DHS Adds Two Parties to the UFLPA Entity List; Corrects the Name of an Already Listed Entity - Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Silverman & Klestadt LLP
On October 2, 2024, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced the addition of two companies to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Consolidated Entity List and a technical correction to modify the name of one already listed entity.
By statute, goods, mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in the XUAR or produced by an entity on one of the UFLPA lists are subject to a rebuttable presumption that they were made using forced labor and are inadmissible.
The two new additions to the entity list, effective October 3rd, are:
• Baowu Group Xinjiang Bayi Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. (also known as Xinjiang Bayi Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.; Baosteel Group Xinjiang Bayi Iron and Steel Co., Ltd.; and Bayi Iron and Steel).*
• Changzhou Guanghui Food Ingredients Co., Ltd. (also known as GSweet; Changzhou Guanghui Food Additive Co., Ltd.; and Changzhou Guanghui Food Technology Co., Ltd.; and formerly known as Changzhou Guanghui Biotechnology Co., Ltd.)**
In addition, the DHS modified its designation of the below already listed UFLPA entity:
• Changhong Meiling Co., Ltd. (formerly known as Hefei Meiling Co., Ltd.; and Hefei Meiling Group Holdings Limited)
Since the UFLPA was signed into law, 75 entities have been added to the UFLPA Entity List involving various product sectors. The full list can be found on the Homeland Security webpage. Future additions to the list will be considered. A procedure is also available whereby parties may request their removal from the entity list.
Please do not hesitate to contact any of our attorneys for further information on the above or any other aspect of UFLPA compliance.
________________________________________________________________________________
FMC Services Available During Supply Chain Challenges - Federal Maritime Commission
The Federal Maritime Commission offers consumer assistance, enforcement, and litigation services that individuals and companies could find helpful in seeking relief from current supply chain challenges.
The Office of Consumer Affairs and Dispute Resolution Services (CADRS) can act as a facilitator to resolve business disputes or help identify solutions to some situations where the flow of cargo is interrupted. CADRS specializes in achieving amicable solutions to immediate problems whenever possible and can serve as a resource for parties uncertain how to resolve issues with ocean shipments.
Individuals who believe they have been improperly invoiced for any charges, including detention and demurrage, can file a Charge Complaint with the Commission and have their claim rapidly reviewed. This provides a quicker, less formal way to challenge a bill.
Parties seeking monetary damages and compensation for a dispute with a common carrier or marine terminal operator (MTO) can file a formal claim that will be heard by an Administrative Law Judge or a Small Claims Officer. Disputes must be related to statutes the Commission administers such as those involving detention and demurrage and the Shipping Act.
The Bureau of Enforcement, Investigations and Compliance will review any allegations that conduct of a common carrier or MTO violates Commission statutes and regulations.
The Commission issued an advisory to all regulated entities on September 23, 2024, reminding them that they are bound to comply with all Commission administered statutes and regulations.
Common carriers and MTOs must comply with all statutory and regulatory requirements, including rules governing tariffs, service contracts, MTO schedules, the application of and invoicing for demurrage and detention, and all other fees and surcharges assessed.
Demurrage, detention, and all other fees and surcharges must be reasonable, clearly defined, and serve a specific measurable purpose. As a reminder, notice of common carrier and MTO fees and surcharges must be given at least 30 days prior to taking effect.
FMC regulations require that demurrage and detention fees serve as legitimate financial incentives to encourage cargo movement. Pursuant to these requirements, the Commission will scrutinize any demurrage and detention charges assessed during terminal closures.
Demurrage and detention invoicing must be lawful. The Commission’s rule on such invoicing, implementing provisions of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022, became effective on May 28, 2024. Invoices that do not include required information, or that are sent to the wrong entity, are not valid.
Parties who believe a common carrier or MTO has violated a statutory or regulatory requirement, particularly as it relates to the application of demurrage and detention charges, are encouraged to report that conduct to the Commission.
The Federal Maritime Commission will prosecute any violations of the law to the fullest extent permitted. To report unlawful actions or to file a complaint, individuals or entities can:
• File a formal complaint proceeding for adjudication before the FMC’s Office of Administrative Law Judges.
