U.S. Code » Title 19 » Chapter CHAPTER 4— TARIFF ACT OF 1930 › Subtitle SUBTITLE III— ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS › Part Part III— Ascertainment, Collection, and Recovery of Duties

19 U.S.C. § 1503

Dutiable value

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 19 CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as provided in section 1520(c) 11 See References in Text note below. of this title (relating to reliquidations on the basis of authorized corrections of errors) or section 1562 of this title (relating to withdrawal from manip­ulating warehouses), the basis for the assessment of duties on imported merchandise subject to ad valorem rates of duty or rates based upon or regulated in any manner by the value of the merchandise, shall be the appraised value determined upon liquidation, in accordance with section 1500 of this title or any adjustment thereof made pursuant to section 1501 of this title. Provided, however, That if reliquidation is required pursuant to a final judgment or order of the United States Court of International Trade which includes a reappraisement of imported merchandise, the basis for such assessment shall be the final appraised value determined by such court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1949–2023 · leading case: Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. United States, 532 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. United States, 532 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2008). · cites it 4× “12 and 19 U.S.C. § 1503 also demonstrates that an allowance under the regulation merges into liquidation.”
United States v. Ven-Fuel, Inc., 758 F.2d 741 (1st Cir. 1985). “19 U.S.C. § 1503 . The price for the merchandise when it was sold for exportation to the United States is the critical element.”
United States Ex Rel. Tamanaha v. Furukawa Am., Inc., 445 F. App'x 992 (9th Cir. 2011). “2 (demanding entry and liquidation of imported merchandise); 19 U.S.C. § 1503 (assessment of duties on imports is generally based on the appraised value of the imported goods as determined on liquidation); Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2011) (codified at 19 U.”
United States v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 2015 CIT 120 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015). “19 U.S.C. § 1503 (d). 13 . Indeed, in the recent case of AH AC III, the Federal Circuit did not find that it was prevented, by the rule of finality, front hearing the defendant’s claim that it was not liable for antidumping duties under its bond because the entries covered had…”
Second Nature Designs Ltd. v. United States, 2023 CIT 116 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). “Motion to Dismiss the Counterclaim for Failure to State a Claim Defendant pleaded the following counterclaim in its Answer: Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff, United States, brings this counterclaim pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §§ 1503 , 1505(b) & (c), the tariff code ( 19 U.”
Brooks Paper Co. v. United States, 23 Cust. Ct. 277 (Cust. Ct. 1949). · cites it 2× “The *278 merchandise was entered under the provisions of section 503 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U. S. C. § 1503 (b)) at 80 pfennig per square meter, less 3 per centum, packed.”
N. M. Albert Co. v. United States, 34 Cust. Ct. 102 (Cust. Ct. 1955). “Section 503 of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U. S. C. § 1503 (a)) provides as follows: SEC.”
Maple Leaf Mktg., Inc. v. United States, 2023 CIT 90 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). · cites it 2× “Equally inapposite is 19 U.S.C. § 1503 , which concerns reliquidations ordered by the U.”
Brooks Paper Co. v. United States, 40 C.C.P.A. 38 (C.C.P.A. 1952). “It was valued on the consular invoice at 60 pfennig per square meter and entered pursuant to the provisions of section 503 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U. S. C. § 1503 (b), at 80 pfennig per square meter less 3 per centum, packed.”
Richard Nathan Corp. v. United States, 39 Cust. Ct. 523 (Cust. Ct. 1957). “In view of the requirements of section 503 (a) (b), Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U. S. C. § 1503 (a) (b)) and following Eurasia Import Co.”
Eccardt v. United States, 30 Cust. Ct. 377 (Cust. Ct. 1953). “(Section 503, Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U. S. C. § 1503 .) At the hearing, counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest insofar as it seeks any alteration in the entered and appraised value which has become final under the statute.”
Field v. United States, 25 Cust. Ct. 286 (Cust. Ct. 1950). “” Such recitations would have been proper in situations involving so-called duress entries made under the provisions of section 503 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U. S. C. § 1503 (b)) wherein the importer certifies at the time of entry that he has entered the merchandise at…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.