Our 4th video has now been released. Reynold Martens, author of our white paper series, An Integrated Trade Compliance Strategy, presents a summary of a few key concepts introduced in the original white paper. Related: Seven Best Practices of Leading Traders
Ed Fast, Minister of International Trade announced the successful conclusion of the second round of free trade negotiations with Ukraine.
The Honourable Ed Fast, Minister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway, today announced the successful conclusion of the second round of free trade negotiations with Ukraine.
“Our government remains focused on the economy,” said Minister Fast. “A free trade agreement with Ukraine will further expand trade opportunities, encourage economic growth and help create jobs.”
This round of talks began on May 16, 2011, and took place in Kyiv.
“We want to build on our already strong cultural relationship with the Ukrainian people by strengthening our economic ties,” said Minister Fast. “Canadian companies are steadily building a presence in Ukraine in areas such as aerospace and agriculture. We want to encourage more of these connections.”
A free trade agreement with Ukraine would further open markets for Canadian exports ranging from seafood products to machinery, vehicles, iron and steel products, and plastics.
Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe, and home to a highly educated population, a diversified industrial base and substantial natural resources. Some 1.2 million Canadians have Ukrainian roots, enriching Canada’s business, arts and academic communities.
The Harper government has already concluded new free trade agreements with eight countries and is in negotiations with close to 50 others, including the members of the European Union and India, which are among the world’s largest economies.
MAPI says manufacturing to increase 6.2% but economy only 2.7%…
(Industry Week – Agence France-Presse)
MAPI says manufacturing to increase 6.2% but economy only 2.7%
The U.S. economic outlook continues to show modest improvement, but while the manufacturing recovery is on track, caution flags remain for the overall economy. The Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI Quarterly Economic Forecast predicts that inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) will expand by 2.7% in 2011 and by 2.9% in 2012.
The 2011 forecast represents a downgrade over the previously estimated 3.2% growth, while the 2012 forecast is down slightly from the 3% growth anticipated in the February 2011 quarterly report.
“The economy is continuing to grow at a moderate pace with consumer durable goods, business equipment, and exports leading the way,” said Daniel J. Meckstroth, Ph.D., Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI chief economist. “Rising oil prices and government austerity at all levels, however, give pause to any excessive optimism.” Read more here.
A Brazilian proposal for the WTO to examine the impact of currency exchange rates on international trade met with a mostly favourable response…
A Brazilian proposal for the WTO to examine the impact of currency exchange rates on international trade met with a mostly favourable response from WTO members last week, sources report.
Arguing that the relationship between trade and exchange rates risked falling into a “no man’s land” between different international institutions, Brazil is calling for a two-year ‘work programme’ in the WTO’s Working Group on Trade, Debt, and Finance (WGTDF) consisting of analysis and debate on economic theory and case studies, as well as possible reform measures.
Brazil has struggled to cope with the value of its currency, the real, which has soared by almost 50% in real terms since the late 2008, causing the country’s exports, particularly of manufactured goods, to become less competitive overseas in overseas markets, while imports continue to rise. Exchange rates, linked as they are to countries’ fiscal and monetary policies, are sensitive issues for several governments, and declarations from the Group of 20 leading economies have yielded little more than anodyne remarks about pursuing “more market-determined exchange rate systems” and “refraining from competitive devaluation.” Read more here.
Congress is currently drafting an updated customs reauthorization bill, which is expected to be taken up by lawmakers later this year…
(World Trade Interactive)
Both the Senate and the House of Representatives are currently drafting an updated customs reauthorization bill, which is expected to be taken up by lawmakers later this year following the anticipated approval of free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia and Panama. Businesses, organizations and individuals with an interest in resolving problematic customs issues should take this opportunity to make sure those issues are part of the forthcoming legislation….
Issues expected to be included in the customs reauthorization bill include the following.
Automated Commercial Environment
This section of the bill will include provisions on 100% electronic filing for all entry types, centralized entry filing, accelerated implementation of the International Trade Data System, implementation of ACE for exports and continued funding.
Centers of Excellence
Congress may direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to test a “centers of excellence” model in which it designates a few select ports and import specialist teams to process all entries related to a specific industry sector and links the centers with national account managers to ensure coordinated CBP actions, uniformity, compliance reviews, etc.
The envisioned legislation would amend the HTSUS Chapter 98 provisions to facilitate the flow of goods that may cross borders for certain operations and return to the U.S. without being assessed duties a second time and allow goods that may be imported under such provisions to use generally accepted accounting principles for inventory management.
Lawmakers are interested in adding language, possibly the Duty Drawback Simplification Act of 2007, to streamline the drawback process and thus open the door to more drawback claims.
The pending bill could allow non-resident importers of record to participate in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, which would allow CBP to vet their supply chains for security purposes.
Possible changes could affect the positioning of the Office of Regulations and Rulings, whose current status within the Office of International Trade is seen by some as limiting its ability to issue critical policy and legal guidance, and could include moving the balance of the current OIT into the current Office of Field Operations (which would be renamed the Office of Commercial Operations) to ensure that CBP’s operational, strategic and enforcement functions are managed in a uniform and collaborative manner.
Private Sector Partnership
The draft legislation proposes that, without diminishing its central law enforcement and homeland security functions, CBP adopt a trade facilitation posture as a point of departure for executing new laws and regulations. For example, the First Sale Rule should not be reversed barring congressional action, and the HTSUS 9801 provision should not be reinterpreted to the detriment of commerce unless there is a clear conflict with law enforcement or security objectives.
