FTZ’ine April 2026
April 1, 2026
FTZ’ine June 2026
June 2, 2026
CAPEd Crusaders
Many FTZ Administrators took on a new role in April – leading the charge for IEEPA refunds for their organizations. Those CAPEd crusaders were busy uploading lists of entries to the newest system from U.S. Customs.
Among the refund roadblocks are some format validations that bounced about half of all submissions, slowing the process. And many refund requests have yet to be attempted. So far, refunds have been requested for only about 20% of eligible shipments in the first week of CAPE operation.
Clarification on the calculation method for Section 232 duties brought relief to some this month, and stabilization to all. Termination of the inclusion process means expansion of the Section 232 product list will be very slow from now on. And, some contraction may be possible.
The Trump Administration has scraped money together to issue paychecks to your local CBP Officers. But the divide in Washington over DHS funding has grown wider and could impact FTZ activities if the impasse doesn’t break soon.
Both the Treasury Secretary and USTR reiterated last month that despite the IEEPA setback, tariffs should soon revert to their post-Liberation Day normal. FTZs, and their systems and brokers, will need to be ready for new rates and codes to accommodate.
Top Story - FTZs Run for the Refunds
The first phase of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) system from U.S. Customs and Border Protection went live at 7:11am eastern a week ago Monday.
IEEPA refund requests accepted for recently liquidated entries should start flowing back very soon. Other refunds will take longer before ACH funds are automatically deposited.
CAPE puts all refund requests through a series of validations before the request is accepted. During the first seven days of system operation, 37.2% of files uploaded to CAPE were rejected by those validation checks. 15.9% of the entries that survived file validation were subsequently rejected during entry validation, according to CBP.
CBP said that on that first day of CAPE availability, ACE registered a 70 percent increase in log-ins as compared with the previous record number of daily log-ins.
Through April 26th, a total of 75,306 CAPE declaration files had been uploaded, of which a total of 47,315 CAPE declarations passed the file validations. Brandon Lord of CBP’s Office of Trade said in a filing with the Court of International Trade that those 47, 315 declarations cover a total of 11,222,927 entries with IEEPA duties.
A total of 2,124,394 entries that were included on CAPE declarations that passed the file validations were rejected for failing the entry-specific validations.
Out of the 11,222,927 accepted entries that passed the entry-specific validations, approximately 1,740,000 entries have been liquidated and are now in the refund process.
Apart from some glitches when CAPE launched last week, the portal is running smoothly, according to CBP.
"Since the opening of CAPE on April 20, 2026, the only time during which the CAPE functionality was not available for use by importers and their brokers was an 18-minute period on April 20, 2026, when CBP briefly paused the ability to submit declarations to reconfigure resources and optimize the processing of CAPE declarations," Lord said in the filing.
The agency launched CAPE following the Supreme Court's February ruling striking down IEEPA levies imposed by President Trump. More than 330,000 importers paid IEEPA tariffs on 53 million shipments.
Tech Tip: CAPE Refunds Trip Up on Validations
Phase 1 of the Consolidated Administration and Processing of Entries (CAPE) functionality in ACE is live!
To date, roughly 16% of entry submissions have been rejected since the IEEPA reimbursement portal launched on April 20th, according to CBP. Don’t end up in that category. Make sure your refund claim doesn’t include entries that will fail the CAPE validation checks:
• Each entry number must exist in ACE, with an IEEPA Chapter 99 HTS included
• Entry summary IEEPA amounts must not all be zero
• Entry summaries may not be flagged for Reconciliation
• Entry type 09 (Reconciliation) summaries are not permitted
• Entry summaries associated with a Drawback entry are not permitted
• Entry type 47 Drawback summaries are not permitted
• Entry type 08 USMCA Duty Deferral summaries are not permitted
• Entry summaries with an Open or Suspended Protest are not permitted
• Entry summaries with “open” or “closed” liquidation status (i.e. Temporary Importation under Bond entries) are not permitted
• AD/CVD entry summaries in pending liquidation status are not permitted
• Entry summaries over 80 days past the liquidation date are not permitted
• Goods value amounts are not permitted on IEEPA HTS lines.
The last one has caught a number of filers off guard. The entered value of the imported product reported on an IEEPA entry summary line should be reported on the Chapter 1-97 HTS classification, unless Chapter 98 reporting provisions require the entered value to be reported differently. Although entries may have been accepted for payment with a value reported on an IEEPA tariff code line, such entries are not accepted for refund. When this happens, the values have to be properly placed through the Post-Summary Correction (PSC) process.
