New Articles

US Government Adds 4 Military-Connected Entities in Burma to Entity List and Sanctions 22 Burmese Individuals

burma

US Government Adds 4 Military-Connected Entities in Burma to Entity List and Sanctions 22 Burmese Individuals

As part of the U.S. Government’s ongoing response to the military coup in Burma (Myanmar), the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) added four entities to the Entity List effective July 6, 2021 and the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) added twenty-two individuals to the Specially Designated Nationals & Blocked Persons List (“SDN List”) effective July 2, 2021.

Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo noted that the four entities include a satellite communications services provider to the Burmese military and three entities that have revenue-sharing agreements with Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited (“MEHL”), an entity that generates revenue for the Burmese military and which was previously added to the Entity List. As a result of the additions, licenses are required for exports, reexports, and in-country transfers of all items “subject to the EAR” to the four entities and BIS will employ a presumption of denial license review policy. The entities are:

-King Royal Technologies Co., Ltd.;

-Myanmar Wanbao Mining Copper, Ltd.;

-Myanmar Yang Tse Copper, Ltd.; and

-Wanbao Mining, Ltd.

The twenty-two individuals added to the SDN List under Executive Order 14014 include two members of the State Administrative Council currently participating in governance of Burma and the Ministers of Information; Investment and Foreign Economic Relations; Labor, Immigration, and Population; and Social Welfare, Relief, and Resettlement. Fifteen of the twenty-two added to the SDN List were added because of being either spouses or adult children of persons on the SDN List.

As a result of the SDN designations, all property and interests in property of these persons in the US or controlled by US persons must be blocked and reported to OFAC. US persons are prohibited from sending or receiving any provision of funds, goods, or services to/from these newly designated SDNs. According to OFAC’s “50% Ownership Rule,” these sanctions also extend to any subsidiaries in which these SDNs directly or indirectly hold, either individually or in the aggregate with other SDNs, an ownership interest of 50% or more.

_______________________________________________________________

Cortney O’Toole Morgan is a Washington D.C.-based partner with the law firm Husch Blackwell LLP. She leads the firm’s International Trade & Supply Chain group.

Grant Leach is an Omaha-based partner with the law firm Husch Blackwell LLP focusing on international trade, export controls, trade sanctions and anti-corruption compliance.

Tony Busch is an attorney in Husch Blackwell LLP’s Washington, D.C. office.

Xinjiang

U.S. Adds Chinese Entities to BIS Entity List and Updates Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory

Earlier this month, the US Government updated its ongoing response to what the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) described as “Beijing’s campaign of repression, mass detention, and high-technology surveillance against Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and members of other Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Regions of China (“XUAR”), where the [People’s Republic of China] continues to commit genocide and crimes against humanity.”

Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) added twenty-four (24) China-based entities to the Entity List on July 12th, thereby prohibiting the export, re-export, or in-country transfer of commodities, software, and technology subject to the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) to those entities without a license. Then, on July 13th, a group of agencies including Commerce, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”), and the Departments of Homeland Security, Labor, State, and Treasury updated its Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory (the “Advisory”) to highlight the increasing legal and reputational risks to companies who maintain supply chains with links to Xinjiang.

BIS specifically linked fourteen (14) of the twenty-four (24) total China-based entity designations to their connection to the ongoing repression of Muslim minority groups in Xinjiang. In addition to companies within China, foreign affiliates of Suzhou Keda Technology Co., Ltd. in the Netherlands, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea, and Turkey, as well as the foreign affiliate of China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology in the United Kingdom, were also targeted.

These worldwide additions confirm the importance of screening both customers and supply chain participants wherever they are located. The July 12 BIS Entity List additions also included thirteen (13)  Entity List designations of companies and persons located in China and Russia as a result of their use of items for military programs or transfer to sanctioned Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) Specially Designated Nationals (“SDNs”). BIS also added one (1) Russian company to the Military End User (“MEU”) list, which restricts the export or reexports of certain items to companies meeting the definition of an MEU.

Besides direct services to prison camps and authorities in Xinjiang, the inter-agency Advisory highlights activities that carry a heightened risk of a nexus to the intrusive surveillance system implemented by China in Xinjiang, which include:

-Venture capital investment in Chinese companies contributing to surveillance in Xinjiang;

-Selling items such as cameras, tracking technology, and biometric devices into China;

-Certain research joint ventures and research partnerships in surveillance-related areas with Chinese firms;

-Exporting, reexporting, or transferring (in-country) EAR-regulated items to companies on the Entity List;

-Trading in the securities of certain Chinese firms listed on the Non-Specially Designated Nationals Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List (“NS-CMIC List”).

The Advisory puts the industry on notice that rigorous due diligence is necessary to mitigate risks in the areas of anti-money laundering (“AML”), potential surveillance assistance, forced labor use by customers or supply chain participants, and the provision of construction materials to Xinjiang authorities, and that the US government will use all agencies, laws, and federal contract clauses available to it to hold companies accountable. The European Union also released its own “Guidance on Due Diligence for EU Businesses to Address the Risk of Forced Labour in Their Operations and Supply Chains” on July 12th.

________________________________________________________________

Cortney O’Toole Morgan is a Washington D.C.-based partner with the law firm Husch Blackwell LLP. She leads the firm’s International Trade & Supply Chain group.

Grant Leach is an Omaha-based partner with the law firm Husch Blackwell LLP focusing on international trade, export controls, trade sanctions and anti-corruption compliance.

Tony Busch is an attorney in Husch Blackwell LLP’s Washington, D.C. office.

third party sellers

Protecting Your Brand from Third-Party Sellers and Retail Arbitrage

From its humble origins as an online bookseller, Amazon has already ridden the rise of e-commerce. According to new research, though, it’s on track to overtake Walmart as the largest retailer in the US by 2025. By then, Amazon will also account for nearly two-thirds of the estimated $1 trillion in online consumer goods sales.

For consumers, it makes sense: with one-click ordering, access to products from over 8 million sellers, fast shipping, and (often) the best price, buying on Amazon is an easy choice.

It’s not as easy for sellers, though. Yes, Amazon opens the door to millions of additional buyers, but it controls the marketplace and introduces new competitive pressure. It’s important to protect your brand on Amazon, especially from third-party sellers that can undercut your sales or damage your brand loyalty. There’s more, though: retail arbitrage is an ecommerce business model that’s growing rapidly, and it’s important to understand it and protect your brand against it. Put simply, retail arbitrage is when people buy retail products (online or in person) and resell them on Amazon and other online marketplaces for a higher profit. It’s happening all the time, to brands that are sold regularly on Amazon as well as those that are restricted—which means that they’re not to be sold on Amazon.

