7 U.S.C. § 518d
Use of assessments as source of funds for payments
The term “base period’ 1
The term “market share” means the share of each manufacturer or importer of a class of tobacco product (expressed as a decimal to the fourth place) of the total volume of domestic sales of the class of tobacco product during the base period for a fiscal year for an assessment under this section.
The Secretary, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, shall impose quarterly assessments during each of fiscal years 2005 through 2014, calculated in accordance with this section, on each tobacco product manufacturer and tobacco product importer that sells tobacco products in domestic commerce in the United States during that fiscal year.
Assessments collected under this section shall be deposited in the Tobacco Trust Fund.
For subsequent fiscal years, the Secretary shall periodically adjust the percentage of the total amount required under subsection (b) to be assessed against, and paid by, the manufacturers and importers of each class of tobacco product specified in paragraph (1) to reflect changes in the share of gross domestic volume held by that class of tobacco product.
If the Secretary determines that the assessment imposed under subsection (b) will result in insufficient amounts to carry out this subchapter during a fiscal year, the Secretary shall assess such additional amounts as the Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out this subchapter during that fiscal year. The additional amount shall be allocated to manufacturers and importers of each class of tobacco product specified in paragraph (1) in the same manner and based on the same percentages applicable under paragraph (1) or (2) for that fiscal year.
The Secretary shall provide each manufacturer or importer subject to an assessment under subsection (b) with written notice setting forth the amount to be assessed against the manufacturer or importer for each quarterly payment period. The notice for a quarterly period shall be provided not later than 30 days before the date payment is due under paragraph (3).
Assessments shall be collected at the end of each calendar year quarter, except that the Secretary shall ensure that the final assessment due under this section is collected not later than
The assessment for a calendar year quarter shall correspond to the base period quarter that ended at the end of the preceding calendar year quarter.
The assessment for each class of tobacco product specified in subsection (c)(1) shall be allocated on a pro rata basis among manufacturers and importers based on each manufacturer’s or importer’s share of gross domestic volume.
No manufacturer or importer shall be required to pay an assessment that is based on a share that is in excess of the manufacturer’s or importer’s share of domestic volume.
The calculation of the volume of domestic sales of a class of tobacco product by a manufacturer or importer, and by all manufacturers and importers as a group, shall be made by the Secretary based on information provided by the manufacturers and importers pursuant to subsection (h), as well as any other relevant information provided to or obtained by the Secretary.
The volume of domestic sales shall be calculated based on gross domestic volume.
Each manufacturer and importer of tobacco products shall submit to the Secretary a certified copy of each of the returns or forms described by paragraph (2) that are required to be filed with a Federal agency on the same date that those returns or forms are filed, or required to be filed, with the agency.
Any person that knowingly fails to provide information required under this subsection or that provides false information under this subsection shall be subject to the penalties described in section 1003 of title 18. The Secretary may also assess against the person a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed two percent of the value of the kind of tobacco products manufactured or imported by the person during the fiscal year in which the violation occurred, as determined by the Secretary.
A manufacturer or importer subject to this section may contest an assessment imposed on the manufacturer or importer under this section by notifying the Secretary, not later than 30 business days after receiving the assessment notification required by subsection (d), that the manufacturer or importer intends to contest the assessment.
Not later than 180 days after
If a manufacturer or importer establishes that the initial determination of the amount of an assessment is incorrect, the Secretary shall revise the amount of the assessment so that the manufacturer or importer is required to pay only the amount correctly determined.
The regulations promulgated by the Secretary under paragraph (2) shall provide for the immediate payment by a manufacturer or importer challenging an assessment of that portion of the assessment that is not in dispute. The manufacturer and importer may place into escrow, in accordance with such regulations, only the portion of the assessment being challenged in good faith pending final determination of the claim.
Any manufacturer or importer aggrieved by a determination of the Secretary with respect to the amount of any assessment may seek review of the determination in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or for the district in which the manufacturer or importer resides or has its principal place of business at any time following exhaustion of the administrative remedies available under subsection (i).
Administrative remedies shall be deemed exhausted if no decision by the Secretary is made within the time limits established under subsection (i)(4).
The court shall restrain collection of the excessive portion of any assessment or order a refund of excessive assessments already paid, along with interest calculated at the rate prescribed in section 3717 of title 31, if it finds that the Secretary’s determination is not supported by a preponderance of the information available to the Secretary.
The authority provided by this section to impose assessments terminates on
The Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, referred to in subsec. (a)(2)(B), is not set out in the Code. See Publication of Harmonized Tariff Schedule note set out under section 1202 of Title 19, