Showing posts with label fabric. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fabric. Show all posts

Monday, September 23, 2013

Do You Make Men’s or Boy’s Suits of Imported Worsted Wool?

Submit Your Application by 5 pm on Oct. 15, 2013
 to Obtain a Tariff Rate Quota!
 
 
A “Tariff Rate Quota” (TRQ) is a temporary reduction on import duties, and in this particular case, it would mean a duty savings of 25%, or $25 on every $100, imported through Dec. 31, 2014.
Title V of the Trade and Development Act of 2000, which created this TRQ, requires that they be allocated to persons who
1) Cut and sew men’s and boy’s worsted wool suits, suit-type jackets and trousers in the United States, and/or
2) Weave worsted wool fabrics with an average fiber diameter of either 18.5 microns or less, OR that which is greater than 18.5 microns, for making men’s and boy’s suits.
Right now, applications to obtain this reduction are being accepted from “persons,” i.e., firms, corporations, or other legal entities, who either fall under either of the two above categories.
In order to be eligible for this TRQ, an application must be submitted on the form provided at http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/wooltrq/wool_app.htm
and be submitted by 5 pm on October 15, 2013 to the
Office of Textiles and Apparel, Room 30003
U.S. Dept. of Commerce
1401 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC  20230
If you have any problems with the link above, you may also call (202) 482-3400.
Questions/comments?  Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com
Keep up with me:

On Twitter @fashcompliance 
https://twitter.com/fashcompliance

On Facebook 
http://on.fb.me/17Pocfj

On YouTube 
http://bit.ly/12a9lau
 
 

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Corporate Officer of Men’s Suit Importer Avoids Joint Payment of $2,392,307 in U.S. Customs Penalties

On July 30, 2013, in Slip. Op. 11-527, U.S. v. Trek Leather, Inc. and Harish Shadadpuri, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reversed a U.S. Court of International Trade decision to impose penalties on the corporate officer of an “Importer of Record.”



“Trek Leather” (Trek), whose President and sole shareholder is Mr. Shadadpuri, was the Importer of Record for seventy-two (72) entries of men’s suits.  Mr. Shadadpuri is also a 40% shareholder to “Mercantile Electronics,” which was the consignee of these shipments.

Both Trek and Mercantile Electronics provided “assists” (in the form of fabric) to their suit manufacturers and failed to declare their value to US Customs.  Mr. Shadadpuri even admitted that he knew Trek (the Importer of Record) should have included the value of fabric assists in its duties but did not bother to do so.

 US Customs therefore brought a lawsuit claiming that under 19 USC §1592, both Trek and Mr. Shadadpuri, in his personal capacity, were liable for a penalty of $2,393,307 for fraudulently, knowingly, and intentionally understating the dutiable value of the imported men’s suits. 

Since Trek, a corporation, was the Importer of Record, Mr. Shadadpuri argued he could only be personally liable if the government established that he had pierced Trek’s “corporate veil” or established that he had either committed fraud, or aided and abetted Trek’s fraud, making him liable under 19 USC §1592.

 As Trek had conceded during the course of the litigation however, that its activity rose to a level of gross negligence, the government abandoned its fraud claim against Trek and instead proceeded alternatively on a claim of gross negligence.
 
Mr. Shadadpuri in his defense, argued that corporate officers of an Importer of Record are not directly liable for penalties under 19 USC §1592 – and the court agreed. 

 The CAFC’s 1999 decision in United States v. Hitachi America, Ltd., 172 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 1999), held that because one cannot “aid and abet” negligent conduct, Mr. Shadadpuri could not be liable for Trek’s admitted negligence unless the government could prove he was acting as Trek’s alter ego rather than as an officer of the corporation acting in his capacity as such.
 
The CAFC, agreeing with Mr. Shadadpuri, stated that under the basic principles of corporate law, Mr. Shadadpuri could not be personally charged with a claim of negligence for the actions he took on behalf of the corporation.

In CAFC’s own words:
 
“[T]he government [US Customs] has asked us to adopt a broad legal principle that would expose all corporate officers and shareholders to personal liability for negligent acts they undertake on behalf of their corporation.  Absent an explicit statutory basis for doing so, we decline to believe Congress intended to supplant the common law so completely…”

 To read the full decision, click here.
 
Questions/comments?  Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com
 
 
Keep up with me:
On Twitter @fashcompliance  https://twitter.com/fashcompliance
 

Friday, June 21, 2013

Looking to Buy Products Made in the USA?