Because third-party sellers and retail arbitrage are widespread, you must have visibility into your product and brand portfolio. This is where the performance analytics Line Item can be essential for monitoring your e-analytics to protect your portfolio. Let’s look at why.

Amazon third-party sellers
Third-party sellers are growth drivers within a rapidly growing market. In fact, according to research from Planet Retail RNG, third-party sellers on Amazon already account for more than half of all sales—and by 2022 will account for as much as $130 billion of total gross merchandise value on the platform. This means they are a force you can’t ignore—and more sellers open accounts every day.

Before looking further at the risks, let’s define terms. First-party sellers are brand manufacturers that sell their inventory directly to Amazon. Amazon then sells to customers. Second-party sellers are Amazon suppliers that are not the product’s manufacturer; Amazon often relies on second-party sellers to buffer inventory. Third-party sellers strategically use Amazon as a marketplace for direct-to-consumer sales.

Amazon buyers may be indifferent about purchasing from these different types of sellers. But brand manufacturers are not. Think of it this way: every third-party sale of your products is a sale you lost out on. And these sales are only projected to grow. Why? It’s become very easy to resell on Amazon. All you need is an Amazon Seller account and products to sell. To make it even easier to net a profit, there are price-tracking apps that give resellers real-time info simply by scanning or entering product codes.

Third-party seller risks to your brand
Third-party sellers can cost your brand, so monitoring and acting on any activity is critical. The risks include:

-Unauthorized sales

-Price undercuts

-Losing the buy box

-Lower search results, ranks, and conversions

-Losing control of your curated detail page because of Amazon Fulfillment Center out-of-stocks

-Quality problems with selling condition

-Erosion of brand equity and consumer loyalty

Restricted brands
Amazon tries to control counterfeiting through restricting certain brands or even certain products on Amazon. But third-party sellers have found many ways around this, so even if your brand or product is restricted on Amazon, that doesn’t mean it isn’t being sold.

What brands can do about third-party activity
CPG and e-commerce brands must understand the scope of any third-party sales on Amazon and other platforms. To tightly control the supply chain, you must evaluate:

-How many resellers will your brand authorize, who are they, and on what retail sites are they selling

-Whether authorized resellers are upholding your brand, including product quality, customer service, and pricing

-If customer reviews are trending negatively, including unaddressed customer service needs that may ultimately damage consumer confidence—and your brand.

Line Item can help by identifying third-party activity as well as verifying pricing, including list price, selling price, and price undercutting. Let’s look at how Line Item can help when it comes to third-party activity on Amazon.

Line Item can help you identify new, unauthorized third-party activity on Amazon.

Line Item can track e-analytics related to item pricing, helping you understand if your products are under- or overpriced, or when a third-party seller undercuts your price.

Line Item captures e-analytics including e-tailer, review score and count, selling price and more, so you can gain visibility via a single platform into every aspect of your online sales.

Line Item can identify if your reviews are letting you down, giving you insight that can help you address brand loyalty and consumer confidence for online sales.

Line Item can tell you if out-of-stocks are hurting your revenue, helping you track inventory to retain greater control over your sales, curated detail page, and more.

With Amazon on track to take over as king of global retail, now is the time to put the right safeguards for your brand in place. It’s not just about Amazon sales; with Amazon a major driver of online sales beyond the platform, it’s about ensuring your brand viability and sales across all online channels. This is where Line Item can be a game-changer for your Amazon and online sales, helping you protect your brand from third-party seller risks and giving you e-analytics insight to grow your loyalty alongside your sales.

______________________________________________________________________

Ironbridge Software was founded in 1989 by Mike Dickenson. Mike’s unparalleled expertise and passion for technology led him to create the first-ever analytical solution for the Consumer Packaged Goods Industry

food supply

Using Technology to Improve Food Supply Chain Visibility

As they address the issues of 2020 and try to avoid repeating the same mistakes, food and beverage companies embrace more technology to help them gain higher levels of supply chain visibility. Here is how.

 

Supply chain visibility has become a hot button for corporate leaders as a result of the pandemic, which left many companies reassessing how they obtain, share, and disseminate data with their trading partners. According to PwC, visibility enables companies to know at any given time where a product is in the supply chain.

 

“This enhances decision making agility for production and distribution decisions,” PwC points out. “Food supply chain visibility is increasingly a standard expectation for consumers, especially with an emerging middle class.”

 

A Bigger Spotlight on Visibility

 

Where stockouts of critical supplies early in the pandemic—plus ongoing supply shortages—forced companies to pay more attention to this aspect of their operations in 2020, the food supply chain has always been held to a higher level of scrutiny. Pre-COVID, for example, food and beverage companies were already strengthening efforts around “farm to fork” traceability while complying with new government regulations in this area.

 

This was partly driven by the introduction of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which in 2011 shifted the focus from “responding” to foodborne illness to “preventing” it. When it became a law, FSMA expanded the responsibility of ensuring the safety of the food supply to many different points in the global supply chain (for both human and animal food). Last year, pandemic-related challenges pushed the food industry even further down the road to securing high levels of supply chain visibility across manufacturers, farmers, distributors, restaurants, and grocers.

 

These new obstacles pushed companies to rethink their approaches to supply chain visibility, traceability, and transparency. Where in the past the most popular reaction was to increase inventory levels, this approach consumes working capital, requires extra physical space, and often leaves food companies “holding the bag” on inventory that’s perishable or in danger of expiring. Instead, companies are choosing to implement supply chain solutions such a WMS, MES and TMS that ensure a real time visibility on all inventory and advanced traceability capabilities to pinpoint the origins of a given ingredient quickly and efficiently.

 

Supply Chain, Disrupted

 

In Food Processing, Robert Swientek explains how the COVID-19 pandemic triggered panic buying and food hoarding that subsequently disrupted the world’s food supply chains. This exposed defects in the industry, leaving some store shelves empty right at a time when an oversupply of food animals crowded farms. Concurrently, goods that would normally be distributed to restaurants had no place to go due to mandatory shutdowns.

 

“The food supply chain is one of the most critical supply chains in any economy,” Adroit North America’s Richard Sides told Food Processing. “Other events have shaken the food supply chain, like tariffs and foodborne outbreaks, but COVID-19 had a greater impact because it affected the entire process—from the field to the consumer.”

 

According to Swientek, the nuts and bolts of productive supply chains can be found at the organizational level and in manufacturing plants. “Gaining a better understanding and grasp of your production capabilities, processes and data platforms, demand forecasting, procurement and sourcing and inventory management,” he writes, “can help you optimize your upstream supply chains.”

