Skip to content

#Section 301

0 items today
Sep 8Tue
  1. Federal Register · USITC

    USITC requests comments on implementation of Section 338(g) in investigation No. MISC-053

    The U.S. International Trade Commission requests comments from interested persons on how it can best meet its statutory obligations under Section 338(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, in investigation No. MISC-053. Written comments must be submitted on or before November 9, 2026, identified by docket number MISC-053, via the Commission's EDIS docket or by email to Secretary@usitc.gov.

Sep 2Wed
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT rules feed-grade chlortetracycline concentrate is classifiable as an antibiotic under 2941.30.00

    In Slip Op. 26-102, Court No. 22-00056, the U.S. Court of International Trade granted Zoetis Services LLC's motion for summary judgment and denied the government's cross-motion, holding that feed-grade chlortetracycline concentrate manufactured in China by Jinhe Biotechnology Co., Ltd. is properly classified as an antibiotic under subheading 2941.30.00 rather than as an animal feed preparation under heading 2309. CBP had liquidated two Chicago entries, dated December 26, 2019 and January 22, 2020, under subheading 2309.90.10 and assessed Section 301 duties under 9903.88.03 at 25 percent ad valorem; the government argued on cross-motion for subheading 2309.90.95 at 1.4 percent.

Jun 17Wed
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT grants default judgment against Franco Tire Distribution in Section 1592 penalty case

    The U.S. Court of International Trade granted the government's motion for default judgment against Franco Tire Distribution, Inc., a U.S. importer, in a civil penalty case under 19 U.S.C. § 1592, entering judgment of $55,882.98 plus interest in Slip Op. 26-66, Court No. 24-00161, dated June 17, 2026. The government alleged that Franco negligently omitted the antidumping case number A-570-040-000 and countervailing case number C-570-041-000 from entry summaries for two entries of truck and bus tires from China, and failed to pay estimated AD/CVD duties at importation. Franco later corrected the summaries and paid $27,941.49 in duties but did not pay the penalty of two times that amount.

Apr 23Thu
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT rules in Cyber Power Systems v. United States on classification of UPS cables and Section 301 duties

    The U.S. Court of International Trade held in Slip Op. 26-41, Court No. 21-00200, that Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc.'s eight models of cables are properly classified under subheading 8544.42.90, HTSUS, and subheading 9903.88.03, HTSUS, but that the government is not entitled to collect the additional 2.6 percent ad valorem duty that would normally be due under subheading 8544.42.90.