Law Offices of Vincent Bowen

• Represent automobile/truck producer in Customs audit of Foreign Trade Subzone operation.
• Represent producer of personal water craft and golf carts in Customs audit of Foreign Trade Subzone operations.
• Represent importer of high-tech ceramics in Customs Compliance Assessment.
• Represent food importer in Customs Compliance Assessment.
• Represent large steel trading company in Customs Compliance Assessment.
• Represent luxury goods company in Customs Compliance Assessment.
• Represent methanol importer in Customs Focused Assessment.
• Represent paper/wood product company in Focused Fssessment.

II.  Penalties and Liquidated Damages

Representation in Customs proceedings on penalties/liquidated damages/other sanctions:

• Represent company in multi‑million $ liquidated damages / seizure / 1592 claim alleging cancellation of temporary import bonds by exporting domestic goods.
• Defend importer against liquidated damages assessment for failure to redeliver allegedly adulterated food products.
• Represent importer in 1592 action for alleged false declaration of country-of-origin to escape steel Voluntary Restraint Arrangements; liquidated damages for failure to deliver mis‑marked goods; and liquidated damages claims for failure to timely file export certificates.
• Defend importer against 1592 claim that NAFTA treatment declared in violation of binding rulings.
• Represent importer in Section 1592 investigation involving FTZ withdrawals allegedly not reflected on entry form.
• Represent four companies in Customs investigations involving alleged overstatement of ocean freight and insurance charges in CIF transactions.
• Represent importer against liquidated damages claim involving alleged inadequacy of proof of export of TIB merchandise to Mexico.
• Represent importer in Section 1592 action alleging misclassification of steel imports into lower duty‑rate category due to material omission in invoice description.
• Represent individual assessed with Section 1592 penalties due to alleged violation of OFAC rules by importing Iranian origin goods through third country.
• Advise importer under criminal indictment of legality of invoicing subassemblies under "high‑low" arrangement resulting in exclusion of low‑priced assemblies from antidumping order.
• Co-counsel in civil RICO action on whether "nominal consignees" legally entitled to make entry and whether surety has claim for duties against "real party in interest" who was not importer of record.
• Represent importer against liquidated damages claim based on alleged non-exportation of TIB merchandise.
• Represent Foreign Trade Zones operator against Customs claim that incorrect duty amounts paid on entries containing merchandise subject to antidumping/countervailing duty requirements.
• Represent importer in Section 1592 investigation regarding alleged undervaluation and misclassification of machinery imports.
• On behalf of Foreign Trade Subzone operator, file petition to mitigate liquidated damages for alleged admission of goods without prior Customs approval.
• Draft numerous prior disclosure letters to Customs districts regarding various valuation, origin and classification issues, including: 
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding entries under 9802 provisions;
  
  - Prior disclosure letters for numerous importers regarding declaration of correct AD/CVD requirements;
  
  - Prior disclosure on importer-supplied designs for imported fashion wear;
  
  - Prior disclosure / tender on assists (i.e., molds);
  
  - Prior disclosure letter regarding classification of ferroalloy imports;
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding missing components in "entireties" shipment;
  
  - Prior disclosure on undervaluation of lumber;
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding pricing of production machinery;
  
  - Prior disclosure letters regarding partial rebates of freight and marine insurance to exporters;
  
  - Prior disclosure to regarding classification of machinery and equipment;
  
  - Prior disclosure to on Automotive Products Trade Act ("APTA") diversions;
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding double invoicing and transshipment;
  
  - Prior disclosure of misclassifications of wood products in GSP categories;
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding possible undisclosed royalties, license fees and
    commissions;
  
  - Prior disclosure on possible misclassifications and possible wrongful NAFTA claims on imports from Canada;
  
  - Prior disclosure on possible misclassification of petroleum derivatives;
  
  - Prior disclosure on non-declaration of wall board material imports;
  
  - Prior disclosure of value breakdown reported for 9101 time pieces;
  
  - Prior disclosure regarding classification and valuation of methanol imports.

III.  TARIFF CLASSIFICATION

Represent client interests in disputes with U.S. Customs over the proper tariff classification of imported merchandise.  This includes representation at the Court of International Trade in litigation and at the U.S. Customs Service through protest procedures, internal advice requests, and preparation of ruling requests.