The Office of Textiles and Apparel at the US International Trade Administration has a handy portal to help sellers find vendors who manufacture products made in the USA.



Specific to the textiles and apparel industries, the portal allows you to search for vendors of children’s wear (including infants), men’s and boy’s, or women’s and girl’s apparel, in addition to accessories and footwear, technical textiles as well as soft furnishings.

You can further search by fabrics, whether of wool, cotton, upholstery, silk and other fabrics.

Whether searching for a cut and sew contractor, input supplier, manufacturer or other type of business, the information you will get back includes an entity’s contact information, whether or not they export, production capacity and production locations.

You can also learn if they have design capabilities, have any special washes or treatments available, certifications offered and many other details.
To go to the Made in USA search portal, click here.

Questions/comments?  Post below or email me at fashioncompliance@gmail.com

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Fashion Compliance Begins Here


FASHION COMPLIANCE

Fashion Compliance begins here too, with certified non-flammable threads that turn into fabrics that are safe to wear and live in. Are you certified?

Questions/comments?  Post below or email me at fashioncompliance@gmail.com


Keep up with me:
On Twitter @fashcompliance  https://twitter.com/fashcompliance

Friday, February 25, 2011

The Complexity of Fabric Classification

I picked up an Emilio Pucci scarf recently and have been enjoying learning about all of the different ways of wearing it. Its size is approximately 3 ft x 3 ft and while I bought it to wear as a cover up on the beach, I’ve been discovering its many variations as a shawl and scarf.

While wearing it the other day in my office, I found myself researching fabric issues and I couldn’t help but think about how appropriate it was given that I was wearing a large (and gorgeous) piece of cloth!

The issue I was looking into had nothing to do with the material of my new accessory but rather that of bonded fabrics and the identification of where nuances arose as between the general rule on bonded fabrics and “pile” fabrics. I was also trying to determine if there were any differences when the fabric was knit versus crocheted.

Finding this answer required an analysis of the Textile Section Notes of the tariff (Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, “HTSUS”) and in particular, Chapters 59, 60 and 61. Let me explain how the tariff is organized.

The tariff is arranged by Section which generally categorizes similar merchandise. It has titles such as “Vegetable Products,” (Section II), “Plastics and Articles Thereof, Rubber and Articles Thereof” (Section VII), and “Footwear, Headgear, Umbrellas, Sun Umbrellas, Walking Sticks, Seatsticks, Whips, Riding-Crops and Parts Thereof; Prepared Feathers and Articles Made Therewith; Artificial Flowers; Articles of Human Hair” (Section XII).

At the beginning of each Section are “Notes” unique to all of those Chapters within the Section. Similarly, in the first part of each Chapter are Notes specific to the tariff provisions within that Chapter, along with Additional U.S. Notes that are unique to imports coming into the United States.
With regards to “Textile and Textile Articles,” the tariff provisions for these types of imports are found in Section XI, Chapters 50 through 63.
Making determinations on fabrics can be tricky due to reasons such as the type of combination of fibers, if such fibers had been brushed or cut during the processing thereby creating a “pile,” if fabric is adhered to another type of fabric, or if fabric has been coated or impregnated with a medium that contains varying percentages of a rubber and plastic combination.

The methodology for the classification of goods under the HTSUS is governed by what are known as the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI). The first GRI provides that classification determinations are made in accordance with the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relevant Section or Chapter Notes.

Coming back to bonded fabrics, Note 2 to HTSUS Chapter 59 (entitled, “Impregnated, coated, covered or laminated textile fabrics; textile articles of a kind suitable for industrial use”) provides a general rule for bonded fabrics, stating that where a knitted or crocheted fabric is coated, impregnated, laminated or covered, then it would be classified in HTSUS Chapter 59.

Despite this general rule however, Note 1(c) to HTSUS Chapter 60 (entitled, “Knitted or crocheted fabrics”) sets forth an exception to this rule where the imported merchandise involves a knit pile fabric that is coated, impregnated, laminated or covered. Under this circumstance, these fabrics are classifiable within Chapter 60, under Heading 6001, and not under Chapter 59.

Moreover, Additional Legal U.S. Note one (1) to HTSUS Chapter 60 provides a specific definition for the term “long pile fabrics.” As defined, these are “fabrics made by inserting fibers from card silver into the loops of the ground fabric during knitting.” In everyday language, this simply means that a certain manufacturing process must have been utilized in order to qualify under this provision.

Needless to say, making classification determinations can sometimes seem like solving a puzzle as multiple Chapters and Notes need to be analyzed before any conclusions can be drawn.

Questions/comments? Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com