Client Alerts & Insights
FURTHER UPDATE: Actions to Recover Duties Paid Under Section 301 List 4 on China Imports – Statute of Limitations Begins on Friday
August 16, 2021
Authored By:
We previously alerted domestic importers on the option of litigating to recover List 4A duties, and that bulletin is available here. At the time one year ago domestic industry had taken note of a lawsuit before the Court of International Trade “CIT” challenging the Section 301 tariffs on imports from China. Approximately 4,000 lawsuits were filed in the days that followed. The sense of urgency in 2020 was due to application of the statute of limitations restricting claims for List 3 recovery to, most conservatively, September 18, 2020.
Now, importers who have not filed before the CIT and yet paid the List 4A duties on imports from China could face a similar statute of limitations on that $300 Billion trade action. The conservative course of action is to file for recovery of any List 4A by August 20, 2021 – this Friday. Filing suit after this date risks losing the right to recover some or all of the List 4A duties paid. As with the List 3 claims, a suit seeking recovery of duties paid under List 4A will similarly alleged that the United States Trade Representative violated the Trade Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. Essentially, List 4A was unlawful and the duties collected by U.S. Customs must be refunded.
Benesch is representing many importers before the CIT in order to preserve rights to potential recovery. Our CIT litigation and U.S. Customs team is standing by to assist in determining appropriate courses of action for pursing List 4A claims.
Jonathan Todd is a Partner with Benesch’s Transportation & Logistics Practice Group. He is a licensed U.S. Customs Broker in addition to an attorney. You may reach him at 216-363-4658 or jtodd@beneschlaw.com.
Latest News
Course of Performance as Contract Amendment or Waiver: When Business Practices Overrides Paper Terms
Imagine you are a leading manufacturing company, and you purchase a critical widget from a supplier. You have a carefully negotiated contract in place—one that spells out specific pricing, delivery timelines, and product specifications for those widgets.
California AG’s Carbon Health Settlement Raises the Stakes for MSO-PC Structures and Continuity Planning in California
The California Attorney General’s June 2026 settlement with Carbon Health marks the first-of-its kind resolution of an enforcement action directly targeting an MSO-PC structure under California’s corporate practice of medicine (“CPOM”) doctrine.
Supply Chain Security – C-TPAT Program Growing in Significance for U.S. Operations
Geopolitical challenges are triggering executive-level focus on supply chain security across industrial sectors and transportation service providers, including renewed interest in the Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (“C-TPAT”) program.
BREAKING: Seventh Circuit Holds Text Messages are not Telephone Calls Under Section 227(c)(5) of the TCPA
In a significant post-Loper Bright win for defendants, the Seventh Circuit issued its decision in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, No. 25-2398, affirming a trial court ruling that “§ 227(c)(5) [of the TCPA] does not permit plaintiffs to sue for the receipt of unwanted texts . . . .”