Karl W. Means

In a July 15 order, U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) Judge Richard K. Eaton announced that the court will enter an order that directs U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to reliquidate certain finally liquidated entries to process refunds of duties paid under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), in connection with the expected launch of Phase 3 of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE). Why The Order Is Important CBP developed the CAPE system in the wake

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling striking down most of the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump under International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA), and the Court of International Trade declaration that "every single cent of IEEPA duties that were imposed must be returned,” the question for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) — and importers — has been how to refund more than $166 billion in IEEPA tariffs collected over 53 million entries filed by over 330,000

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday struck down most of the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA). But questions remain for importers and others affected by the IEEPA tariffs: How and when will importers receive refunds of IEEPA duties already paid? What will be the impact of the new tariffs announced Friday by the Trump administration? What is the status of the trade agreements negotiated with certain trading partners in response to the

Between now and when its term ends in June, the United States Supreme Court is expected to decide whether global “reciprocal” tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) are unlawful. The much-anticipated decision could come at any time and, no matter the outcome, likely will significantly change the U.S. tariff landscape in both the short- and long-term. Here’s what importers need to know as they wait. How We Got Here The question before

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of International Trade late Wednesday afternoon struck down the reciprocal tariffs imposed last month by the Trump administration. The court, in a per curiam decision, held that the powers delegated to the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) do not confer the “unbounded authority” to “impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world.” V.O.S. Selections, Inc., et al. v. United States, No. 25-00066

President Donald Trump issued an executive order (EO) earlier this month announcing sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on imports from countries across the world. One country missing from the EO’s increased tariffs was Russia, despite its ongoing trade surplus with the United States. In response to the scrutiny this has drawn, the White House offered existing U.S. sanctions on Russia as the basis for its exclusion. While the EO’s more substantial “reciprocal” tariffs are currently suspended (except for China), these discussions raise the

Almost a year to the day after the Build America Buy America Act (BABA) became law, the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has published its “Final Guidance for Grants and Agreements” intended to implement BABA’s domestic content preference requirements (88 FR 57750, Aug. 23, 2023). BABA and Prior OMB Guidance BABA was enacted last August as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (see sections 7091-70927, Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat 429). It imposes Buy America preferences for

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) recently issued a proposed amendment to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) that tightens “Buy American” thresholds for DoD procurements. The Proposed Rule supplements and largely mirrors the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) implementation of President Joe Biden’s Executive Order (E.O.) 14005, “Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers,” while incorporating several DoD-unique requirements. Most importantly, the Proposed Rule introduces the following changes: Increases the Domestic Content Threshold.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a Proposed Rule and Notification of Proposed Guidance to federal agencies earlier this year regarding the implementation of the Build America, Buy America Act (BABA), which imposes a government-wide preference for domestically produced iron and steel, manufactured products, and construction materials in federal infrastructure projects. The Proposed Rule builds upon the White House guidance for BABA released in April 2022. Although confusingly styled as “guidance,” the Proposed Rule proposes definitions

Many U.S. enterprises and U.S. real estate holdings have some degree of foreign ownership. Federal law requires the filing of detailed reports on foreign ownership every five years by U.S. enterprises “in which a foreign person . . . owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, 10 percent or more of the voting securities in an incorporated U.S. business enterprise, or an equivalent interest in an unincorporated business enterprise.” 15 C.F.R. part 801.10(b). The U.S. government expects this requirement to apply

Highlights This Miles & Stockbridge alert provides a summary of the latest sanctions and developments regarding the ongoing situation in Ukraine. In response to Russia’s continued war operations and military attacks throughout Ukraine, the U.S. government and its allies imposed many more sanctions and new export control restrictions in the past week, specifically targeting Russian financial institutions, Russian state-owned enterprises, Russian elites,  and several of Russia's critical industrial sectors. In response to the Russian invasion and continued war operations throughout Ukraine, the U.S.