 

Now, more companies are turning to supply chain software and platforms that enable end-to-end visibility. “The pandemic has brought a renewed focus for manufacturers in making sure they are becoming more transparent and agile within their supply chain processes,” Niels Anderson writes in Food Safety Tech.

 

“They are realizing thanks to this disruption that suppliers can’t always deliver and a backup plan is crucial to keep things moving,” Anderson continues. “One option is to implement technology that helps track visibility and transparency to better assess what is needed and to offer alternative suppliers. Having supply chain transparency requires companies to know what is happening upstream in the supply chain and communicate this knowledge both internally and externally.”

 

Managing Costs and Identifying New Solutions

 

Supply chain visibility is about more than just understanding where raw materials and finished goods are at any point in the global supply chain. It’s also about becoming more efficient and profitable. In How Supply Chain Visibility Helps Restaurants Improve Their Business, CH Robinson points to supply chain visibility as being key to managing costs and identifying solutions in the food sector.

 

“While it has always been important, visibility is now an essential element of successful supply chains,” the transportation provider writes. “Insight to shipment status is only one aspect of true supply chain visibility. Complex supply chains often combine costs, which can impede clear understanding when changes to costs do occur.”

 

The transportation provider also says that the foodservice industry needs “connected” supply chains. “Simply managing the supply chain isn’t enough in today’s market,” CH Robinson adds. “As the foodservice industry continues to evolve for the future, it’s critical that the supply chain is viewed as a roadmap. Continuous improvement and ongoing supply chain optimization strategies will continue to differentiate acceptable foodservice companies from superior ones.”

 

Generix Group North America provides a series of solutions within our Supply Chain Hub product suite to create efficiencies across an entire supply chain. Our solutions are in use around the world and our experience is second-to-none. We invite you to contact us to learn more.

carbon fiber industry

Demand for Lightweight Vehicles to Foster Automotive Applications of Carbon Fiber

Carbon fiber is well known for its exceptional properties, such as low thermal expansion, high-temperature tolerance, high chemical resistance, low weight to high strength ratio, high tensile strength, and high stiffness. These properties make them a highly popular material in many applications in civil engineering, sports equipment, military, motorsports, and others. Carbon fiber-based components witness robust demand from aerospace, automotive, wind energy, and other end-use industries.

In aerospace and automotive industries, there is a growing emphasis on utilizing lightweight, durable, flexible, materials, such as carbon fiber, to enhance the performance and efficiency of automobiles and aircraft and aid in achieving the emission standards set by various authorities. Owing to this, the materials are quickly replacing aluminum and steel. The global carbon fiber market size is forecast to witness notable growth over the coming years.

Demand in automotive and aerospace applications

The carbon fiber industry share from automotive applications is predicted to expand significantly in the upcoming years. In vehicles, carbon fibers, due to lightweight, high thermal stability and electrical conductivity, are used in various important components, such as disk brakes, wheels, automobile hoods, and others.

Soaring carbon fiber consumption is expected due to the increasing production of cars to cater to strong consumer demand. According to the International Organization for Motor Vehicle Manufacturers, the global production of commercial vehicles and cars was combinedly around 91.78 million in 2019.

From aerospace applications, the carbon fiber industry share is slated to witness considerable growth by 2027. The superior physical strength, low coefficient of thermal expansion, high dimensional stability, and low abrasion characteristics of carbon fibers complement their applications in aerospace antennas, aircraft brakes, and support structures. Recent research and development in the manufacturing process of carbon fiber composites for aerospace applications are likely to boost its consumption in the sector.

For instance, researchers at the University of Sydney have recently developed an upgraded method for recycling carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites, that retain 90% of their original strength and allow their re-utilization in modern commercial airframes.

Flourishing clean energy projects in North America

North America is slated to register a considerable share of the global carbon fiber industry by 2027. The booming wind energy sector in the region is generating strong demand for carbon fiber composites for their use in wind blades. The exceptional fatigue and corrosion resistance property of carbon composites enhance the longevity of wind blades.

Wind energy is one of the major sources of electricity generation in the United States. For instance, approximately 337.5 terawatt-hours of electricity were produced by wind power between January and December 2020, which is equal to nearly 8.42% of all generated electricity in the U.S. Growing adoption of clean energy technologies to reduce emission should positively impact carbon fiber market share across various sectors in the region.

Leading manufacturers of carbon fiber composites are Zoltek, Formosa Plastics Corp, Hexcel Corporation, Toho Tenax (Teijin), SGL Carbon SE, Mitsubishi Rayon Co. Ltd., and Toray Industries. These prominent companies are focusing on R&D activities and leveraging advanced technologies to develop new procedures for carbon fiber manufacturing to reduce costs.

Carbon fibers are a multipurpose material, which has widespread applications across various sectors. Some of its other applications include the fabrication of carbon-fiber microelectrodes, textiles, and flexible heating.

supply chain

Navigating the 12 Pitfalls of the Global Supply Chain

With over 30+ years of international trade experience, I have witnessed numerous and repeated errors made by Sales, Purchasing, Logistics Managers, Supply Chain, and International Business Executives.

There are tremendous opportunities and benefits to be derived through global sourcing and foreign business development. Along with these opportunities are considerable challenges, obstacles, and pitfalls. In order to succeed in international business, management must mitigate these concerns through gaining knowledge and implementing processes and controls over import and export operations, including the development of robust training for all personnel.

The following section contains twelve steps companies can take to manage the solutions that will allow the navigation through these challenges and delivering success to the international operation.

These twelve steps create a pathway forward in a concise, straightforward methodology and time-tested process to ensure management accomplishes their desired corporate goals of profits, growth, and sustainability.

Avoid the following:

Step 1: “We have no personal liability”.

There is significant personal liability for individuals who operate in global supply chains.

U.S. Government enforcement agencies, such as but not limited to:

– Department of Justice

– Customs and Border Protection

– Departments of State, Commerce and Treasury

– Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

– United States Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration

All above are a few of the agencies that will prosecute both organizations and individuals who are seriously out of trade compliance with their import and export regulatory responsibilities.

While criminal prosecution is a rare occurrence … it does happen every day in the supply chain, somewhere in the world of international trade.

Trade Compliance Management in companies with an international footprint is a necessary evil that needs to be managed and integrated into the fabric of the organization’s culture and business model.

Step 2: “The FOB Term is Always a Safe Incoterm to Utilize”.

The FOB Incoterm has three deadly areas of concern:

-It is used in domestic trade

-It is a gray area in the loading process

-There can be ambiguity when the point in time responsibility and liability shift from the seller to the buyer (exporter to importer).

It is used in domestic trade

For domestic trade in the United States, the UCCP (Uniform Commercial Code of Practice) currently (though in contention) utilizes the FOB term as a “term of sale or purchase”, where there are two primary options FOB Origin and FOB Destination.

Within the UCCP, FOB is defined as:

Uniform Commercial CodeU.C.C. – ARTICLE 2 – SALES (2002)PART 3. GENERAL OBLIGATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT

2-319. F.O.B. and F.A.S. Terms.

Unless otherwise agreed the term F.O.B. (which means “free on board”) at a named place, even though used only in connection with the stated price, is a delivery term under which:

(a) when the term is F.O.B. the place of shipment, the seller must at that place ship the goods in the manner provided in this Article (Section 2-504) and bear the expense and risk of putting them into the possession of the carrier; or

(b) when the term is F.O.B. the place of destination, the seller must at his own expense and risk transport the goods to that place and their tender delivery of them in the manner provided in this Article (Section 2-503);

(c) when under either (a) or (b) the term is also F.O.B. vessel, car, or another vehicle, the seller must in addition at his own expense and risk load the goods on board. If the term is F.O.B. vessel the buyer must name the vessel and in an appropriate case, the seller must comply with the provisions of this Article on the form of a bill of lading (Section 2-323).

The UCCP Term allows any mode of transit or conveyance.

Some sources claim that FOB stands for “Freight on Board”. This is not the case. “Freight On Board” is not mentioned in any version of Incoterms, and is not defined by the Uniform Commercial Code in the USA.[10] Further to that, it has been found in court that “Freight On Board” is not a recognized industry term.[11] The use of “Freight on Board” in contracts is therefore very likely to cause confusion. The correct term is “free onboard”.

Keep in mind that a huge amount, if not a clear majority of domestic commercial transactions, are sold or purchased on a FOB basis and moved by truck, rail, or air. This would be ok if the FOB Term was the UCCP intent and not intended utilization under Incoterms 2020.

There is a very clear line of confusion between the domestic and international “FOB” terms in selling and purchasing. It is only when it causes a problem when it is seen as an issue.

Free on Board, or FOB is an Incoterm, which means the seller is responsible for loading the purchased cargo onto the ship, and all costs associated with same. At the point, the goods are safely onboard the vessel, the risk transfers to the buyer, who assumes the responsibility of the remainder of the transport.

FOB is the most common agreement between an international buyer and seller when shipping cargo via sea. This Incoterm only applies to sea and inland waterway shipments.

The 2020 edition of Incoterms opened the door for domestic utilization of the FOB term. The FOB UCCP term varies greatly from the FOB Incoterm.

Under Incoterms 2020, the preferred term for domestic utilization, since that door was opened, is FCA (Free Carrier At).

It is a gray area in the loading process

Under Incoterms 2000 and prior, the FOB term transferred risk and cost from the seller to the buyer once the goods passed the ship’s rail.

This factor was changed in the 2010 edition of Incoterms and continues in the 2020 edition. The term now read “…passes when the goods are on board the vessel”.

However, “on board” is not clearly defined. Is that when the goods are placed on the deck, in the hold, not yet secured, secured, etc.?

We had a case in our office, where a U.S. exporter, sold a huge piece of equipment, (25 Tons, $11m in value) to a customer in Europe. It was going to be shipped via ocean, secured in a cargo hold under deck.

During the loading process, the goods were being lifted onto the vessel by a crane and longshoreman crew. In the handling, the equipment was laid down on the deck of the hold several times, while the longshoreman positioned the cargo.

In that repositioning process, the freight was damaged. The issue now became who is responsible, based upon the Incoterm of FOB Port Elizabeth – the seller or the buyer?

Were the goods actually “on board” when they were damaged? The maritime judicial system will eventually resolve that issue and court precedence will be established.

But today there is an ambiguity in defining “on board” in the FOB Incoterm. There are references to being “secured in place”, but it appears ambiguous.

Sellers and buyers need to address these specific concerns in the contract of sale and attempt to minimize the gray areas of liability, that may present themselves when using the FOB term.

There can be ambiguity when the point in time responsibility and liability shift from the seller to the buyer (exporter to importer).

This is the explanation of the FOB term from the Incoterms 2020 edition.

A2 (Delivery)

The seller delivers by placing the goods on board the vessel nominated or provided by the buyer on the agreed date, or within the agreed period as notified by the buyer, or if there is no such time notified then at the end of that period.

There is still a belief that the ship’s rail is the defining point, i.e.: before the notional vertical line above the rail is the seller’s cost and risk, and after is the buyer’s cost and risk. A court ruled that the delivery point was when the goods were on the deck but that then caused the question was the notional vertical line replaced with a notional horizontal one in line with the deck itself and what if the goods were being placed below deck? This ship’s rail concept was removed in the Incoterms® 2010 version. Typically, then, “on board” is taken to mean when the goods are safely on the deck or in the hold. If the cargo needs to be then further secured for transportation such as being lashed or separated with some material or spread evenly throughout the hold for bulk goods like grain the seller and buyer should agree in their contract what is needed and at whose cost and risk this is done.

B2 (Delivery)

The buyer’s obligation is to take delivery when the goods have been delivered as described in A2.

FOB A3 / B3: Transfer of Risk

A3 (Transfer of risk)

In all the rules the seller bears all risks of loss or damage to the goods until they have been delivered in accordance with A2 described above. The exception is loss or damage in circumstances described in B3 below, which varies depending on the buyer’s role in B2

B3 (Transfer of risk)

The buyer bears all risks of loss or damage to the goods once the seller has delivered them as described in A2.

If the buyer fails to inform the seller of where and when the vessel will be presented or if the vessel fails to arrive on time, or it fails to take the goods so that the seller cannot deliver, then the buyer bears the risk of loss or damage to the goods from the agreed date or at the end of the agreed period.

On an operational level, the seller delivered the goods to the terminal, carrier, or other agreed named place, and the goods were not loaded on board as anticipated for an array of reasons, such as but not limited to the carriers having vessel timing or loading issues and the seller appropriately notified the buyer than delivery has been made and risk of loss and damage has passed from the seller to the buyer.

The important aspect to note here is that the buyer expected to take delivery “on board” and now that did not occur as the buyer will take delivery and assume all risks at a point short of “on board”.

In general, Incoterms need to be understood in their entirety including the consequences associated with using the incorrect Incoterm or not understanding the specific responsibilities as the buyer or seller. Incoterms training is a must for all personnel engaged in global trade and more particularly those operating in Procurement, Sales, Operations, Finance, and Customer Service.

Companies involved in international trade using best practices will switch Incoterms 2020 rules in quotations, purchase orders, contracts, commercial invoices, and other commercial documentation when determining the level of responsibilities and costs they want to take on; dividing the responsibilities for risk transfer, costs, and responsibility for carrier selection between the buyer and the seller.

