U.S. Code » Title 19 » Chapter CHAPTER 4— TARIFF ACT OF 1930 › Subtitle SUBTITLE IV— COUNTERVAILING AND ANTIDUMPING DUTIES › Part Part I— Imposition of Countervailing Duties

19 U.S.C. § 1671h

Conditional payment of countervailing duty

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 19 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) In general

For all entries, or withdrawals from warehouse, for consumption of merchandise subject to a countervailing duty order on or after the date of publication of such order, no customs officer may deliver merchandise of that class or kind to the person by whom or for whose account it was imported unless that person complies with the requirement of subsection (b) and deposits with the appropriate customs officer an estimated countervailing duty in an amount determined by the administering authority.

(b) Importer requirementsIn order to meet the requirements of this subsection, a person shall—(1) furnish, or arrange to have furnished, to the appropriate customs officer such information as the administering authority deems necessary for ascertaining any countervailing duty to be imposed under this part,(2) maintain and furnish to the customs officer such records concerning such merchandise as the administering authority, by regulation, requires, and(3) pay, or agree to pay on demand, to the customs officer the amount of countervailing duty imposed under this part on that merchandise.(June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title VII, § 709, as added Pub. L. 98–573, title VI, § 608, Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3029.)Editorial NotesStatutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Oct. 30, 1984, see section 626(a) of Pub. L. 98–573, set out as an Effective Date of 1984 Amendment note under section 1671 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1997–2013 · leading case: GPX Int'l Tire Corp v. United States, 2013 CIT 2 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
GPX Int'l Tire Corp v. United States, 2013 CIT 2 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013). “19 U.S.C. § 1671h. Of course, the competitiveness of the products of the exporter and producer is affected.”
New Zealand Lamb Co. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 442 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997). “19 U.S.C. § 1671h (1988). The U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”), the administering authority, published a final countervailing duty order for lamb meat from New Zealand which stated: The net bounty or grant for the review period is NZ$0.”
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.