penalty Archives - Page 5 of 6 - Customs & International Trade Law Firm

PAYING CHINESE TARIFF’S & YOUR COMPETITORS AREN’T?

Now that the Section 301 tariffs are effective, importers are required pay additional duties – but not all are doing so. We found that while some importers know their product is subject to one of the 3 Chinese tariff lists, they are either using HTS’s not on the list (even though that is not the correct HTS for their product), or using an HTS subject to additional tariffs, but, not paying the additional tariffs. If you are an honest importer paying the correct amount of additional duties, this may leave you unable to compete in the current market.

If you’ve noticed that some of your competitor’s pricing has not been affected by the additional tariffs and you have been forced to increase your prices to stay in business, you have an option to help equal the playing field.

[…]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-07-07T13:19:16-04:00January 22, 2019|AD/CVD, Best Practices, China, China Trade War, Export, Import, International Law, International Trade, penalty, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|2 Comments

CATCH UP ON DTL’S TOP BLOGS FROM 2018!

We want to make sure you stay up to date with the hottest trade topics from 2018. below is a summary of what you missed by category. Enjoy!

[…]

Why You Need Your VERY OWN ACE Account

The Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) is a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) system designed to facilitate legitimate trade while enhancing border security. ACE improves collection, sharing, and processing of information submitted to CBP and government agencies.

You can now double check your entries filed by your broker with CBP & directly (or via a trusted consultant) interact with CBP via ACE!

ACE provides a single, centralized access point for the trade community to connect with CBP and its Partner Government Agencies (PGAs). It is the primary system through which the trade community reports imports and exports and the government determines admissibility. Through ACE as the Single Window, manual processes are streamlined and automated, paper is being eliminated, and the trade community is able to more easily and efficiently comply with U.S. laws and regulations.

[…]

By Jennifer Diaz|2019-01-31T00:11:43-05:00January 4, 2019|Best Practices, CBP 28, CBP 29, Customs Expert, Export, Import, International Trade, penalty, Seizure, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|1 Comment

Why Your Freight Forwarder MUST Segregate Hazardous Materials

It’s important to understand why freight forwarders take certain steps prior to shipping your goods. We previously discussed why it’s important to complete a Shipper’s Letter of Instruction. Now we are addressing why your Freight Forwarder segregates your hazardous materials, even if you request otherwise. The fines for non-compliance are severe. 49 CFR 107.329 provides for the maximum civil penalty amounts. Violators that knowingly violate hazardous material transportation laws and regulations may face no more than a $78,376.00 penalty for each violation, but if the violation results in death, serious illness, severe injury to any person, or substantial destruction of property the maximum civil penalty is $182,877.00. There is no minimum civil penalty, except for a minimum civil penalty of $471 for violations relating to training. When the violation is a continuing one, each day of the violation constitutes a separate offense. […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-07-12T15:02:35-04:00November 30, 2018|Best Practices, Freight Forwarding, Import, Import Alert, International Law, International Trade, penalty|1 Comment

Chinese Telecom Giant, ZTE, Faced with Largest Penalty Ever Levied

In our previous post, we discussed ZTE’s record penalty for selling technology with US-origin chips to North Korea and Iran, in violation of US trade laws. The company initially received a $1.19 billion in penalties and was ordered to reprimand the executives responsible for the malfeasance’s as a condition to re-enter the United States (US) market after a three-year suspension. Despite telling the US government that the guilty executives had been properly punished, it became clear that they were instead rewarded with bonuses. This violation triggered an automatic ban of ZTE from the US market for seven (7) years. As the 4^th largest seller of cell phones to the US, the ban on ZTE serves as a means of protecting American production.

After the announcement, the ensuing backlash from Beijing, as well as trade talks in China, President Trump stated that he and Chinese president Xi Jiping are working together to bring ZTE “back into business”.

Now, the Trump administration threw a metaphorical lifeline to this tech giant, seemingly easing tensions with Beijing. Secretary Ross announced a $1.4 Billion dollar settlement with ZTE.

ZTE has agreed to severe additional penalties and compliance measures to replace the U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) denial order imposed as a result of ZTE’s violations of its March 2017 settlement agreement. Under the new agreement, ZTE must pay $1 billion and place an additional $400 million in suspended penalty money in escrow before BIS will remove ZTE from […]

By Jennifer Diaz|2022-07-07T12:44:45-04:00June 8, 2018|Export, penalty, Technology, U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|2 Comments

Previous 456 Next