Step 3: Contracts Override Relationships

In international trade, relationships trump contracts. Relationships will drive a successful deal and a long tenure. I have always extolled “you can contract out risk”, but you can seriously minimize and mitigate risk by establishing favored relationships that allow the best opportunity for problem resolution and working out issues that will likely occur over time and trade.

Contracts are important to make the deal have legal standing, but it is foolish to believe that the contract eliminates any risk in the transaction. In fact, sometimes contracts can cause risk when a false sense of security is at hand.

Obtaining legal support is prudent but spending money and time at building relationships with suppliers, vendors, agents, and customers will go a long way in mitigating many of the risks in global trade.

Step 4: Service Providers are Experts in all Aspects of the Global Supply Chain

Just not so! While a small percentage of service providers are clearly experts, professionals, and aligned with teams of knowledgeable staff the majority have serious limitations.

While many have the expertise to arrange affreightment, pick up and delivery many lacks:

-the necessary local connections in all foreign markets

-trade compliance knowledge

-an understanding of how best to eliminate risk and cost from the supply chain

A high degree of scrutiny, vetting, and discerning should take place when choosing service providers, 3PL’s, freight forwarders, and customhouse brokers.

Areas of evaluation:

Service providers can be very valued partners in your global supply chain. Just because they hang out a shingle does not mean they can provide real benefit. Scrutinize robustly and vet diligently. It will pay off in the long run. Having a quality partner will make your job easier and with a greater ability to meet all the challenges successfully.

Step 5: Manage the Supply Chain with Robust Technology

Supply chains that have expansive technology in every aspect of the operation will gain great leverage in performance metrics.

Areas of technology in the supply chain are:

Technology creates efficiency, ease of operations, robust information flow, security, and other benefits. It allows for the highest levels of performance in any organization, but more particularly in the global supply chain. Technology advances forward and expands every day. Keeping contemporary is a challenge that all supply chain executives face.

Cyber Security has grown to be a significant threat. It must be contemplated and managed in every moment and keystroke of the day. There are cybersecurity solutions that must be integrated into all aspects of operation, where there is a technology interface.

Step 6: We have been doing it this way … for over 5 years with no problems.

We hear this often and clearly because a company has not encountered a specific problem, does not necessarily mean things are being done correctly.

A volcano is not a problem until it erupts. The underlying problem is waiting for emergence. Dealing with potential issues proactively and anticipating “what ifs” are a much better option.

Potential problems along with potential betterments must be proactively pursued to assure you do not have serious issues and are doing all possible to reduce risk and cost and/or business process improvements.

Continually updating a logistic SWOT Analysis, risk management assessments and process evaluations are all necessary steps in mitigating any unanticipated problems in the future.

Because no one is complaining does not mean everything is ok. You must be proactive in making sure everything is ok, without assumptions. Err to the side of conservativism as it will prevent future headaches.

The pandemic was a complete disaster and disruption to all global supply chains. Having said that, some good came out of it as companies had time for internal introspection at risk and threats leading to proactive steps in mitigation.

Step 7: We Handed it to the Carrier, so it must be “on board”

Tracking and tracing need to be accomplished at a very detailed and exhaustive level.

Just because you have confirmation that a carrier has received freight, does not assure it made it on board the vessel, aircraft, railcar or truck.

You need affirmation that in fact the goods have actually made it on board the conveyance with an updated ETA, followed up with daily frequency, in case of any unanticipated delays, which occur all the time.

Step 8: We Always Check the Denied Parties List

Many international executives believe their companies are consistently checking and reviewed the various lists making up the “Denied Party Screening” regulations for importers and exporters.

In many years of auditing companies engaged in global trade, only a small percentage is fully compliant with the review, checking and compliance responsibilities associated with Denied Party Screening.

There are available direct connections into the government agencies and numerous third-party technology companies with DPL Screening Capabilities.

Step 9: I am the Ultimate Consignee on these Goods, but not the Importer of Record.

Many companies who are the recipients of imported merchandise who are not participative in the import process believe they have no import responsibilities.

That is potentially and totally incorrect! Customs (CBP) has the right to evaluate any import situation and determine that the ultimate consignee could be considered the “importer of record” and therefore has all the responsibilities as the importer of record”. This would then require adherence to all import regulations HTSUS, valuation, recordkeeping, etc.

Step 10: Domestic Packing will work for my International Shipments

Claims for loss and damage on international shipments occur every day and a major cause is inadequate packing, marking and labeling.

Just check with any marine insurance companies they will advise of the frequency and the severity of claims occurring on import and export shipments directly attributed to inadequate packing marking and labeling which could jeopardize marine cargo insurance coverage as an implicit or explicit warranty.

Step 11: Do we really need to ensure the shipment?

Loss and damage to international freight is a daily occurrence worldwide. In the overall cost of the global supply chain, marine insurance is an inexpensive purchase offering a high value of the return.

Just looked at what happened this year in the Suez Canal, with the grounding of the Ever Given (Evergreen Lines) which potentially caused losses in excess of $ 1billion.

Direct claims in delays and damage and indirectly caused by a General Average Claim. The fines, penalties, delays and lost cargo is still mounting, as only in early July, has the vessel finally exited the Suez Canal.

Marine cargo insurance is a solid, responsible, value-driven, and best practice purchase for any company shipping goods internationally.

“All Risk”, “Warehouse to Warehouse” with contemporary customized underwriting terms under standard policies are available.

Step 12: Do I need to train my global supply chain team?

The challenges of the global supply chain are numerous and daunting. These challenges can only be met by experienced well-trained managers and staff. The training needs to be consistent, contemporary and robust. Key areas to include are:

-Compliance

-Documentation

-Negotiating Freight

-Sourcing Management

-Logistics Management

-Technology Management

-Warehousing & Distribution

-International Contracts

-Risk and Spend Directives

-Foreign Trade Zones

These outlined above show a handful of the necessary skill sets required for import and export personnel to master. And “training” is the pathway to successful global supply chain management.

Summary:

The twelve examples outlined above provide a synopsis and evidence that mistakes based upon a lack of knowledge and skillsets can cause great disruption in import and export activity in the global supply chain.

Developing resources, providing training, and implementing procedures will assist in mitigating the problems and challenges identified in the above article.

Resources in international business and supply chain management will provide informed intelligence that will allow for making better decisions.

Training and skill set development will better prepare supply chain, import & export executives, managers, and staff to better deal successfully with all the challenges of global trade.

Procedures, protocols, and disciplines in management are always critical to a company’s success in business. In the global supply chain, SOPs are an integral component of freight, logistics, trade compliance, foreign sales, and overseas procurement that assure a company’s success in its international footprint.