De Minimis and Informal Entry Amounts
The personal de minimis exemption would be increased to $500 and the informal entry limit would be increased to $2,500.
A recent CITT appeal brings to point the need ensure that importers have due diligence with their vendors including indemnification clauses on their purchase orders when suppliers don’t follow through with requests from Customs Agencies, CBSA in this case, that it is not the supplier who is held at fault but the importer in this [...]
A recent CITT appeal brings to point the need ensure that importers have due diligence with their vendors including indemnification clauses on their purchase orders when suppliers don’t follow through with requests from Customs Agencies, CBSA in this case, that it is not the supplier who is held at fault but the importer in this case. While this case specifically is about textile products, it applies to all products imported.
Bob Cowie, Vice President Consulting at GHY International commented; “Interesting appeal to reinforce the fact that if supplier does not forward info to CBSA with regards to NAFTA it is the importer who pays. It reinforces the suggestion to have some type of indemnification on your purchase order.”
Mr Cowie also identified that the importer was also put at an additional loss because, “if some of the entries were early enough in the year they may have been able to access the TPLs”
While both Canadian and US Governments have mandates to create better supply chain security for the benefit of their nations citizens, they are harmonizing many programs, although not on the same time line, nor is each program identical as each have their own nuances due to National priorities. The key is that understanding each program is part [...]
While both Canadian and US Governments have mandates to create better supply chain security for the benefit of their nations citizens, they are harmonizing many programs, although not on the same time line, nor is each program identical as each have their own nuances due to National priorities.
The key is that understanding each program is part of the journey towards trade compliance as part of an integrated trade compliance strategy.
Courtesy of ie Canada
The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) has issued a notice advising stakeholders that as of January 20, 2011, the agency has received 239 eManifest conveyance and 3403 related cargo transmissions from a variety of carriers and service providers for shipments entering Canada at ports of entry in all regions nationally.
While the figures are relatively low, CBSA notes that they are increasing daily as clients complete systems’ testing and carriers implement electronic processes throughout their fleets on a national basis.
You may have noticed a new link on the right hand side under the follow us section indicating the popular Facebook LIKE status. If you LIKE us then please click on the link to let us know that. You can also use the new Face Book page as an alternate delivery of updated feeds from [...]
You can also use the new Face Book page as an alternate delivery of updated feeds from our twitter, trade news, and this trade compliance site.
We will be checking the page weekly and we do have notifications if you leave us any messages, etc. so we can develop our ongoing two-way discussion on the topics related to an Integrated Trade Compliance Strategy.
A communication with a long time friend and experienced and certified trade professional lead to an awareness that a major manufacture did not know what assists were! They were looking for help to correct the situation.
This article came about because in the course of communicating with a long time friend and experienced and certified trade professional we found a major trailer manufacturer who didn’t know what assists are!
We continue to reference ‘assists’ on every importer meeting as most people don’t appreciate/comprehend the implication. Let’s face it ‘in Canada we all think of assists as something related to reward for the person passing the puck to the goal scorer’
Seriously though any input to the manufacturing process that an importer provides is to be included in the value of the goods. Most common references relate to tools, die’s, etc. that are provided to a manufacture in order to make a part for an importer. That could even be as simple as a ‘sticker’ applied to a product, where the sticker was supplied by the importer.
Trade Compliance Complexity is in the Details
The purpose of this piece is not to educate you on classification of furniture sets, but make you aware of the hidden detail and make you think about how you are setup to keep current with the ever changing world of international trade compliance.
In this specific case the detail comes from the WCO which has over 150 signatory countries to it, so these “rules” apply to apply and this specific case relates to imports to Canada.
Classification of Furniture Sets
In 2010 a new D-Memorandum, 10-14-58, was released by CBSA. The topic of that memo is Tariff Classification of Furniture Sets. In simple terms, this D-memo indicates that the WCO has classified a bistro patio set, consisting of a square (76 x 76 cm) solid hardwood table and two matching wooden chairs, presented unassembled and put up in a single box for retail sale, under heading 94.03. This heading reads “Other furniture and parts thereof”.
However, the WCO also determined that the same goods, if packaged in two or more boxes, would not qualify as “goods put up in sets for retail sale” and the components would have to be classified separately.
The WCO’s reasoning was based on the General Interpretive Rules (GIRs). The WCO applied GIRs 1, 2(a), 3(c) and 6, as follows:
GIR 1 does not offer assistance in classifying these goods.
GIR 2(a) allowed the unassembled [bistro set] components to be classified as if they were the finished good.
GIR 3(a) did not apply as the headings applicable to the hardwood table [94.03] and the wooden chairs [94.01] described only part of the furniture set and did not provide the most specific description.
GIR 3(b) did not apply because neither component gives the set its essential character. [In CBSA’s words, the number of boxes is a factor in how a furniture set is classified. When the set is packaged in more than one box it cannot be considered as “goods put up in sets for retail sale” under GIR 3(b), and each piece in the set must be classified separately.]
GIR 3(c) then directed that the goods be classified under heading 94.03, as it is the latter of two possible headings that equally warranted consideration (Chairs – 94.01, Tables – 94.03).
GIR 6 allowed for classification at the subheading level.