Goods of Crimea are of Ukrainian Origin US Customs Reminds Us

The U.S. position on Crimea is clear and this sentiment was echoed throughout the customs community in a country of origin marking message it published on April 23rd that stated that goods originating in Crimea are products of the Ukraine.

This means that for country of origin labeling on any product, including that which is on clothing labels, if it is made in Crimea it is of Ukrainian origin - ONLY.

After reminding us of the law requiring that the English name of the country of origin must be marked, U.S. Customs specifically stated that the:

“Growth, production, or manufacture of a good in Crimea is growth, production, or manufacture of a good in Ukraine.  Goods which are the growth, product, or manufacture of Crimea and other areas of Ukraine should be marked as ‘Product of Ukraine’ or ‘Made in Ukraine’.  If the container of the imported good is marked, it may be marked, ‘Contents made in Ukraine’ or words similar in meaning.”

“So what happens if it’s accidentally marked as “Russia” or some other country?” you may be asking yourself?  Pain (in the wallet).  Or at least, a headache for the importer, as goods not correctly marked will also be subject to additional duties of 10% of the final appraised value unless exported or destroyed under Customs supervision prior to liquidation.

So, referendum of not.  Goods of Crimea are of Ukrainian origin.  Period.

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

Keep up with me at www.fashioncompliance.com or:

On Facebook at www.facebook.com/FashionCompliance

On Twitter @fashcompliance

Contracts and the International Sale of Goods

Between the office and teaching International Business Law at F.I.T., contracts have been a main topic on my mind recently. Just last week in class, I went over a Drawback Contract with my students to set out the pertinent areas of a contract while going over the duty refund concept of drawback.

This week, we are turning to contracts involving the international sale of goods and it reminds me of my law school days at Tulane when I first learned about contracts. The difference however, is that I get to expose my students to the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, which was adopted by a diplomatic conference on April 11, 1980, and is commonly referred to as the “CISG.”

The CISG is an international set of commercial rules established to provide a framework for international sales contracts, that is, to govern commercial relationships between merchants of different countries. The rules are therefore, applicable to those countries who are “Members” that have ratified the CISG under the premise that the development of international trade on the basis of equality and mutual benefit is an important element in promoting friendly relations among States.

The CISG is comprised of 101 Articles, with each Article providing a rule specific to a commercial transaction, such as Article 51 which states “The buyer must pay the price for the goods and take delivery of them as required by the contract and this Convention.”

Pace University’s Law School has the Institute of International Commercial Law and has a wealth of material on the CISG, including the CISG Treaty text and legislative history, cases on the CISG and other scholarly materials.

Unlike the CISG, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), which is our domestic law here in the U.S. that governs commercial transactions, has only 9 “Articles.” Within each Article however, are multiple sections, with each Article governing a particular area, such as Article 3, which deals with “negotiable instruments,” or Article 5, which deals with Letters of Credit.

Of course, for this week’s class, we will be focusing on Article 2 which deals with “Sales” as this is the section you would look to in order to understand how domestic merchants behave in a commercial setting. In fact, just perusing through Article 2, you see how it begins with contract formation and construction – after setting forth some definitions, of course – and then continuing on with the idea of acting in “good faith,” performing under the contract and alas, breach of contract.

It is not surprising that the “Remedy” section of the UCC is so lengthy, after all, it is not uncommon to find that it is not until a dispute arises that parties begin to pay attention to the laws governing their agreement.

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