• Draft Singapore’s (third party) briefs in WTO dispute between U.S. and EC on Article II tariff bindings on local area network equipment.
• Advise clients on GATT and U.S. challenges to U.S. tariff classification of sports utility vehicles.
• Protest tariff classification of two types of sports utility vehicles from Japan (resulting in duty refunds in excess of $30 million).
• Plastic Covered Textile Materials ‑‑ application of chief value test to TSUSA 355.65‑355.85 (1992 Court of International Trade case, Spradling v.  U.S.); and ruling requests to Customs regarding HTSUS successor categories for identical merchandise.
• Fasteners (200 different bolts and screws) used in automobile production ‑‑ protest proposed reclassification to screws category, Court of International Trade Appeal.
• Unfilled binders for organizers/agendas -- stationery of paper vs. articles of materials on covers. 
• Configured steel blanks used to manufacture automobile transmissions ‑‑ material vs. unfinished auto part (Court of International Trade case ‑‑ Kasle Steel v. U.S. --stipulated judgment).
• Motor vehicles (golf cars and water vehicles in knock‑down condition, incomplete and unassembled) -- parts vs. entireties treatment (ruling request).
• Tanks and pressure vessels in unfinished condition  ‑‑ steel materials vs.
  unfinished articles (ruling request).
• Round steel stampings ‑‑ further worked or not further worked (ruling
  request).
• Beveled and/or perforated steel ‑‑ further worked or not further worked
  (ruling request).
• Titanium based steel ‑‑ carbon vs. alloy steel (two ruling requests).
• Corrugated sheet ‑‑ classification as flat‑rolled or shapes and sections (ruling request).
• Spice oleoresins -- Draft protests against classification of food coloring of vegetable matter.
• Nopalitos (cactus leaves) ‑‑ (ruling request).
• Cement -- portland cement versus masonry cement (ruling request).
• Concrete mixes – portland cement versus unfinished concrete (ruling request).
• Flat-rolled steel – alloy vs. non-alloy (CIT case -- Duferco Steel v. U.S. - stipulated judgment).
• Salicyclic Acid (used in aspirin) ‑‑ Protest on whether suitable or not suitable for medicinal use.
• Band Saw Steel (further worked or not further worked) ‑‑ Protest and related section 1592 action.
• Personal Water Craft ‑‑ water sport equipment vs. pleasure vessels (ruling request) -- $1.5 million annual duty savings.
• Boron-containing flat-rolled steel -- carbon vs. alloy -- (ruling request).
• Buildings -- unfinished buildings vs. individual parts categories -- (ruling request).
• Tomato Powder -- dried tomatoes vs. vegetables otherwise prepared or preserved (protest and CIT case – McCormick v. U.S.) -- $600,000 in duty refunds.
• Plastic coated pile fabrics - plastic (Ch. 39) vs. textile category (Ch. 60) (protest).
• Unfinished glass / ceramic disks for hard disc drives – ceramic versus glass (appeal CAT-assigned import specialist’s determination to NIS).
• Ceramic heaters for chemical vapor deposition chambers (CVD) -- ceramics vs. semiconductor machinery parts (appeal CAT- assigned import specialist’s determination to NIS).
• Mass air flow sensor heating elements for catalytic converters – sensor parts vs. electrical resistance heating elements (appeal CAT-assigned import specialist’s
  determination to NIS).
• Ceramic roofs for etching chambers – ceramics versus machinery parts.
• Backpack / handbag combination - appeal CAT-assigned import specialists'classification as handbag to NIS.
• Heater blocks in semiconductor etching chambers - electrical heating resistors vs. ceramic articles - protests and section 1520(c) petitions - $350,000 in duty refunds.
• Bimetallic watches - base metal vs. other metal (precious) - essential character -protests and section 1520(c) petitions - $450,000 in duty refunds.
• Bimetallic watches - base metal vs. other metal (precious) -98% base metal in-laid with 2% gold -- ruling requests to HQ and NY.
• Pioneer XM satellite trunk receivers - ruling request.
• Binders Chapters 42 vs. 39 and 63 -- oppose port's proposed reclassification/rate advance.
• Non-elastomeric fluoropolymers - 3904 vs. Ch. 99 reduced provision for ETFEs - protests and section 1520(c) petitions - $250,000 in duty refunds.
• Elastomeric fluoropolymers in irregular slabs - 3904 (primary form) vs. 3920 (in sheets) - oppose ports rejection and reclassification.
• Protest Customs' classification of bath & shower gels as bath preparations under category subject to banana war sanctions.
• Porcelain insulating tubes – insulators or insulating fittings – ruling request.

