Ford News Flash

If you have an interest in NAFTA, this is big news.

As you know, Customs & Border Protection has been pursuing a $42 million recordkeeping penalty against Ford for failing to produce backup documents supporting certificates of origin from a Mexican supplier. For background see this earlier post.

Earlier today, and despite winning a preliminary ruling, CBP agreed to settle the case for zero penalty from Ford. The settlement is done and a stipulated dismissal has already been filed with the District Court. According to industry sources, the only statement the government has made regarding the substance is that it is re-evaluating is policy regarding NAFTA recordkeeping.

This is tremendously good news for NAFTA importers. As I have said previously, we all owe Ford a debt of gratitude for fighting the good fight. Ford's counsel deserves congratulations as well.

Comments

Unknown said…
Hi Larry,

I am curious to know what your opinion of this is...
http://boyda.house.gov/?sectionid=21§iontree=3,21&itemid=279
Dec 19, 2007, 1:52:00 PM
Larry said…
What Christie refers to is the NAFTA Accountability Act. I blogged about this earlier in this post. I'm not a big fan of the bill, at least based on what I have read so far. It seems that NAFTA is becoming the Willie Horton of this campaign cycle. As I said in my earlier post, the U.S., North American, and world economies are complicated and intertwined. The NAFTA is not to blame for much of what is invoked in this bill as an appropriate measure for success.

I'm not an inside-the-beltway guy, but I doubt this will get too far into the legislative process.
Dec 19, 2007, 9:04:00 PM
Anonymous said…
Larry,

I'm just curious if you see down the road a-ways any possibility of recordkeeping violation (which as this case shows Customs is willing to make staggeringly costly to the trade) being mitigat-able in a prior disclosure-type way. We know they aren't in the 1592 section therefore not diclosable in that way - do you think as Customs focuses on this area they will also develop a way for companies to come clean about a1a doc violations - and does inclusion in the ISA make extra sense from this point of view (e.g., protection for recordkeeping in particular...)

Thanks - and liked your viewpoint of NAFTA being exporter-oriented from early October....
Jan 7, 2008, 11:24:00 AM
Larry said…
Jane:

Interesting question. I'm not sure there is much of a policy advantage to CBP for recordkeeping disclosures. In the 1592 context, CBP gets the money it is owed when the importer does a disclosure. In recordkeeping, there is no way to make the government whole because the importer apparently cannot produce the records.

As to mitigation, some circumstances merit mitigation of a recordkeeping penalty. You know, fires in the record facilities, third party failures, etc. Also, recordkeeping penalties are supposed to be set based on the degree of compliance compared to the total number of importations, importer cooperation, etc. Mitigation is permitted under 19 USC 1618.

Hope that helps. Best to your colleagues.
Jan 12, 2008, 11:46:00 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