The author can be reached at: tomcook@bluetigerintl.com for questions and comments.

climate change

Climate Change Plans and the Impact on Global Trade

Changes in our planet’s climate are the most significant threat to almost any business. Climate change directly affects companies’ costs, as eco norms require many firms to look for environmentally friendly materials and processes.

The resilience of companies to new climate changes depends on a risk management process, a ready-made business plan, and a laid-out governance structure. Alas, many companies don’t have access to relevant climate information, so they don’t plan for or mitigate physical risk.

Facilities, supply chains, working networks, customers, and markets are the first targets that suffer from physical climate risk. For example, supply chains “break down” when natural disasters are affected by a rapidly changing climate.

How does climate affect production?

Climate change significantly increases the price of any production, reducing the speed with which supplies can be delivered. The quality of the goods and services produced also suffers.

Also, production and deliveries are entirely “broken” in timing due to minor delays in components and goods. Companies need to best manage the uncertainty associated with possible significant disruptions occurring in supply chains.

Assessing supply chain risks

Many companies are accustomed to assessing their supply chains from factors related to policy, regulatory, market, and technological nuances. Any unforeseen change in any of these areas puts the supply chain at significant risk, threatening companies’ ability to operate.

Weather is similarly considered in short- and medium-term supply chains. This data helps companies search for other suppliers and enter new financial markets. Proactive forecasting activities allow for short-term changes in supply chain decisions. Alas, this activity is considered inefficient, ad hoc, and short-sighted.

Annual adjustments with supply chain investments that lack long-term understandings of weather and climate trends will become highly problematic. This approach should be bypassed these days. Companies better start understanding the medium- and long-term physical risks in the climate environment.

Instead of planning a year, companies would do well to look a couple of years ahead and invest in those sources at the least risk from the climate.

Decarbonizing Supply Chains

While supply chain decarbonization processes are complex, many firms can capitalize on multiple climate issues by implementing such methods.

Companies in sectors that are most user-driven have higher per-chain emissions than direct emissions. By encouraging suppliers to create zero-emission supply chains, companies can increase their climate footprint to ensure that emissions in the sectors where the situation is most problematic are reduced to accelerate steps to combat climate change.

It’s no secret to world leaders that decarbonizing supply chains look very difficult in practice. Even the leading companies have difficulty with the necessary data and setting goals and standards that their suppliers adhere to.

Involving the entire (fragmented) supplier landscape can be an almost impossible task. The situation looks complicated if the emissions are at the beginning of the chain and collective action is needed to eliminate them.

More than half of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions come from food, construction, clothing, consumer goods, electronics, automotive, trucking, and more. Indirectly, the share is often controlled by a few companies. End-consumer spending will not be able to increase spending in supply chains with zero.

Remarkably, about 40% of each of these supply chain emissions can be reduced by taking advantage of cyclicality, efficiency, and renewable energy sources that will have minimal impact on the price of all products. With zero emissions in the supply chain at the end-user, costs would increase to a maximum of 4%.

Supply chain decarbonization problems are solvable with many steps for each company:

-Create a comprehensive baseline emissions plan that will be gradually filled with actual supplier information;

-Setting ambitious with comprehensive emission reduction goals;

-A complete review of product design options;

-Revision of geographic supply strategy;

-Setting ambitious purchasing standards;

-Working together with suppliers to co-finance emission reduction levers;

-Working together with peers to agree on sectoral goals that increase impact with leveling the playing field;

-Leveraging economies of scale by increasing demand to lower the price of green solutions;

-Developing internal governance mechanisms where emission reduction will be a guiding mechanism.

Preparing supply chains for climate change

Supply chain management needs to be directed toward preparing for the unknown to ensure greater competitiveness and relevance in an ever-changing industrial landscape.

Many companies are now implementing solutions that address the industry’s role in mitigating supply chain risks due to climate change.

There are ways to protect supply chains from physical climate risk. Since most of the population lives near the coast, there is a risk that sea levels will rise, there will be more storms, flooding, and hurricanes, which only exacerbates the growing dangers.

Buying/building a property in a coastal area that lacks coastal flood risk mitigation infrastructure will not be the best idea to implement.

The electric commerce industry uses more materials in packaging that are suitable for recycling or biodegradability – an encouraging sign that consumers are concerned about climate change.

As the dialogue on climate change occurs among consumers and businesses, it is becoming increasingly clear that addressing climate change is already necessary.

Smart contracts and Global Trade: future effect on climate change plans

In recent times, bitcoin and the rest of the blockchain network have triggered the sustainable development of many industries in Global Trade. Smart contracts that run on blockchain will provide the world with just the right new ways to combat climate change and its effects.

However, many companies have missed the potential of smart contracts that are fully trackable, transparent, and irreversible in self-executing contracts that only work on blockchain to combat climate change.

It is no secret that blockchain companies are in no way affected by what happens in the environment. For example, day trading altcoins consistently break records among enticed traders. Smart contracts can help create globally accessible and automated reward systems that directly reward companies for engaging in sustainable practices (regenerative agriculture, carbon offsets, and so on).

The fight against climate change needs a more considerable change in habitual global consumption, and smart contracts could be just the right tool to encourage participation in areas of global “green” direction.

supply chain

Supply Chain Executives Implementing Warehouse Visibility Solutions

The last 18 months have truly tested the supply chain. Between a global pandemic, shipping bottlenecks, and surprising inclement weather, the impacts were felt across various industries. There’s still a shortage of microchips and other consumer goods due to the events of 2020, even as we move on from many pandemic-era consumer needs with items like sporting goods and furniture. Weather, gas line disruptions, and cyber-attacks are now affecting the production of new items, from plastics to chicken wings and meat supplies, and even cheese. Whether it’s the result of a singular event or that of multiple mini disruptors, the supply chain has been struggling to keep up with demand, which makes disruption the new normal. 

Even as experts attempt to navigate ongoing disruption, many supply chains today still have some components or areas that remain disconnected, which ultimately hinders the ability of all businesses involved (from the DC to the 3PL) to understand operations completely. To stay competitive, modern supply chain managing experts are focusing on better visibility and their use of data inside the warehouse, looking to provide better continuous improvement options to their teams as products go in and out of the warehouse – managing disruption before it becomes a transportation issue. Companies that have remained competitive during the last 18 months are turning to warehouse visibility to provide warehouse operators with valuable insights needed to turn analytics data into real-time, actionable process improvements. 

Many leading supply chain experts have found that continuous improvement processes need just that – their own continuous improvement. To that point, a recent industry survey revealed where inefficiencies are taking place within the warehouse, and where a lack of real-time, easy-to-use analytics data is still preventing operators from making integral, real-time decisions.  