*In all of the finalized TSUS / HTSUS classification matters noted above, the merchandise was ultimately classified in the competing category with the lowest duty rate.    

IV.  CUSTOMS VALUATION AND APPRAISEMENT

• Advise luxury goods company on structuring intra-company cost-sharing
  arrangement for Customs duty purposes.
• On behalf of several companies, submit comments to Headquarters urging clarification of Hasbro ruling on royalties.
• Contest auditors’ attempt to collect duty on full amount of lump sum distributorship fee determined to be dutiable, where most of the entries covered by fee were finally liquidated ($400,000 duty demand settled for $88,000).
• File protests on Customs valuation decisions and respond to Customs Service requests for additional information on valuation issues.
• Protest Customs assessment on certain payments from importers to exporters under HTSUS 9802.00.60 (TSUSA 806.30) arrangements.
• Represent and advise exporters in connection with Customs and FMC investigations of understatement of dutiable value and violation of service contracts by rebating freight and insurance charges to carriers.
• HTSUS 9802.00.60 (806.30) ‑ Advise on a continuous basis major steel traders and represent their interests at Customs regarding availability of, and calculation of partial U.S. duty exemption for U.S. metal articles exported and returned to the U.S. for further processing.
• Advise numerous importers in structuring import transactions to achieve lower dutiable value.
• Advise clients on a continuing basis on the dutiability of certain costs and charges incurred in import transactions, including:
  
  - Royalties and license fees;Foreign inland freight charges; Separate joint venture payments made in connection with imported goods;
  
  - Buying and selling commissions; assists; indirect payments;
  
  - Post‑importation price adjustments; interest charges;  
  
  - Payments for guaranteed on‑time delivery; and Payments between related parties.
  
• Represent importer in internal advice proceedings on dutiability of non-exclusive distributorship fee.
• Represent consignment importer in Customs’ review of basis of valuation.

V.  GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES

• Petition USTR to waive competitive need limits on VCRs from Malaysia.
• Petition USTR to waive competitive need limits on VCRs from Indonesia.
• Ruling request to Customs on whether direct shipment test is satisfied for BDC product substantially transformed in non‑BDC and returned to BDC for direct shipment to U.S. (prior to statutory reversal of Madison Galleries).
• Petition USTR to create separate tariff line for nopalitos and waive competitive need limits.
• Oppose removal of Malaysian rubber thread from GSP list.
• Petition to reinstate Indian spice oleoresins to GSP list after removal under the Section 301 pharmaceuticals dispute.
• Petition to designate tomato powder (HTSUS 0712.90.75) from Morocco to GSP eligible list.
• Oppose domestic company's petition to remove black pepper oleoresin from GSP list.
• Petition to designate kola nuts from Ivory Coast to GSP eligible list and to create separate tariff line.
• Oppose removal of chemicals used to make tires from GSP list.
• Petition USTR to designate/waive competitive need limits on four types of consumer electronic products from Malaysia.
• Petition to waive competitive need limits on radio broadcast receivers from Indonesia.
• Draft petition to designate digital / XM / satellite trunk radio receivers to GSP eligibility.

VI.    SECTION 301

• Oppose (including testimony) inclusion of tomato powder from Spain on retaliation list in oilseeds dispute with EEC .
• Oppose inclusion of ginger and chili peppers on retaliation list in 301 dispute over China's market access restrictions.

VII.   COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AND MARKING ISSUES

• Draft legislation and work with Congressional staffers to introduce bill exempting spices from country-of-origin marking requirements (Exemption codified at 19 U.S.C. § 1304(g)).
• On behalf of Japanese steel exporting associations, oppose Customs pre-NAFTA proposal to apply new change-in-tariff-heading origin criteria to steel products.
• Draft Government of Singapore’s proposed origin rules on petroleum and petrochemicals in WTO harmonization negotiations.
• On behalf of foreign antifriction bearings industry, file comments with Customs opposing U.S. proposal to use change-in-tariff-heading origin rules for enforcement of all Customs programs.
• Monitor and report on GATT country of origin negotiations on harmonization, rules of discipline and advise foreign interests of U.S. origin practices and U.S. strategies in the negotiations.
• File Ruling Requests with Custom Headquarters regarding origin of various types of U.S.‑made steel coated/galvanized abroad.
• File claims with Customs Headquarters alleging non-compliance of competitive imports with marking laws (televisions and pipe fittings).
• Represent, advise clients regarding "country of origin" requirements involving U.S. imports under following programs: 
  
