LinkedInFacebookInstagramXYouTube
305-456-3830|info@diaztradelaw.com

Import

Call 305-456-3830 or email info@diaztradelaw.com.

New AD/CVD Case Filed Against Glyphosate from China 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed against Glyphosate from China. The allegation is that imports from China are being dumped and unfairly subsidized.  

Full list of importers here.
Full list of exporters here. 

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner, while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is glyphosate (N(phosphonomethyl) glycine) in all forms, concentrations, and formulations.  

The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 2931.49.0020, 3808.93.5020, and 2931.49.0080.  

Full scope here.

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the investigations within 20 days. The […]

By |2026-07-02T07:40:26-04:00July 2, 2026|AD/CVD, China, Import|0 Comments
Read More

The U.S. Declined to Renew USMCA – What Importers Must Do Now

USMCA remains in force, but annual reviews create a new layer of origin compliance risk that importers can’t afford to ignore. 

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • USMCA did not end. On July 1, 2026, the U.S. declined to renew the agreement for a fresh 16-year term, moving it into annual reviews. The pact stays in force, potentially through 2036, unless a country formally exits with six months’ notice. 
  • Nothing changes at the port tomorrow. USMCA-qualifying goods still enter duty-free. Your certifications, rules-of-origin claims, and preference elections remain valid today. 
  • The real risk is enforcement, not policy. A decade of open renegotiation puts rules of origin, especially auto content and regional-value-content thresholds, into permanent play. Origin claims made under old assumptions become audit and penalty exposure. 
  • Act now on documentation, not headlines. Importers should stress-test USMCA certifications, tighten origin recordkeeping, and model exposure to Section 232 auto/steel/aluminum tariffs that already sit on top of the agreement. 

The Challenge: Compliance & Enforcement 

The news landed fast and loud: the United States declined to renew the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on July 1, 2026. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer confirmed the U.S. would forgo a fresh 16-year term in favor of annual reviews of the pact. Some coverage framed this as the end of North American free trade. It is not. 

Here is the […]

By |2026-07-02T07:30:25-04:00July 2, 2026|Import, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), USMCA|0 Comments
Read More

EAPA Update: CBP Finds Evasion Despite Full Cooperation 

A recent EAPA evasion finding against a solar importer reveals how a single country-of-origin misclassification can trigger steep consequences, even when the importer fully cooperates with CBP.

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • CBP issued a Notice of Determination as to Evasion in an EAPA case, finding that a major solar-module importer evaded antidumping AD/CVD orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells. 
  • Report the cell, not the module.  For solar modules assembled in a third country, the AD/CVD-relevant country of origin is where the cell was made, not where the module was assembled. Declaring the assembly country can be a material, false statement under EAPA. 
  • Cooperation does not erase the duty.  The company fully cooperated, but CBP found evasion anyway. 
  • The exposure is severe.  Cash-deposit rates reached up to 271.28% (Vietnam AD) and 238.95% (China-wide AD).
  • If you assemble abroad and import into the U.S., audit your country-of-origin declarations now — before an allegation does it for you. 

The Evasion Case 

On June 23, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a Notice of Determination as to Evasion in EAPA Consolidated Case No. 8163, finding substantial evidence that a major solar-module importer evaded antidumping (AD) and countervailing (CVD) duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells. The finding reached the Vietnam Circumvention Determination and the Malaysia and Vietnam AD/CVD Orders. 

The […]

By |2026-07-02T07:24:30-04:00July 2, 2026|AD/CVD, Enforcement, Import, Investigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More

CAPE Phase II Is Live: Most IEEPA Duties Are Now Refund-Eligible — Here’s How to Claim Yours 

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • As of June 29, 2026, CBP’s CAPE system reached Phase II — enhanced processing for reconciliation-flagged entries, making the large majority of IEEPA duties eligible for refund. 
  • Refunds are not automatic for every entry type. Eligibility, filing method, and ACH enrollment all matter — and finally, liquidated entries are treated differently depending on whether you filed a CIT lawsuit. 
  • The window rewards speed and documentation. Importers who reconcile their IEEPA-dutied entries now will recover capital sooner; those who wait risk falling into later, slower phases. 

Tariff Refunds – a Moving Target 

If your business paid duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), you have likely been watching a moving target: litigation over whether those duties were lawfully collected, a refund mechanism built in phases, and shifting guidance on which entries qualify and when. The result is paralysis — many importers know money may be owed back to them, but cannot tell whether, how, or when to claim it. 

That uncertainty has a real cost. Every month, a refund-eligible entry that sits unaddressed, working capital tied up at CBP rather than in your business. And because the refund framework is being rolled out in stages, the entries you can act on today are not the same as the ones you will be able to act on next month — sequencing matters. 

CAPE Phase II Now […]

By |2026-06-29T09:50:10-04:00June 29, 2026|ACE, Import, tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More

De Minimis, Codified: CBP Finalizes the Postal Suspension Rule

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • De minimis is not new news — the $800 duty-free exemption was already suspended for all countries on August 29, 2025. What’s new is CBP’s interim final rule codifying the postal piece and creating a formal postal informal entry process. 
  • Two key dates: the postal IFR takes effect July 24, 2026, and public comments on the rulemaking are due July 24, 2026. The compliance date was initially set for October 22, 2026, but was later extended to January 20, 2027.
  • If your business ships low-value parcels by mail, the entry mechanics are now being locked into regulation. The comment window is your one chance to shape them before they harden. 

De Minimis Is Over. Now CBP Is Writing the New Rules.

For years, the de minimis exemption was the quiet engine of e-commerce: shipments valued at or under $800 entered the United States free of duty and with minimal formality. That era already ended. As we covered in De Minimis No More: What It Means for Importers and Consumers, a July 30, 2025, Executive Order suspended duty-free de minimis treatment for all countries effective August 29, 2025, accelerating the repeal that the 2025 budget law had set for July 1, 2027. 

So the headline is not that de minimis is ending — it ended ten months ago. The development now […]

By |2026-10-14T16:16:33-04:00June 29, 2026|Import, Pre-compliance, tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More
This website uses cookies and third party services. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the Privacy Policy. OK
Skip to content
Go to Top