Goodbye Ruby Tuesday

Today is Tuesday, March 23, 2010 and Customs and Border Protection has issued a Federal Register Notice implementing the Junta Anti-Democratic Efforts ("JADE") Act of 2008. First, can someone please stop the acronym madness in Congress? That is one of the most strained acronyms I've seen. I would like my congress person (are you listening Jan Shakowski?) to introduce the Lawyers Always Run Rare Yaks Act of 2010.

The JADE Act actually serves a laudable purpose by seeking to prohibit the importation of gems and precious stones from Burma and, in some cases, other locations. The idea here is that the traffic in these article supports the repressive regime in Burma. Specifically, the articles in question are jadeite, rubies, and jewelry containing them.

The original interim regulations were published here in 2009. Under the regulations, presenting an entry of the covered merchandise is a certification that the goods are not from Burma and do not contain Burmese jadeite or rubies. This certification needs to be made on the basis of a certificate from the exporter. Of course, record keeping obligations attach to the certificates.

So, you are warned. Make sure your documents are in order.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Larry -

Amen on ridiculous acronyms. It seems that Members of Congress spend more time dreaming up "cutesy" acronyms than giving serious thought to legislation.

Your faithful Customs retiree.
Mar 23, 2010, 10:32:00 AM
Anonymous said…
I should add that the bureaucracy in the Executive Branch is just as guilty of coming up with acronyms and then finding words to fit them. Just be glad that Customs chose to call their new duty assessment program "ACE" rather than the Customs Revised Assessment Plan.

In a snitty mood.

Your faithful Customs retiree
Mar 28, 2010, 10:25:00 PM
Larry said…
Well, we do have CRAPP in valuation. Commissions, Royalties, Assists, Packing, and Proceeds of subsequent resale.
Mar 29, 2010, 8:53:00 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