• Report allegations of violations with the Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement, Investigations, and Compliance. Based on the information received, a formal investigation may be launched.
• Provide concerns and information for the benefit of the Commission’s knowledge at complaints@fmc.gov.
The Commission has and will continue to directly communicate with regulated entities on their responsibilities under the FMC’s laws and regulations. In addition, the FMC is actively engaged in outreach to affected stakeholder groups to provide a forum to discuss supply chain challenges.
________________________________________________________________________________
USITC Releases Report on Apparel Export Competitiveness of Certain Suppliers to the United States - U.S. International Trade Commission
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today released a report about the export competitiveness of certain apparel suppliers to the United States. This report, Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602), was requested by the U.S. Trade Representative in a letter received on December 20, 2023.
The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan federal agency, examined the export competitiveness of the apparel industries in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, and prepared a public report that includes:
• a comparison of the relative U.S. market shares held by Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, as well as an analysis of changing patterns in apparel trade.
• a review of general literature on the key determinants driving export competitiveness in the global apparel industry.
• a discussion of factors affecting export competitiveness in the apparel sector; and
• country-specific profiles of the apparel industries in the above-listed countries, including information on investment, vertical integration, duty-free access to the U.S. market, wages and labor productivity, and sourcing of inputs, as well as an assessment of the export competitiveness of each country in the U.S. market.
Key findings:
• The United States is the largest single-country apparel importer in the world. In 2023, U.S. imports of apparel totaled $79.3 billion, with the majority sourced from Asia.
• Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan are notable suppliers to the United States—ranking among the top 10 U.S. import suppliers in 2023—and are also significant exporters in the global market. These five countries accounted for a combined 27.0 percent of U.S. apparel imports in 2023.
• The market shares of major U.S. suppliers changed significantly during 2013–23. The share of imports from China, the largest exporter to the United States, fell during the period, while the market shares of other top suppliers such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Pakistan increased.
• Although Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan differ with respect to the factors of competitiveness that make them attractive to U.S. brands and retailers, they share certain similarities and are all reportedly competitive on sourcing costs. Additional key highlights concerning the five profiled countries are as follows:
o As the second-largest apparel exporter in the world, Bangladesh has extensive capabilities in apparel manufacturing and specializes in bulk orders of basic garments. Factors such as low labor costs, relatively low input costs, and duty-free access to large destination markets outside of the United States contribute to Bangladesh’s cost competitiveness.
o Foreign direct investment drives Cambodia’s export-oriented apparel industry with Cambodia focused on cut, make, and trim production using imports of upstream materials. Cambodia’s apparel industry is viewed as an attractive alternative to sourcing from China and its reputation for social responsibility contributes to its competitiveness.
o India has a long history in textiles and apparel production and remains a steady source of U.S. imports. Quality and detailed finishing contribute to the competitiveness of India’s apparel production, which is supported by a highly vertically integrated apparel industry.
o A major supplier of a wide variety of clothing, Indonesia exports the majority of its apparel to the United States. While it is a relatively high-cost source, Indonesia produces high-value, complex garments such as business attire, outdoor apparel, and athletic wear which contributes to its competitiveness.
o Pakistan’s cotton sector supports the country’s apparel industry, which is noted for production of high-quality denim. Vertical integration and access to domestic cotton are competitive strengths, but buyers cite geopolitical risk as a concern.
Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602, USITC Publication 5543, August 2024) is available on the USITC website at:
ttps://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5543.pdf.
About factfinding investigations: USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs, trade, and competitiveness and are generally conducted under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.