Need help filing for refunds of your IEEPA duties paid? Contact us at info@iscm.co.
Foreign-Trade Zones Plan for Increased Tariffs
On the same day of the February 20th Supreme Court ruling that ended IEEPA tariffs, President Trump issued an Executive Order immediately establishing a new, global 10% tariff on import merchandise under powers granted to him by Congress in Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
But the authority to collect those tariffs only lasts into July, with Congressional approval of an extension unlikely.
To avoid a gap in tariff collections, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) launched 76 investigations into new tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Section 301 tariffs are not subject to the same time and rate limitations as Section 122 tariffs, making them more durable with no Congressional input needed. But switching from one to the other means foreign-trade zone operators need to prepare for a complete new set of trade-remedy HTS codes that will need to be installed as the Section 122 codes are retired. And tariff rates are likely to rise at least 5% back to their IEEPA levels when that happens.
The two-stage approach allowed for rapid implementation of tariffs under Section 122 while using the 150-day window to develop and implement Section 301 tariffs.
The Trade Act of 1974 requires an administrative record and invites public comment before Section 301 tariffs can be implemented. Even so, public comments by administration officials indicate there may not be much outside influence on how Section 301 tariff authority will be applied.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said “We had a setback at the Supreme Court in terms of the tariff policy, but we will be implementing or conducting Section 301 studies, so the tariffs could be back in place at the previous level by beginning of July,” at a Wall Street Journal event in Washington.
That would mean increases in country-specific rates to 15% for U.S. trading partners that had previously come to an agreement with the United States with respect to IEEPA tariff levels.
But countries that had not previously reached a deal could see their rates go much higher. Such a move could kick off another round of negotiations, and uncertainty with respect to U.S. tariff rates.
USTR alleged in the March 11th set of investigations that 16 countries have developed production capacity that has resulted in overproduction and large or persistent trade surpluses.
This investigation covers a broad range of manufacturing sectors, including aluminum, automobiles, batteries, cement, chemicals, electronics, energy goods, glass, machine tools, machinery, paper, plastics, processed food and beverages, robotics, satellites, semiconductors, ships, solar modules, steel and transportation equipment. Policy interventions that USTR has identified as contributing to structural excess capacity include production subsidies, wage suppression, noncommercial activities of state-owned enterprises, sustained market-access barriers, lax environmental or labor protections, subsidized lending and currency manipulation.
USTR initiated separate Section 301 investigations on March 12th into forced labor targeting 60 of the largest U.S. trading partners, collectively representing more than 99 percent of U.S. imports in 2024. The investigations will examine whether each economy’s failure to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor constitutes an act, policy or practice that is “unreasonable or discriminatory” and that “burdens or restricts U.S. commerce.” Pursuant to statute, an act, policy or practice is considered “unreasonable” if it constitutes a “persistent pattern of conduct that permits any form of forced or compulsory labor.”
USTR has further stated that, although some trading partners have adopted measures intended to stop the importation or sale of products produced using forced labor (e.g., Canada, Mexico and the European Union), “none of these countries has adopted and effectively enforced a forced labor import prohibition to date.” If USTR determines that any country’s practices are actionable, it must then determine what responsive measures to take.
Section 232 Revamp an Amalgam of Good and Bad for FTZs
At the beginning of the month, President Trump issued a Proclamation substantially revising the application of Section 232 tariffs on imports of steel, aluminum and copper and on finished products that use those metals.
Shortly thereafter, the President issued another proclamation that expanded Section 232 tariffs to imports of certain pharmaceutical products.
The most significant overall change eliminated the need to report the precise metal content of imports subject to Section 232 tariffs; rates are applied to the full value of the article. Also significant was termination of the inclusion process that had proliferated the number of derivative product categories subject to the 25% tariff.
The new value calculation is a blessing for FTZs that struggled to get reliable documentation from their supplier base on the specific weight and value of metal content. On the other hand, the 50% rate on base metal products and 25% rate on derivatives are a significant increase in some cases.
Imported products made completely (or almost completely) of non-U.S. origin steel, aluminum or copper now have a 50% tariff rate applied to the full value of the product.