  - NAFTA -- Advise various companies on country-of origin criteria for preferential NAFTA duty treatment and new U.S. marking laws for goods shipped from NAFTA partners; 
  
  - U.S. steel VRAs:  Ruling request and Section 1592 defense concerning country‑of‑origin of mirror‑polished steel from VRA country processed in non‑VRA country before importation; U.S.‑Canada Free Trade Agreement ("FTA"): Advise clients whether third country merchandise processed in North America meets FTA origin requirements in shipments between U.S. and Canada (i.e., spices, galvanized steel sheet, various automotive materials, computer subassemblies and telephone subassemblies);
  
  - U.S. insular possessions program ‑‑ Ruling request to Customs on whether apparel assembled and sewn in Marianas are eligible for U.S. duty exemption on products from insular possessions; 
  
  - U.S. country of origin marking requirements: Advise on application of substantial 
  transformation test to articles (particularly electronic products) produced in foreign countries and processed in the United States after importation.  Advise on 
  appropriate origin markings;
  
  - File letters with Treasury opposing proposed tariff shift rule in NAFTA marking rules for imported spices.

VIII.    IMPORT DUTY FORGIVENESS / DEFERRAL PROGRAMS

• Continuing advice to and representation of retail trade clients on inventory control and recordkeeping requirements, operator agreements, HTSUS classifications, procedures manual, admission and entry procedures in FTZ distribution center;
• Represent importers / operators in activation of two motor vehicle production plants designated as Foreign Trade Subzones;
• Structure subzone operators' exportation procedures to achieve minimum duty liability through duty drawback, TIB, zone‑to‑zone transfers, zone‑to‑bonded warehouse transfers and in‑bond shipment and exportation. 
• Advise on Customs requirements in establishing inventory system and record‑keeping;
• Ruling request to Customs regarding application of U.S. duties to imported materials manufactured in U.S. FTZ and exported under transportation and exportation procedures to insular possessions.
• Represent various importers in Customs proceedings concerning whether domestic sale for export violates TIB “one-sale” restriction.   

IX.  CUSTOMS ASPECTS OF ANTIDUMPING (AD) AND 
       COUNTERVAILING  DUTY (CVD) ASSESSMENTS

• Oppose domestic uranium’s petition to establish conditional release period for uranium potentially subject to AD/CV requirements .
• File over 100 protests with Customs contesting various aspects of AD/CVD assessments:
  
  - Protest untimely assessments under 1504(d); subsequent CIT action (Okura & Co. v. U.S. – stipulated judgment);
  
  - Multiple protests on untimely assessments after 4‑year period in 1504(d);
  
  - Protest assessments six years after rate was finalized (at deposit rate) under laches theory;
  
  - Protest assessments made on entries upon which proper notices of suspension were not issued;
  
  - Protest assessments on entries not within scope of investigation;
  
  - Protest assessment of interest on imports entered under bond without cash deposits;
  
  - Protest failure to provide interest on refunds under Section 1677g (with cash deposits) and under Sections 1505(c), 1520(d) for pre-1980 entries;
  
  - Protest assessments which failed to give credit for amounts already deposited;
  
  - Protest assessment at high preliminary rates which were adjusted downward in final determination or administrative review;
  
  - Protest duties prematurely assessed (under injunction);
  
• Represent company seeking exclusion of HTSUS 9802.00.60 (806.30) entries from flat‑rolled AD cases.
• Challenge Customs' attempts to collect AD/CVD deposits beyond Customs 60-90 day rejection period.
• Oppose Customs/DOC collection of AD/CV duties on floor plate as flat- rolled – CIT and 2002 CAFC Appeal – Duferco v. U.S. -- $2.5 million in refunds.
• File Offer in Compromise with Headquarters for relief of countervailing duties and interest on cotton yarn from Brazil.
• Advise companies of Customs consequences of incorporating new companies to engage in trade of goods not subject to antidumping/countervailing duties.
• Advise companies subject to Title VII proceedings of relationship between retroactive duty deposit requirements of critical circumstances provisions with Customs policy not to require additional deposits beyond those made at entry.
• Challenge Customs assessment of AD duties in DOC scope proceedings on portland cement.

X.  GENERAL CUSTOMS MATTERS

Represent and advise Customs clients regarding: