Trade court - Scope ruling under ADD / CVD orders not always required for “protestable decision” 

May 13:  The U.S. Court of International Trade today denied the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, and instead found that a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) determination that the imported merchandise was not excluded from the scope of antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders, followed by liquidation of the merchandise, was a “protestable decision” of the type specified under 19 U.S.C. section 1514(a)(2). LDA Incorporado v. United States, Slip op. 14-54 (CIT May 13, 2014)

The trade court distinguished situations when the scope of the ADD and CVD orders is in question versus when the importer claims that CBP made a mistake in applying the orders.

Read the opinion [PDF 485 KB]


In 2008, the Department of Commerce issued a notice of antidumping duty (ADD) order and a notice of countervailing duty (CVD) order concerning circular welded carbon quality steel pipe from China. The ADD and CVD orders specifically excluded “finished electrical conduit.”

The importer in this case, in July 2010, imported a single entry of merchandise, described as electrical rigid metal conduit steel—a type of rigid steel conduit product—and classified under HTSUS 7306.30.50.25, as “duty free” and without reference to the ADD and CVD orders. The importer believed the merchandise was specifically excluded from the scope of the orders as “finished electrical conduit.”

In January 2012, CBP liquidated the entry. In February 2012, the importer filed a scope inquiry with Commece. In April, the importer filed a timely protest with CBP, and the protest was denied in May 2012. In July 2012, Commerce issued its scope ruling, finding that the merchandise was excluded from the scope of the ADD and CVD orders.

The importer claimed that CBP made a mistake in not determining that the merchandise was not excluded from the ADD and CVD orders. It also claimed that this mistake was a “protestable decision.”

The government moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting that the importer must seek review of the scope ruling from Commerce that the merchandise was excluded from the orders (which did not happen in this case) in lieu of filing a protest as required for the trade court to have jurisdiction.

The trade court, however, denied the government’s motion to dismiss, finding instead that CBP’s determination that the merchandise was not excluded from the scope of the orders was a “protestable decision” of the type specified in section 1514(a)(2).

For more information, contact a professional with KPMG’s Trade & Customs practice:

Douglas Zuvich

(312) 665-1022

Andrew Siciliano

(631) 425-6057

John L. McLoughlin

(267) 256-2614

Todd R. Smith

(949) 885-5617

Luis A. Abad

(212) 954-3094

Amie Ahanchian

(202) 533-3247

Or your local KPMG Trade & Customs professional.

©2014 KPMG LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership and the U.S. member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International"), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.

The KPMG logo and name are trademarks of KPMG International.

KPMG International is a Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent member firms. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member firms in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member firms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member firm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any member firm in any manner whatsoever.

The information contained in herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation.

Direct comments, including requests for subscriptions, to
For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at:

+ 1 202 533 4366

1801 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006.

Share this

Share this


Current and future KPMG clients may subscribe to TaxNewsFlash email alerts.

Email your contact information.

TaxNewsFlash-Trade & Customs by year