Survey Results for Improved Insights 

In March 2021, Merit Mile commissioned an online survey that was presented to approximately 2,500 supply chain and warehouse executives. The survey revealed that over 75% of executives are seeing an increase in efficiency from implementing warehouse visibility technologies, with a quarter seeing between a 10% – 15% increase, and more than half seeing between a 5% – 10% increase.  

In addition, a third said they’re seeing a 10% – 15% increase in operational savings and another half said they’re experiencing a 5% – 10% operational cost savings as a result of warehouse visibility technologies that were implemented.  

Finally, nearly 70% of organizations said they need better visibility into the procurement functions of their warehouse, followed by production and labor (65%), and fulfillment (37%).   

Supply chain systems globally are feeling pressure of various types, with everything from constrained transportation systems, labor workforce challenges and supplier material shortages. What this survey shows is that thousands of supply chain executives realize that the warehouse is central to the entire supply chain operation. Incorporating better visibility regarding what data means to their operation will enable quicker decisions in real-time.  

Transitioning to New Supply Chain Strategies  

Using the data gathered, warehouse executives can now view what they need to implement and improve in order to create the best visibility for warehouse operators. With it now being made clear that almost all supply chain systems need a makeover, most companies have already begun transitioning to new and improved strategies.   

Over the next 12 – 24 months, 72% of businesses said they will be focused on aligning traditional supply chain strategies with both digital and analytics solutions. Sixty-four percent said they’ll be focused on defining an advanced supply chain systems strategy. Another 34% said their focus will be on executions and refinement of newly installed systems and solutions.  

Half of all companies polled said they plan to implement warehouse visibility technologies over the next 12 months. A third of those companies polled said they will be considering the implementation of such systems. These steps are just the first of many to come in order to perfect the supply chain systems and reduce the visibility issues of the supply chain.  

_______________________________________________________________

Sarah Caro has nearly 15 years of experience in the public relations industry working preliminarily in the agency setting. Her expertise lies in the B2B realm, garnering client media placements in top-tier outlets including Forbes, The New York Times and Bloomberg, in addition to top industry-specific outlets. To date, she has worked within the mining and manufacturing, supply chain, automotive, healthcare, technology and non-profit sectors. As Senior Account Executive for Merit Mile, Sarah regularly gets client stories into the hands of the media, making them the go-to source for news stories.   

Enterprise Networking

Enterprise Networking Market: Top Trends Reinforcing the Industry Forecast through 2024

According to a recent study from market research firm Graphical Research, the global enterprise networking market size is poised to expand at a substantial CAGR during the forecast period. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has been shaping the field of networking in various ways, including the emergence of completely remote offices and the development of advanced software solutions for better communication. Consequently, the demand for networking solutions across enterprises and businesses is slated to spiral throughout the world.

The top seven trends powering the enterprise networking industry outlook are as follows:

Expanding Demand for High-Speed Switches in North America

In terms of product, the North American enterprise networking market outlook has been bifurcated into network security, routers, switches, network management, and wireless. The demand for high-speed ethernet switches has been escalating in recent times in accordance with the growing utilization of network virtualization solutions.

During 2017, the market share from the switching segment accounted for more than 25% of the total regional industry. The forthcoming years are poised for considerable growth as the transformation of the enterprise network needs amid the pandemic has led to a higher preference for high-speed ethernet switches. With the proliferation of the 5G network, the demand will propagate further across the region.

North American Enterprises to Recalibrate their Cloud Strategies

Numerous businesses across the world, including those in North America, have been focusing on the recalibration of their cloud strategies as the workplace scenarios have been transforming due to the pandemic. In this scenario, virtual desktops, collaboration, and mobility are embracing the cloud deployment model for enabling a secure and distributed workforce.

The cloud model is increasingly being leveraged not just as an application destination but as a new enterprise management tool because it offers network insights efficiently. It ensures quick access to the latest features as well. This move toward the cloud deployment model is more than likely to stay afloat in the post-pandemic times.

Introduction of Native Cloud Management Platforms in Canada

By 2024, Canada is likely to emerge as one of the leading regional markets of the North American enterprise networking market. Advancing at a 6% CAGR, the regional segment has been registering a remarkable uptick in the volume of cloud service adoption by enterprises.

With the Canadian government utilizing cloud technology for responding to the growing necessity for IT services, private enterprises are turning to advanced cloud strategies. Numerous industry players have been expanding their product and service offerings. For instance, the cloud-based networking company, Extreme, announced the addition of a native cloud management platform located in Canada during December 2020, ensuring better data privacy and sovereignty for large enterprises.

Alarming Rise in Cyber Threats in the U.S.

The dramatic rise in the volume of cyber threats and cyber-attacks amidst the pandemic has been driving enterprises to adopt advanced networking solutions in the U.S. During 2017, the U.S. represented a staggering 70% of the total North America enterprise networking market share.

Clearly, cyberattacks rank as one of the fastest emerging crimes across the U.S., leading to major business disruptions. Recent surveys reveal that most enterprises are susceptible to data loss due to their poor cybersecurity practices and unprotected data. With growing concerns regarding better protection of data, the prospects for the enterprise networking industry in the U.S have improved.

Growing Adoption Across IT & Telecom in Asia

The Asia Pacific enterprise networking market size is slated to expand rapidly over the forecast years. The sector held a market share of more than 30% during 2017 and might make a significant headway by 2024. By 2024, the overall APAC industry share will have reached $20 billion.

The growth in the need for high bandwidth applications has been encouraging enterprises to switch to advanced enterprise networking solutions for addressing the current bandwidth shortage problems. As smartphones, laptops, and tablets become more commonplace with trends such as BYOD (Bring Your Own Device), the enterprises will see a higher adoption even in post-pandemic times.

Cybercriminals Capitalizing on COVID-19 fear in Japan

In Japan, cybercriminals have been capitalizing on the COVID-19-induced fear for luring victims into sophisticated traps, while hackers have been targeting victims via hoaxes and phishing emails. This will fuel the APAC enterprise networking market forecast.

As Japanese companies have been falling victim to unexpected cyberthreats and cyber-attacks, they have been striving to fortify their cybersecurity. In December 2020, the Japanese Ministry of Trade urged enterprises to exercise enhanced leadership with strengthened internal cybersecurity, as the frequency can worsen with the growth in telework.

Rising IoT devices across the Netherlands

The Netherlands enterprise network market is expected to accrue a considerable revenue by 2024, growing at a 10% CAGR through the analysis timeline. The support from government initiatives has been improving cybersecurity across enterprises.

