19 C.F.R. § 191.32

Substitution drawback

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. Section 313(j)(2) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1313(j)(2)), provides for drawback on merchandise which is commercially interchangeable with imported merchandise if the commercially interchangeable merchandise is exported, or destroyed under Customs supervision, before the close of the 3-year period beginning on the date of importation of the imported merchandise, and before such exportation or destruction, the commercially interchangeable merchandise is not used in the United States (see paragraph (e) of this section) and is in the possession of the party claiming drawback.

(b) Requirements. (1) The claimant must have possessed the substituted merchandise that was exported or destroyed, as provided in paragraph (d)(1) of this section;

(2) The substituted merchandise must be commercially interchangeable with the imported merchandise that is designated for drawback;

(3) The substituted merchandise exported or destroyed must not have been used in the United States before its exportation or destruction (see paragraph (e) of this section); and

(4) For purposes of drawback of internal revenue tax imposed under Chapters 32, 38 (with the exception of Subchapter A of Chapter 38), 51, and 52 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (IRC), drawback granted on the export or destruction of substituted merchandise will be limited to the amount of taxes paid (and not returned by refund, credit, or drawback) on the substituted merchandise.

(c) Determination of commercial interchangeability. In determining commercial interchangeability, Customs shall evaluate the critical properties of the substituted merchandise and in that evaluation factors to be considered include, but are not limited to, Governmental and recognized industrial standards, part numbers, tariff classification and value. A party may seek a nonbinding predetermination of commercial interchangeability directly from the appropriate drawback office. A determination of commercial interchangeability can be obtained in one of two ways:

(1) A formal ruling from the Entry Process and Duty Refunds Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade; or

(2) A submission of all the required documentation necessary to make a commercial interchangeability determination with each individual drawback claim filed.

(d) Time limitations. For substitution unused merchandise drawback:

(1) The claimant must have had possession of the exported or destroyed merchandise at some time during the 3-year period following the date of importation of the imported designated merchandise; and

(2) The merchandise to be exported or destroyed to qualify for drawback must be exported, or destroyed under Customs supervision, before the close of the 3-year period beginning on the date of importation of the imported designated merchandise.

(e) Operations performed on substituted merchandise. In cases in which an operation or operations is or are performed on the substituted merchandise, the performing of any operation or combination of operations, not amounting to manufacture or production under the provisions of the manufacturing drawback law, on the commercially interchangeable substituted merchandise is not a use of that merchandise for purposes of this section.

(f) Designation by successor; 19 U.S.C. 1313(s)—(1) General rule. Upon compliance with the requirements of this section and under 19 U.S.C. 1313(s), a drawback successor as defined in paragraph (f)(2) of this section may designate either of the following as the basis for drawback on merchandise possessed by the successor after the date of succession:

(i) Imported merchandise which the predecessor, before the date of succession, imported; or

(ii) Imported and/or commercially interchangeable merchandise which was transferred to the predecessor and for which the predecessor received, before the date of succession, a certificate of delivery from the person who imported and paid duty on the imported merchandise.

(2) Drawback successor. A “drawback successor” is an entity to which another entity (predecessor) has transferred, by written agreement, merger, or corporate resolution:

(i) All or substantially all of the rights, privileges, immunities, powers, duties, and liabilities of the predecessor; or

(ii) The assets and other business interests of a division, plant, or other business unit of such predecessor, provided that the value of the transferred assets and interests (realty, personality, and intangibles, exclusive of the drawback rights) exceeds the value of such drawback rights, whether vested or contingent.

(3) Certifications and required evidence—(i) Records of predecessor. The predecessor or successor must certify in an attachment to the drawback claim that the successor is in possession of the predecessor's records which are necessary to establish the right to drawback under the law and regulations with respect to the imported and/or commercially interchangeable merchandise.

(ii) Merchandise not otherwise designated. The predecessor or successor must certify in an attachment to the drawback claim, that the predecessor has not and will not designate, nor enable any other person to designate, the imported and/or commercially interchangeable merchandise as the basis for drawback.

(iii) Value of transferred property. In instances in which assets and other business interests of a division, plant, or other business unit of a predecessor are transferred, the predecessor or successor must specify, and maintain supporting records to establish, the value of the drawback rights and the value of all other transferred property.

(iv) Review by Customs. The written agreement, merger, or corporate resolution, provided for in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, and the records and evidence provided for in paragraph (f)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section, must be retained by the appropriate party(ies) for 3 years from the date of payment of the related claim and are subject to review by Customs upon request.

[T.D. 98-16, 63 FR 11006, Mar. 5, 1998; 63 FR 15288, Mar. 31, 1998, as amended by USCBP-2018-0029, 83 FR 65064, Dec. 18, 2018]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 2000–2018 · leading case: Precision Specialty Metals, Inc. v. United States, 116 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).
Precision Specialty Metals, Inc. v. United States, 116 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000). “B at 3; see also 19 C.F.R. § 191.32 (b) (1996). Indeed, as Customs noted, since 1936 it has expressly required exclusion of the value of valuable waste from the amount of drawback.”
Florida Citrus Mut. v. United States, 550 F.3d 1105 (Fed. Cir. 2008). “19 C.F.R. § 191.32 (a) (2008); see generally 19 U.”
Fischer S.A. Comercio, Industria & Agricultura v. United States, 2012 CIT 149 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012). “3d at 1109 (citing 19 C.F.R. § 191.32 (a)). 6 . Commerce's Antidumping Manual states: Where no sales of the like product are made in the exporting country in the month of the U.”
E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. United States, 561 F. Supp. 2d 1320 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008). · cites it 2× “22, set forth recordkeeping requirements for direct identification claims that also apply to substitution claims, with exceptions for the specific recordkeeping requirements applying to substitution claims under 19 C.F.R. § 191.32 . See 19 C.F.R. §§ 191.”
Florida Citrus Mut. v. United States, 515 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007). “19 C.F.R. § 191.32 ; see generally 19 U.S.”
Porsche Motorsports N. Am., Inc. v. United States, 2018 CIT 105 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018). “§1313 (j)(2) & 19 C.F.R. §191.32 (substitution drawback).”
BP Oil Supply Co. v. United States, 2011 CIT 116 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011). “See 19 C.F.R. §§ 191.32 (b)&(d)(1) (1998–2010).”
BP Oil Supply Co. v. United States, 2014 CIT 48 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014). “103-361, at 131 (1993); 19 C.F.R. § 191.32 (c). It may also examine negotiations between commercial actors, the description of the goods on bills of sale or invoices, as well as other relevant factual evidence.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.