International Trade

Trump Invokes Section 338 to Impose Additional Duties on Canadian Imports 

Short summary: The Trump Administration has announced new tariffs on Canadian imports and issued three presidential proclamations addressing Canada’s treatment of U.S. dairy products, alcoholic beverages, and motor vehicles. The actions rely on Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 – a statutory authority that has remained largely unused for decades. 


On July 20, 2026, the Trump Administration published a fact sheet announcing new 50% tariffs on a broad range of Canadian imports. Simultaneously, the Administration issued three separate presidential proclamations targeting Canada’s treatment of U.S. dairy products, alcoholic beverages, and motor vehicles. According to the White House, these actions are intended to respond to what the Administration describes as Canada’s long-standing discrimination against U.S. commerce. 

The New Tariffs 

The White House announced that the United States will impose an additional 50% tariff on many Canadian-origin products beginning 30 days after the order’s issuance. According to the Administration, the new duties are intended to offset Canada’s alleged discriminatory treatment of American products and businesses. 

Products eligible for USMCA treatment are not exempt from the new tariffs. Several categories of goods are excluded from the new tariffs, including: 

  • Energy products 
  • Critical minerals 
  • Potash 
  • Fish 
By |2026-07-21T12:53:42-04:00July 21, 2026|Canada, International Trade, tariffs, USMCA|0 Comments

IEEPA Tariff Refund Update: CIT Will Order Reliquidation of Some Finally Liquidated Entries 

Short summary: The U.S. Court of International Trade has announced that it plans to order U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to reliquidate certain finally liquidated entries in approximately 3,700 pending IEEPA tariff refund cases once CAPE Phase 3 launches. The court also confirmed that CBP continues to expand CAPE’s refund capabilities, including future functionality for entries with open protests, and provided an update on the billions of dollars in refunds already being processed. These developments represent another significant step toward resolving pending IEEPA tariff refund claims for importers. 


The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has announced another significant development in the ongoing litigation over tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In a July 15, 2026, order, Judge Richard K. Eaton confirmed that the court intends to direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to reliquidate certain finally liquidated entries in the approximately 3,700 pending CIT IEEPA refund cases once the next phase of CBP’s Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) refund system becomes operational. 

While the order does not immediately authorize refunds of liquidated entries, it provides important insight into how the court and CBP plan to move thousands of pending refund claims toward resolution. 

Reliquidation Order Planned for Thousands of Cases 

The court stated that, in connection with the anticipated launch of CAPE Phase 3, it will issue an order directing CBP to reliquidate certain finally liquidated entries […]

CBP Seized Your Goods at the Border: Your Options and Next Steps 

For more information on this topic, check out our webinar: ‘Goods Detained or Seized by CBP? Understand Your Options.” Watch here. 

 

Summary: When CBP seizes imported goods at the border, importers have several options — including filing a Petition, submitting an Offer in Compromise, or pursuing court action. This article explains the difference between detention and seizure, outlines the steps importers should take immediately after receiving a CBP Seizure Notice, and describes how a customs attorney can help recover seized merchandise and prevent future seizure. 


Importers expect the import process to run smoothly, but when a product is not compliant with U.S. laws and regulations, CBP is authorized under 19 CFR Part 162 and 19 CFR Part 151 to detain or seize goods upon importation. 

When goods arrive at a U.S. port of entry, CBP has the authority to detain a shipment if there is a question about its admissibility or compliance with U.S. laws and regulations. Detention is not the same as seizure. It is a temporary hold that gives CBP time to review the shipment and allows the importer to respond. During this window, a customs attorney can communicate directly with CBP on your behalf, provide the documentation or legal arguments needed to resolve the issue, and work to get your goods released before the situation escalates. 

If you do not respond effectively, CBP may move forward with a formal […]

Bosch Agrees to Pay $36 Million Penalty to BIS for Unauthorized Shipments to Huawei 

Robert Bosch GmbH (Bosch), the German multinational engineering and technology company, has agreed to pay a $36,184,680 penalty to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) for exporting controlled items to Huawei Technologies Co. and its affiliates without the required U.S. government authorization. 

What Happened 

Between September 2020 and September 2024, Bosch exported approximately $72.4 million worth of Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) sensor products and automotive software from abroad to Huawei and its affiliates. The exported items were subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) under the Foreign Direct Product Rule, a rule that extends U.S. export controls to certain foreign-produced items that incorporate U.S. technology or are manufactured using U.S. equipment. Because Huawei and its affiliates are listed on BIS’s Entity List, any shipment of items subject to the EAR requires a license from BIS. No such license or authorization was obtained. 

The MEMS sensors at issue are widely used in consumer products, including smartphones, wearable technology, and automobiles. 

The Penalty 

In addition to the $36 million BIS civil penalty, Bosch separately agreed with the Department of Justice to disgorge profits from the transactions, with an actual payment of approximately $3.6 million. BIS suspended approximately $3.6 million of its penalty as credit for the disgorgement, bringing Bosch’s total financial exposure to roughly $39.8 million. 

Bosch filed a Voluntary Self-Disclosure with […]

CBP Just Rewrote the Forced Labor Rulebook: What the New Operational Guidance Means for Importers

Short summary: On June 9, 2026, CBP issued new guidance supplementing its 2022 UFLPA guidance and other resources with a single document covering every forced-labor authority it enforces. The new guidance outlines CBP’s detention and exclusion processes and gives practical guidance on how to respond.


On June 9, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published its new Forced Labor Enforcement Operational Guidance for Importers (Publication No. 5560-0526). It is not a refresh. It updates the June 13, 2022, UFLPA Operational Guidance for Importers and, for the first time, consolidates all forced-labor enforcement authorities CBP wields into a single 89-page reference. 

That consolidation is the story. Until now, importers had to stitch together separate sources to understand how the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA), Withhold Release Orders and Findings under 19 U.S.C. § 1307, and the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) actually differ in practice. CBP has now mapped all of them — including the exact timelines, the review paths, and the documentation bar — in one place. The practical effect: ignorance of the process is no longer a defensible position. 

The one-line summary every importer needs 

CBP detains or excludes goods it suspects were made, wholly or in part, with forced labor — and the burden is on you to prove they weren’t, on a clock that can […]

Go to Top