Derivative products in which the value of the foreign metal content is greater than 15% by weight have a flat rate of 25% applied to the entire customs value of the finished product (not solely, as noted, on the metal content).
Products from the United Kingdom, the European Union, Japan and South Korea will continue to receive the reduced rates consistent with their existing trade agreements with the U.S.
No break for Russia though: the 200% existing tariff still applies to imports of aluminum articles and derivatives that are products of Russia.
Manufacturing duty drawback is now permitted for certain items, provided they are not subject to anti-dumping duties.
No "Stacking": Importers are only required to pay one type of Section 232 tariff (steel, aluminum, or copper) for products containing multiple metals, preventing compounded duties.
There Is No C In FTZ
And there may not be one in the next North American Free Trade Agreement either.
U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, said that President Trump was committed to reining in the North American trade deal and blasted Canada for its trade negotiating strategy, adding, “They suck.”
That pretty much sums up the state of USMCA negotiations between the United States and Canada.
Canada ‘s Prime Minister Mark Carney tacitly acknowledged White house feelings about USMCA when he said “We understand what some of the Americans would call trade irritants or trade issues are”
“It’s not a case of the United States dictates the terms. We have the negotiations. We can come to a mutually successful outcome,” Carney also said. “It will take some time.”
Asked if the President was committed to extending the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, a trade deal he renegotiated in his first term, Secretary Lutnick responded that the President “thinks it’s a bad deal.”
Dominic LeBlanc, a senior Canadian minister who leads talks with the United States, previously said that Canada wanted a comprehensive agreement and fast.
“I would have hoped that by last fall we would have resolved part of the situation,” Mr. LeBlanc said of the existing U.S. tariffs on Canadian steel and other goods. “Now we’re back around the table to do the work. It is moving forward. I can assure you of that.”
Despite that assessment, Secretary Lutnick, attacked Canada’s approach to the trade talks, claiming that Canada leans on the U.S. economy and that it was “outrageous” for Canadian provinces to keep American liquor off their shelves.
He also criticized Prime Minister Carney for striking a deal with China to reduce its 100% tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles to 6.1%, with an annual cap of 49,000 vehicles. In turn, China is expected to lower retaliatory tariffs on Canadian agricultural products.
FTZ Staff Activity
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-137-2026) in FTZ 29AD on behalf of JOM Pharmaceutical Services LLC, Shepherdsville, KY on March 13, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-138-2026) in FTZ 49 on behalf of Weida Freight System Inc., Carteret, NJ on March 13, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-139-2026) in FTZ 81 on behalf of Novo Nordisk US Bio Production Inc., West Lebanon, NH on March 16, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-140-2026) in FTZ 20 on behalf of Gulf Gateway Terminal LLC, New Orleans, LA on March 16, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-141-2026) in FTZ 84 on behalf of Pronto Shipping & Storage Inc., Houston, TX on March 16, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-142-2026) in FTZ 77N on behalf of Banded Holdings Inc., Memphis, TN on March 16, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-143-2026) in FTZ 72 on behalf of Bobst North America Inc., Greenwood, IN on March 16, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-144-2026) in FTZ 126D on behalf of Tesla Inc., Sparks, NV on March 17, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-145-2026) in FTZ 50 on behalf of Weida Freight System Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, CA on March 18, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-146-2026) in FTZ 22 on behalf of Walgreens Co., Bolingbrook, IL on March 18, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a TSF Subzone subject to the activation limits of the Grantee (S-147-2026) in FTZ 27 on behalf of Methods Machine Tools Inc., Acton/Sudbury, MA on March 18, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-148-2026) in FTZ 238E on behalf of Celanese Acetate LLC, Roanoke, VA on March 18, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-149-2026) in FTZ 22AK on behalf of Geanto’s Trucking Company, Bensenville, IL on March 19, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-150-2026) in FTZ 221B on behalf of CMC Steel Fabricators Inc., Mesa, AZ on March 19, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-151-2026) in FTZ 89 on behalf of NRI USA LLC, Henderson, NV on March 19, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a TSF Subzone subject to the activation limits of the Grantee (S-152-2026) in FTZ 104 on behalf of Supreme International LLC dba Perry Ellis International, Dublin, GA on March 19, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-153-2026) in FTZ 241 on behalf of United Marine Inc., Fort Lauderdale, FL on March 20, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-154-2026) in FTZ 26AF on behalf of Vanguard Electric LLC, Morrow, GA on March 20, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-155-2026) in FTZ 64K on behalf of Sandvik Mining and Construction USA LLC, Alachua, FL on March 20, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-156-2026) in FTZ 93M on behalf of Almac Clinical Services LLC, Durham, NC on March 23, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-157-2026) in FTZ 102 on behalf of Weissman’s Theatrical Supplies Inc., St. Louis, MO on March 23, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-158-2026) in FTZ 81J on behalf of Pratt & Whitney, Londonderry, NH on March 23, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-159-2026) in FTZ 93 on behalf of Biogen, Morrisville, NC on March 24, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-160-2026) in FTZ 94 on behalf of Dunavant Logistics Group LLC, Laredo, TX on March 23, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-161-2026) in FTZ 33G on behalf of Steelite International Inc., New Castle, PA on March 25, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-162-2026) in FTZ 70 on behalf of Materials Handling Services Ltd, Detroit, MI on March 25, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-163-2026) in FTZ 107A on behalf of Winnebago Industries Inc., Forest City/Charles City/Lake Mills, IA on March 25, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-164-2026) in FTZ 94 on behalf of American Export Services Inc., Laredo, TX on March 26, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-165-2026) in FTZ 2P on behalf of Dupuy Storage & Forwarding LLC, New Orleans, LA on March 26, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-166-2026) in FTZ 213 on behalf of Project and Construction Welding Inc dba IMS Inc, Fort Meyers, FL on March 30, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-167-2026) in FTZ 235 on behalf of Kennedy International Inc., Old Bridge, NJ on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-168-2026) in FTZ 76 on behalf of American Electro Products LLC, Waterbury, CT on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-169-2026) in FTZ 18V on behalf of Western Digital Inc., San Jose/Fremont, CA on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Redesignation (S-170-2026) in FTZ 50 on behalf of Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, Ontario, CA on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Redesignation (S-171-2026) in FTZ 202 on behalf of EXELint International Co., Redondo Beach, CA on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-172-2026) in FTZ 147 on behalf of JAS N.A. Bio-Distribution Center Inc., Harrisburg, PA on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-173-2026) in FTZ 189H on behalf of Grand River Aseptic Manufacturing, Caledonia, MI on March 30, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-174-2026) in FTZ 104 on behalf of TRT International LTD, Rincon, GA on March 30, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-175-2026) in FTZ 38X on behalf of Total Distribution Inc., Greer, SC on March 30, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-176-2026) in FTZ 75X on behalf of Avnet Inc., Chandler, AZ on March 30, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-177-2026) in FTZ 38AB on behalf of DMA Industries LLC, Greer, SC on March 31, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-180-2026) in FTZ 214C on behalf of Kanban Logistics Inc., Greenville, NC on April 1, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-181-2026) in FTZ 38A on behalf of BMW Manufacturing Co. LLC, Greer, SC on April 1, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a TSF Subzone subject to the activation limits of the Grantee (S-182-2026) in FTZ 18 on behalf of Energy Recovery Inc., San Leandro, CA on April 1, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-183-2026) in FTZ 77 on behalf of LifeScience Logistics LLC, Memphis, TN on April 1, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-184-2026) in FTZ 202 on behalf of CEVA Freight LLC, Gardena, CA on April 1, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-185-2026) in FTZ 49 on behalf of Total Distribution Inc., Bayonne, NJ on April 6, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-188-2026) in FTZ 119R on behalf of Abbott Laboratories dba St. Jude Medical Cardiovascular Division Inc., Roseville, MN on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-189-2026) in FTZ 133 on behalf of Ameropa North America Inc., Rock Island, IL on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-190-2026) in FTZ 153 on behalf of ViX Swimwear LLC, San Diego, CA on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-191-2026) in FTZ 21 on behalf of Expeditors International of Washington Inc., Hanahan, SC on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-192-2026) in FTZ 54B on behalf of Schluter Systems LP, Plattsburgh, NY on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-193-2026) in FTZ 77B on behalf of Brother International Corporation, Bartlett, TN on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-194-2026) in FTZ 50 on behalf of TransDigm Inc dba Adel Wiggins Group, Commerce, CA on April 2, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-195-2026) in FTZ 262B on behalf