________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Register Notices:
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Melamine from Germany, India, Japan, Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago; Scheduling of the Final Phase of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Review
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review and Join Annual Inquiry Service List
• Low Melt Polyester Staple Fiber from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2022-2023
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews Aluminum Extrusions from the Republic of Türkiye: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
• Aluminum Extrusions from Mexico: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
• Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
• Aluminum Extrusions from Indonesia: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, From Malaysia: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Certain High Chrome Cast Iron Grinding Media from India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Certain Alkyl Phosphate Esters From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
• Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From Thailand: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules From the Kingdom of Cambodia: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination
• Stainless Steel Flanges From India: Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Pursuant to Settlement
• Certain Quartz Surface Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited First Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
________________________________________________________________________________
USITC Releases Report on Apparel Export Competitiveness of Certain Suppliers to the United States - US International Trade Commission
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today released a report about the export competitiveness of certain apparel suppliers to the United States. This report, Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602), was requested by the U.S. Trade Representative in a letter received on December 20, 2023.
The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan federal agency, examined the export competitiveness of the apparel industries in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, and prepared a public report that includes:
• a comparison of the relative U.S. market shares held by Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, as well as an analysis of changing patterns in apparel trade;
• a review of general literature on the key determinants driving export competitiveness in the global apparel industry.
• a discussion of factors affecting export competitiveness in the apparel sector; and
• country-specific profiles of the apparel industries in the above-listed countries, including information on investment, vertical integration, duty-free access to the U.S. market, wages and labor productivity, and sourcing of inputs, as well as an assessment of the export competitiveness of each country in the U.S. market.
Key findings:
• The United States is the largest single-country apparel importer in the world. In 2023, U.S. imports of apparel totaled $79.3 billion, with the majority sourced from Asia.
• Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan are notable suppliers to the United States—ranking among the top 10 U.S. import suppliers in 2023—and are also significant exporters in the global market. These five countries accounted for a combined 27.0 percent of U.S. apparel imports in 2023.
• The market shares of major U.S. suppliers changed significantly during 2013–23. The share of imports from China, the largest exporter to the United States, fell during the period, while the market shares of other top suppliers such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Pakistan increased.
• Although Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan differ with respect to the factors of competitiveness that make them attractive to U.S. brands and retailers, they share certain similarities and are all reportedly competitive on sourcing costs. Additional key highlights concerning the five profiled countries are as follows:
o As the second-largest apparel exporter in the world, Bangladesh has extensive capabilities in apparel manufacturing and specializes in bulk orders of basic garments. Factors such as low labor costs, relatively low input costs, and duty-free access to large destination markets outside of the United States contribute to Bangladesh’s cost competitiveness.
o bForeign direct investment drives Cambodia’s export-oriented apparel industry with Cambodia focused on cut, make, and trim production using imports of upstream materials. Cambodia’s apparel industry is viewed as an attractive alternative to sourcing from China and its reputation for social responsibility contributes to its competitiveness.
o India has a long history in textiles and apparel production and remains a steady source of U.S. imports. Quality and detailed finishing contribute to the competitiveness of India’s apparel production, which is supported by a highly vertically integrated apparel industry.
o A major supplier of a wide variety of clothing, Indonesia exports the majority of its apparel to the United States. While it is a relatively high-cost source, Indonesia produces high-value, complex garments such as business attire, outdoor apparel, and athletic wear which contributes to its competitiveness.
o Pakistan’s cotton sector supports the country’s apparel industry, which is noted for production of high-quality denim. Vertical integration and access to domestic cotton are competitive strengths, but buyers cite geopolitical risk as a concern.
Apparel: Export Competitiveness of Certain Foreign Suppliers to the United States (Inv. No. 332-602, USITC Publication 5543, August 2024) is available on the USITC website at:
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5543.pdf.
________________________________________________________________________________
DHS’ 2025 Homeland Threat Assessment Indicates the Threat of Domestic and Foreign Terrorism in the Homeland Remains High -Department of Homeland Securities
Release Date: October 2, 2024
WASHINGTON – The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) 2025 Homeland Threat Assessment (HTA), released today, is designed to inform both the public and the Department’s partners of the threats to public safety and security, in order to assist federal, state, and local partners in preparing, preventing, and responding to an ever-evolving threat environment. The HTA describes a threat environment that is expected to “remain high” over the coming year.
“The Homeland Security Assessment provides an important overview of the dynamic and evolving threat landscape, illustrating just how varied and challenging the threats we confront are,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas. “It is because of the remarkable DHS workforce, and our close collaboration with our federal, state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners, that we are able to meet the challenges and keep the American people safe and secure.”