Issues such as the rising phishing through text messaging, misuse of vulnerabilities in Dutch government’s servers, misuse of the ICT infrastructure, and large-scale distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks are urgently being addressed by enterprises to avoid losses that can have an impact beyond the financial aspects. The considerable addition of numerous IoT devices to the technological infrastructure in the region, promoted by the deployment of LPWAN technology has also been fostering networking growth.

customs value

Eliminating Non-Dutiable Charges from Customs Value

Similar to how taxable income is a primary element to determining income tax, the customs value is used to calculate duty liability. To determine an accurate customs value, companies must factor in certain dutiable additions and non-dutiable deductions. In today’s high-tariff environment, maximizing every deduction is critical and many importers are leaving money on the table. 

For U.S. importers using transaction value, which is “the price actually paid or payable for the merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States,” the focus is often on validating that the enumerated additions to the price are properly declared to U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CPB). While this is a necessary step for maintaining compliance, trade teams should also consider whether they may appropriately deduct or exclude certain charges. 

Historically, these savings opportunities have not been fully explored because the resources required to sustain some of these programs exceeded the savings. However, with the Section 301 tariffs in place for China-origin products, many companies are paying significantly more in duties. Removing these non-dutiable costs can provide substantial savings–making it worth taking a second look at them for many importers.

Eight Overlooked Non-Dutiable Charges

For importers using transaction value, the following savings opportunities should be considered. While some of these programs provide ongoing savings and some are only used in specific circumstances, they all may play a role in reducing the tariff spend. 

1. Freight and Insurance

Foreign inland freight, international freight and insurance costs may be deducted from the transaction value if you meet certain requirements. More specifically, with accurate incoterms and supporting costs and documentation, this can provide long-term cost savings. Importantly, importers must verify that they are deducting the actual, not estimated costs, and that the supporting documentation is adequate. While the requirements around deducting these costs may be daunting, the advances in technology make freight deductions more approachable than ever.

Further, insurance costs may be deducted from the entered value when they are separately itemized and the actual costs (not estimated) are claimed. It is important to verify with sellers that they are providing actual costs because CBP will reject deductions based on estimates, even in cases where the importer paid more than it claimed on the entry.

2. Supply Chain (“Origin”) Costs 

International transportation costs typically include certain other fees, often referred to as “origin costs.” In many cases, CBP considers these origin costs to be “incident to the international shipment of merchandise” and, therefore, possibly excluded from the customs value. Examples of these charges include security charges, documentation fees, and logistics fees. 

On a per-shipment basis, these miscellaneous fees may appear insignificant. However, on an annual basis, they can result in a significant expense for the company by driving up duty payments. As a general rule, the importer must deduct the actual costs, validate that commercial documentation meets all requirements and understand where services are being provided. However, once these steps have been taken, it is likely that little additional work will be required to realize ongoing savings.

3. Warehousing Costs 

CBP has found that warehousing costs paid by the buyer to third parties are not included in the price actually paid or payable of the imported merchandise. However, CBP has distinguished this scenario from instances where the seller, or a party related to the seller, provided this same service and the warehousing costs are included in the price actually paid or payable. In that case, those payments were found to be dutiable and may not be deducted. 

For importers interested in using this opportunity, a careful review of payments and terms of sale should be conducted to validate that the transaction meets all of CBP’s criteria prior to taking this deduction.

4. Inspection or Testing Fees

Often before shipment, an importer will arrange for products to be inspected or tested to validate it satisfies a buyer’s quality standards. Under certain conditions, these fees may be excluded from the dutiable value in instances when they are made to third parties unrelated to the seller of the goods. 

It’s also important to understand that testing that is “essential to the production of that merchandise” is dutiable. In such cases, CBP would consider payments to unrelated third parties for these services as assists that are part of the transaction value. For importers who rely on the seller to perform inspection or testing services, an analysis should be conducted to assess the ROI for engaging a third party to perform these services.

5. Latent Defect Allowances

In certain circumstances, importers may be able to reduce dutiable value post-importation based on repair costs attributable to manufacturing or design defects. For importers with high-value products, such as those in the automotive industry, repair costs can be substantial and this allowance in value provides an opportunity to manage those costs by reclaiming duty. 

With proper planning, a program can be implemented to help ensure the importer does not overpay duty on goods that were defective at the time of import. While there are a number of requirements that must be satisfied to receive a duty refund, high-value importers should explore whether this may be an opportunity for them.

6. Instruments of International Traffic – Reclassification of Packaging

In certain cases, pallets, cartons, hangers and other packaging material may be considered instruments of international traffic (IIT), exempting them from duty. To qualify as an IIT, CBP has determined that the article must meet criteria, including that it is “substantial, suitable for and capable of repeated use, and used in significant numbers in international traffic.” Further, the article must be used in commercial shipping or transportation more than twice to qualify as an IIT. 

For importers whose supply chains include the reuse of certain containers or other materials used to transport international goods, it may be valuable to assess whether these goods qualify as IIT and are, therefore, duty-free. 

7. Post Importation Price Adjustments

When companies make post-importation price adjustments they may be entitled to a duty-refund on the amount adjusted. This typically occurs when downward transfer pricing (“TP”) adjustments are made between related parties, causing a reduction in the products’ customs value. 

For companies that routinely make retroactive transfer pricing adjustments, having in place the documentation to support a refund can have a powerful impact on duty spend.

8. Taxes and Other Fees

Companies may be entitled to deduct Value Added Tax (“VAT”) or Goods and Services Taxes (“GST”) from the declared value of the imports when these payments are refunded. Not only should importers maximize their refunds where possible, but in doing so they open another opportunity for savings. When VAT is remitted by the U.S. importer to the foreign seller, separately identified and refunded to the importer, then the refunded amount is not included in transaction value.

Importers should team with their tax departments and foreign suppliers to understand if VAT refunds are obtained and create documentation that reflects separate itemization of the refunded VAT.

The Big Picture

Potential cost savings through the reduction of non-dutiable charges from the dutiable cost basis of imported goods are often overlooked. However, in this high-tariff environment, these programs can help companies easily achieve cost savings. 

Additionally, with advancements in technology, managing these programs is more straightforward than it used to be. 

Of course, like with any duty-savings program, strong controls must be implemented to preserve compliance. However, as it is likely that steep tariffs will be in place for some time, companies should evaluate which of these programs can help reduce costs, potentially improve the return on investment and then develop an implementation roadmap.

_____________________________________________________________

Andrew Siciliano is a Partner and U.S. Trade & Customs Leader at KPMG LLP. and Elizabeth Shingler is a manager at KPMG’s Trade & Customs Practice.