Yesterday (February 24th) as part of the broader response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – the White House announced strict export controls as part of the Biden Administration’s strategy to “squeeze Russia’s access to finance and technology for strategic sectors of its economy for years to come.” (President Biden’s remarks are found here.)  Those controls are part of a Final Rule “Implementation of Sanctions Against Russia Under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)” (unpublished PDF version is found here) which, although

Maximizing the use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States under the Buy American Act (BAA) is a bipartisan issue. In our previous post, “Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers” (located here) we wrote about Executive Order 14005, signed by President Biden on January 25, 2021.  Among other things, EO 14005 directs the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) to consider proposing a rule that increases the thresholds for

On January 25, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers. The order is part of his “Build Back Better Recovery Plan” to strengthen American manufacturing and has potentially far-reaching effect. The order will tighten the federal government’s requirements to buy American products, support American jobs and rationalize the enforcement of the country’s patchwork of “Made in America” laws. Companies that supply goods and services to the

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) just issued a warning to be on the alert for “fraudulent emails that appear to originate from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) domain, @uspto.gov.” The USPTO goes on to say: “These emails are a scam and do not come from the USPTO. Beware that these messages: Spoof the USPTO email address (e.g., noreply@uspto.gov).  Falsely claim that the USPTO has a new policy requiring separate registration of “clients” and that there is a “penalty”

On May 28, 2020, The Secretary of Commerce opened a new investigation to determine the effects on national security from imports of vanadium, pursuant to its authority under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.  Interested parties are invited to submit written comments, data, analyses, or information pertinent to the investigation, no later than July 20, 2020.  A party potentially impacted in any way – directly or indirectly - by vanadium tariffs should consider submitting comments. Section 232 is

In a decision some believe may generate more trademark infringement litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a trademark owner does not have to prove a defendant acted willfully to receive a profits remedy in some cases. On April 23, 2020, on appeal from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court decided Romag Fasteners, Inc., v. Fossil, Inc.  Under an agreement between Romag and Fossil, Romag made magnetic fasteners used on Fossil’s handbags and other products.  Romag learned, however,

Effective immediately, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is amending the CBP regulations to permit importers to temporarily postpone the deposit of certain estimated duties, taxes and fees. Ordinarily, those estimated duties, taxes and fees must be paid by importers for their merchandise as of the date of its entry, or its withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption. However, for certain merchandise entered in March or April 2020, qualified importers may postpone payment for a period of 90 days from the

On September 17, the President directed the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) to impose additional tariffs on importers of Chinese goods. The official statement is available here.     To recap, this is the third tranche of tariffs on imported Chinese goods. The first tranche, which we blogged about here, went into effect on July 6, and covered 818 tariff schedule categories. To request an exclusion from the tranche one tariff increase, an importer must file its request with the Office of the USTR by October 9,

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) has published the procedures for an importer to request an exclusion from the first round of increased tariffs on Chinese goods, available here. See 83 Fed. Reg. 32,181-32,184 (July 11, 2018).   Our previous blog post, available here, described the tariffs and why they are being imposed, in detail. To have covered goods or materials exempted from the higher duties, an importer has almost 90 days, until October 9, 2018, to file an exclusion request with the

As instructed by President Trump, the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) has just ordered a 25% ad valorem (according to the value of the article) tariff increase on hundreds of products coming from China. It is an increase, so if the previous tariff on a particular product was 5%, the new tariff will be 30%. The new tariffs are intended to target Chinese products in the aerospace, automobile, IT, communications, robotics, and industrial machine industries (under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

For a U.S. person or business that sold to, or bought from, a foreign business or person $500 or more in certain services or intellectual property (“IP”) during the U.S. entity’s fiscal year ending in 2017, June 29, 2018 is the general filing deadline for submitting to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”), a mandatory economics survey (Form BE-120). The Form BE-120 is a once-every-five-years survey conducted by BEA, titled “Benchmark Survey of Transactions in Selected

For a U.S. business enterprise that has or recently had 10% foreign ownership, May 31, 2018 is an important filing date. That Thursday is the general reporting deadline for submitting to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”), a mandatory survey (Form BE-12) which details the extent of foreign investment in a U.S. business, or U.S. affiliate/division of a foreign business. This “benchmark” survey occurs every five years. Many U.S. companies do not know or have forgotten about

Online service providers have until December 31, 2017, to re-register a designated agent with the Copyright Office if they want to remain eligible for protection from copyright infringement liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s “safe harbor”. The 1989 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, also known as the “DMCA,” made significant changes to U.S. copyright law, including changes that offer online service providers such as website operators and Internet service providers protection from copyright infringement liability provided they meet certain eligibility requirements. The