scheme.  But, in the age of reconciliation, is it really more like a provisional pricing mechanism?  It might have been possible to make that argument had Inn Foods adjusted its entries accordingly.  It didn't and the loss of revenue was approximately $624,000.  Based on testimony and evidence indicating both knowl
Read more

Target on Finality

Image
In the last post , about the Federal Circuit’s very important decision on due process and allegations of evasion of antidumping duties, I made a snarky, offhand comment that the government believes “liquidation is magic.” That was in the context of the government arguing that Customs’ liquidation of entries mooted an appeal, thereby taking away the importer’s right to further judicial review. I said that knowing full well that I still needed to write this post summarizing Target Corp. v. United States in which Target made what I want to be a valid and righteous argument that Customs’ improper liquidation of entries at a favorable rate of antidumping duty prevents the Court of International Trade from ordering Customs to collect the legally applicable duties. But it turns out that while liquidation is an important legal step, in at least one unusual circumstance it is not sufficiently powerful to overcome the full force of an Article III court. Understanding this case requires a lot
Read more

CAFC: EAPA Process Really Does Violate Due Process

Image
Hot on the heels of my complaining about how the EAPA law and process is stacked against importers, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued an important decision that will have a major impact on how those cases work. If you are unfamiliar with evasion cases under the Enforce and Protect Act and how Customs and Border Protection handles them, go back and look at these two posts: Part 1 , Part 2. Royal Brush Manufacturing, Inc. v. United States , is the decision in an evasion case against Royal Brush involving pencils allegedly transshipped from China through the Philippines. Customs determined that there was evasion of an antidumping duty order based in part on evidence that was not disclosed to Royal. Specifically, Customs sent a representative to the facility in the Philippines to photograph the interior and provide a report. Customs refused to disclose all the photographs to Royal. Moreover, CBP's report concluded that the facility did not have sufficient capacit
Read more