Assessments from the 2025 HTA:
• Public Safety and Security: The terrorism threat environment in the Homeland is expected to remain high over the coming year. This is due to a confluence of factors, including potential violent extremist responses to domestic sociopolitical developments — particularly the 2024 election cycle — and international events like the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict. Lone offenders and small groups continue to pose the greatest threat. Meanwhile, foreign terrorist organizations, including ISIS and al Qa’ida maintain their enduring intent to conduct or inspire attacks in the Homeland.
• Illegal Drugs: Illegal drugs smuggled into and sold in the United States by transnational and domestic criminal actors continue to pose a lethal threat to communities in the United States. DHS has surged resources to address this threat, seized more fentanyl in the last two fiscal years than in the prior five years combined, and is investing in new technology to increase detection capabilities. Thanks to these and other efforts, the number of overdose deaths have declined by more than 10 percent in the 12 months leading up to April 2024 – the largest drop in overdose deaths in recorded history. That said, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids remain the most lethal of drugs trafficked into the country and continue to pose a national security threat. Adulterated cocaine and methamphetamine also pose a threat.
• Influence Operations and Transnational Repression: We expect the Homeland will face threats to public safety from state actors using subversive tactics in an effort to stroke discord and undermine confidence in U.S. domestic institutions. Malign foreign actors seek to target ethnic and religious minorities, political dissidents, and journalists in the United States to silence and harass its critics abroad.
• Border and Immigration Security: Migrant encounters at our border have steadily declined since the beginning of 2024 and have declined even further since the issuance of the Presidential Proclamation and complementary Interim Final Rule (IFR) were announced on June 4 – decreasing more than 55% in the past four months. We nonetheless expect some individuals with criminal connections to seek to continue to exploit migrants. DHS remains acutely focused on identifying those who may present a threat to public safety or national security and stopping them from entering the United States.
• Critical Infrastructure Security: Domestic and foreign adversaries are expected to continue to target our critical infrastructure via prepositioning, cyber, and physical attacks. The People’s Republic of China (PRC), Russia, and Iran are expected to remain the most pressing foreign threats to our critical infrastructure. Nation-states, criminal hacktivists, and financially motivated criminals will likely hone their techniques to disrupt U.S. services or to conduct espionage focused on gaining access to U.S. networks and critical infrastructure entities. We assess that domestic and foreign violent extremists will continue to call for physical attacks on critical infrastructure in furtherance of their ideological goals and, in response to international conflicts and crises.
• Economic Security: Our adversaries – including the PRC - will continue non-market policies and practices, economic espionage and coercive economic tools, and illicit acquisition of technologies and intellectual property to undercut U.S. and partner competitiveness.
Read entire article here
________________________________________________________________________________
FTC Sends Refunds to Consumers Who Bought Pyrex Glass Manufacturer’s Products Falsely Advertised as Made in USA - Federal Trade Commission
The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $88,000 in refunds to consumers who bought Chinese-made measuring cups marketed as “Made in USA” by Instant Brands, the maker of Pyrex-brand kitchen and home products.
The FTC took action against Instant Brands in 2023 charging that the company claimed that all its popular glass measuring cups were made in the United States, despite some measuring cups actually being imported from China. All told, more than 110,000 units of Chinese-made measuring cup sets were sold to U.S. consumers while being marketed as “Made in USA.” Instant Brands agreed to a settlement with the FTC that stopped the company from making deceptive claims about products being “Made in USA” and required them to pay a monetary judgment.
The FTC is sending checks to 10,259 consumers. Recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 833-244-7320, or visit the FTC website to view frequently asked questions about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.
The Commission’s interactive dashboards for refund data provide a state-by-state breakdown of refunds in FTC cases. In 2023, FTC actions led to $330 million in refunds to consumers across the country.
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and protect and educate consumers. The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. Learn more about consumer topics at consumer.ftc.gov, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Follow the FTC on social media, read consumer alerts and the business blog, and sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts.