My New Best Friend is in Africa

I have a limited ability to see who is visiting this site thanks to the good people at www.sitemeter.com. So, I know a couple things in addition to the overall number of visitors. For example, I know that mentioning Saab cars generated far more traffic than mentioning Angelina Jolie. I also know that certain of my professional colleagues--a euphemism for competitors--visit regularly. I am gratified by the number of visitors I get from the U.S. government and in particular Customs, the DOJ and the courts. This site has been visited by folks on every continent but Antarctica. Thanks for all of that.

Another thing I can see is the search used to bring visitors here. Often these are general searches such as "customs laws." Other times, the searches are very specific such as "festive articles customs," or, as was recently the case, "Kris Kristoferson Salvador."

But, without a doubt, the best search ever recently brought a visitor from South Africa. Clearly, this person is an educator or trainer of the highest order. This person was in Cape Town and used Yahoo to search "'tariff classification' AND examples AND interesting." Interesting examples of tariff classification! Really? Based on his or her underlying assumption that there is such a thing as an interesting example of tariff classification, this visitor deserves our collective support and assistance.

To that end, I offer the following: NYRL J82174 (Mar. 31, 2003). The ruling shows how it is possible to have a number of essentially identical products classified in different headings and in only the exception does the eo nomine provision apply. Read it over and discuss among yourselves.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Oh yes, that is a fantastic ruling. ALmost a law school exam.
Feb 27, 2006, 9:18:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ruling of the Week 2015.8: Old Jersey and Pitcairn Island

Image
For today's ROTW, I set out looking for a ruling dealing with some far off and preferably warm location. Turns out that, with the exception of coastwise transit issues, there are no Customs and Border Protection rulings involving Pitcairn Island or any of several Pacific Ocean microstates including Tuvalu , Niue , and Kiribati . Pitcairn Island What I did find is an interesting question about the country of origin marking for products of the Bailiwick of Jersey Island, Channel Islands. The ruling is HQ 561938 (Mar. 18, 2002). For those of you who may not know, Jersey is an island off the coast of Normandy, France. It is an independent international actor and not part of the U.K. although the U.K. is responsible for its defense and external relations. Also, the Queen is the Head of State in her capacity as "the Crown in Right of Jersey." It is, according to the U.S. Department of State, a " Crown Dependency " along with the Isle of Man and the Bailiwick o...
Read more

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

Ninestar and UFLPA Exhaustion

Image
Exhaustion is a key doctrine in administrative law. When applicable, it requires that a party unhappy with an agency’s determination complete the administrative appeal process before turning to the courts for judicial review. Requiring exhaustion typically promotes judicial efficiency by ensuring that disputes are resolved at the agency and, if they are not, that there is a complete record of the agency process. Exhaustion also ensures that the judiciary respects the executive agencies and their expertise.  There are, on the other hand, times when the courts will find that exhaustion is not necessary or appropriate. Such is the case in  Ninestar Corporation et al. v. United States  et al., a decision of the U.S. Court of International Trade.  Ninestar is also interesting because it is one of the first cases in the CIT involving the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, known as UFLPA. In my hiatus from active blogging, I missed the rise of UFLPA as a major compliance t...
Read more