On January 6th, the Mexican Government published a new list of apparel and textile goods with “estimated prices.” These prices are the minimum reference price that goods ranging from raw materials to finished products may be imported into Mexico and is categorized by Harmonized Tariff Schedule classification number. Shipments entered below these prices will be considered “undervalued” and would likely be subject to an investigation and potential penalties. If the parties to the transaction are related entities, this may also trigger larger questions as to the intercompany pricing (i.e., transfer pricing policy) behind the transactions as well. The measure entered into force on January 18, 2016. The announcement is attached here (in Spanish). Continue Reading Mexico Publishes List of Minimum Reference Price for Textile and Apparel Imports
Jini Koh is Counsel in the International Trade Group in the firm's Washington, D.C. office.
Jini's practice focuses on advising clients on all areas of import regulatory compliance, trade remedies and international trade litigation. Jini's experience covers an extensive range of trade and customs issues, including import due diligence and post-merger &acquisition implementation, internal supply chain and compliance assessments, intercompany valuation, classification, duty drawback, marking and labeling, disclosures, Focused Assessment audits and optimization of trade preference programs and free trade agreements; antidumping and countervailing duty disputes; and related trade litigation.
Last week, the Department of Justice filed an action against Michaels Stores on behalf of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”). According to the complaint, between 2006 and 2010 Michaels sold glass vases which were prone to shattering in consumers’ hands and caused multiple injuries.
The complaint alleges that (1) despite receiving injury reports from consumers beginning in 2007, Michaels failed notify the CPSC of the hazard until 2010; and (2) Michaels sought to mislead the CPSC by implying that another company imported the vases, when in fact Michaels was the “importer of record.” (Under the Consumer Product Safety Act an importer has the same reporting obligations as a manufacturer.) The CPSC is seeking civil penalties and a permanent injunction to allow for compliance oversight of the retailer.
Click here to read the full article on this case and lessons it can provide for retailers.
Click here to view a three-part video series by Crowell & Moring partner Cheryl Falvey that reviews compliance programs and risk mitigation strategies for consumer products companies.