of WPG Americas Inc., Lafayette, MS on March 27, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-196-2026) in FTZ 77K on behalf of CE North America LLC, Memphis, TN on April 3, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-197-2026) in FTZ 176 on behalf of Waldom Electronics Corporation, Rockford, IL on April 6, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a TSF Subzone subject to the activation limits of the Grantee (S-198-2026) in FTZ 274 on behalf of Phillips 66 Company, Billings, MT on April 6, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-199-2026) in FTZ 72 on behalf of MD Logistics, Plainfield, IN on April 7, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-200-2026) in FTZ 249 on behalf of Two Bridges Automotive dba Holstein Parts, Cantonment, FL on April 8, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-201-2026) in FTZ 50AH on behalf of Texollini Inc., Long Beach, CA on April 8, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-202-2026) in FTZ 43 on behalf of Harloff Manufacturing Company, Kalamazoo/Lawton, MI on April 8, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-203-2026) in FTZ 104X on behalf of Distribution Services International, Savannah, GA on April 8, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-204-2026) in FTZ 57D on behalf of Exela Pharma Sciences, Lenoir, NC on April 9, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-205-2026) in FTZ 183 on behalf of Venkel LTD, Austin, TX on April 9, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-206-2026) in FTZ 221A on behalf of Apple Inc., Mesa, AZ on April 9, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Termination (S-207-2026) in FTZ 77 on behalf of International Sourcing Company Inc., Memphis, TN on April 9, 2026
- FTZ Board Staff processed a processed a Minor Boundary Modification (S-208-2026) in FTZ 221E on behalf of Arrow Global Supply Chain Services Inc., Mesa, AZ on April 9, 2026
Foreign-Trade Zone Board Activity
-
- Adtran, Inc., submitted a notification of proposed production activity for telecommunications equipment within Foreign-Trade Zone 83 in Huntsville, Alabama. MORE
- Tekni-Plex Flexibles, submitted a notification of proposed production activity for coated nonwoven materials for healthcare applications within Foreign-Trade Zone 266 in Salt Lake City, Utah. MORE
- Turbocam Inc., submitted a notification of proposed production activity for turbine system components within Foreign-Trade Zone 21 in Ladson, South Carolina. MORE
- Energy Recovery, Inc., submitted an application requesting subzone status for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 18 in San Leandro, California. MORE
- Canaveral Port Authority, grantee, submitted an application requesting expansion of service area for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 136 in Brevard County, Florida. MORE
- Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport Board, grantee, submitted an application requesting expansion of service area for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 39 in Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas. MORE
- Phillips 66 Co., submitted an application requesting subzone status for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 274 in Billings, Montana. MORE
- Inmobiliaria G.G., LLC received approval to operate their Juncos, Puerto Rico facility as Foreign-Trade Zone 7U. MORE
- StandardAero, submitted a notification of proposed production activity for refurbished engines within Foreign-Trade Zone 80 in San Antonio, Texas. MORE
- Applied Materials, Inc., submitted an application requesting subzone status for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 27 in Boylston, Gloucester, Newburyport, and Rowley, Massachusetts. MORE
- Shiseido America, Inc., submitted an application requesting subzone status for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 200 in Cranbury and East Windsor, New Jersey. MORE
- Fisher BioServices, submitted an application requesting subzone status for their facility within Foreign-Trade Zone 255 in Frederick, Maryland. MORE
No Cake And Ice Cream Yet:
It was another month of dynamic trade developments for the foreign-trade zone community. While there is cause for optimism that trade terms will stabilize soon, too much remains unsettled to do any celebrating just yet.
Negotiations with China resulted in a temporary pause in the sky-high rates FTZs had been paying on their imports. But recent rhetoric from Washington suggests the pause won’t last past the 90 days of the agreement. If it even lasts that long.
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the use of IEEPA to place a 10% additional tariff on all imports overstepped presidential authority. The IEEPA tariffs are still being collected until higher courts make a final ruling. The financial stakes are HUGE for both sides.
An investment deal in U.S. Steel prompted the doubling of Section 232 tariffs on imported steel and aluminum beginning this Thursday. Nothing on the table suggests those 50% rates will be reduced anytime soon. Zones need to prepare accordingly.
Foreign-trade zone applications are down. Way down. Staff losses at the Foreign-Trade Zones Board and the loss of the NPF status option appear to be taking their toll. Bonded Warehouse applications? Still overwhelming CBP in certain ports.