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

DOJ

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

DOJ Seeks to Vacate IEEPA Refund Injunctions 

Why Importers Who Haven’t Filed Suit Have the Most at Stake 

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Justice filed its opening brief in the consolidated Federal Circuit appeal challenging the Court of International Trade’s universal injunctions governing IEEPA duty refunds. The government’s own brief concedes that those injunctions now matter to exactly one group: importers with finally liquidated entries who have not filed suit. If the Federal Circuit vacates, that group has no administrative path to a refund, because CBP has told the court it lacks statutory authority to reliquidate finally liquidated entries on its own initiative. 

Key Takeaways 

  • The government filed its opening brief on August 10, 2026 in Federal Circuit Nos. 2026-1895, -1897, and -1899, appealing the CIT’s April 17, 2026 universal injunctions entered by Judge Richard K. Eaton. 
  • The government does not contest importer-specific reliquidation orders. It has stated it intends to comply with them and has not appealed the hundreds already entered. 
  • By the government’s own framing, the universal injunctions retain force only as to IEEPA refunds on finally liquidated entries belonging to importers who have not sued. 
  • CBP’s position is that Congress gave it no authority to reliquidate a finally liquidated entry absent a timely protest or reliquidation within 90 days of […]
By |2026-08-12T07:47:09-04:00August 12, 2026|Uncategorized|0 Comments
Read More

$5.15 Million Settlement Highlights Growing Customs Enforcement Under the False Claims Act

Short summary: A Taiwanese manufacturer has agreed to pay $5.15 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by underpaying customs duties on imported goods. According to the Department of Justice, the company used improper customs practices to reduce duties owed to CBP, resulting in significant lost tariff revenue. The settlement underscores the federal government’s continued focus on customs enforcement and the growing use of the False Claims Act to pursue alleged duty evasion. 

The U.S. Department of Justice recently announced that a Taiwan-led manufacturer agreed to pay $5.15 million to resolve allegations under the False Claims Act and related administrative claims involving customs duties owed on imported goods. While the company did not admit liability, the settlement serves as another reminder that customs compliance remains a significant enforcement priority for the federal government. 

The Case – What Happened 

According to the DOJ, the alleged conduct went well beyond a simple classification error. The government alleged that the company used multiple methods over several years to reduce the customs duties it owed on imports. Specifically: 

  • Country of Origin Misrepresentations: From July 2018 through January 2022, Everlight allegedly knowingly misrepresented the country of origin on Chinese-manufactured LEDs. Everlight knew these products were manufactured in China, and then transshipped to Taiwan, before shipping them to the U.S.  Everlight allegedly misrepresented to CBP that the products originated in Taiwan rather […]
By |2026-08-10T12:28:37-04:00August 10, 2026|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More

Three Enforcement Actions, One Message: Trade Violations Are Serious Crimes 

Learn more about this topic in our upcoming webinar: From Error to Action: Filing a Prior Disclosure with CBP 

As tariffs climb and global trade becomes more complex, a growing number of importers are testing the limits, or outright breaking the law, to reduce or avoid duty payments and other compliance costs. U.S. enforcement agencies, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), have made it clear that customs fraud will not be tolerated and is a top enforcement priority. Three recent cases illustrate the new reality for enforcement. 

1. Undervaluation and the False Claims Act: $2.1 Million Settlement

An importer of fitness equipment agreed to pay $2.1 million to resolve allegations under the False Claims Act that it knowingly undervalued imported goods. 

According to the government, the company knowingly declared artificially low values on its imports in order to reduce tariff obligations. The company also failed to include the cost of computer tablets incorporated into packaged equipment.  

The settlement also resolves a qui tam False Claims Act case brought by a whistleblower, Mr. Greg Dahlstrom. Dahlstrom will receive $420,000 of the proceeds from the settlement. 

2. Importing Precursor Chemicals: Possible Life Sentence

On April 27, 2026, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York announced the unsealing of an indictment charging two Chinese nationals with importing a methamphetamine precursor chemical into the United States with the intent […]

By |2026-05-11T14:35:41-04:00May 2, 2026|Enforcement|0 Comments
Read More

DOJ Targets Trade Fraud: Importers Now on Notice as Criminal Division Ramps Up Enforcement

On May 12, 2025, Matthew Galeotti, the Head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, sent a memo to all criminal division personnel highlighting the focus areas of the division for white-collar crime.

The memo included a list of “high-impact areas” that the division will prioritize investigating and prosecuting. Trade and customs fraud, including tariff evasion, was second on the list.

The DOJ also revised its Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program and added “trade, tariff, and customs fraud by corporations” to the priority list.

Galeotti noted that unchecked fraud in U.S. markets robs hardworking Americans, harms the public, and that efficient enforcement promotes American economic and national security interests.

This memo signals a significant shift in the priorities of the DOJ’s criminal division. Historically, trade violations were not a top criminal priority and were instead handled by CBP and the DOJ’s Civil Division. Relatively few trade law violation cases have risen to the level of criminal prosecution.

What Importers Should Do

Now more than ever it is critical for importers to examine their import compliance programs and ensure that adequate procedures are in place to correctly enter goods into the United States.

Invest in Compliance

CBP expects importers to use “reasonable care” in reporting HTS, value, country of origin, free trade agreement preference, etc. This is a subjective standard; however, CBP […]

By |2025-06-13T13:24:14-04:00June 13, 2025|U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments
Read More

ICYMI: Congress Doubles the Statute of Limitations for Sanctions Violations

On April 24, 2024, President Biden signed into law H.R. 815, an emergency supplemental appropriations bill that included spending for Israel and Ukraine, along with other priorities such as data protection from foreign adversaries.

Within the fentanyl trafficking section, the bill included a provision that doubles the statute of limitations for all sanctions violations from five to 10 years. It also extended the limitation for certain export control violations such as biological weapon proliferation.

On September 11, 2024, the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued an interim final rule amending their Reporting, Procedures and Penalties Regulations to reflect the new statute of limitations. The new rule extends recordkeeping requirements for certain transactions from five to 10 years.

Impact

This policy change will change how exporters keep records, maintain compliance programs, and conduct due diligence. It also allows more time for the government to investigate violations.

Government

The Department of Justice and the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) are the primary authorities that will benefit from this policy change. Agency officials and prosecutors will now have twice as much time to investigate and bring charges against exporters.

The majority of federal crimes currently have a five-year statute of limitations. Some serious crimes such as capital murder or treason have no statute of limitations, other serious crimes such as embezzlement from a federal financial institution or racketeering have a 10 year limit.

Congress deliberately extending the limitations period in line with serious federal crimes sends a clear […]

By |2024-09-13T12:00:33-04:00June 21, 2024|Export, U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|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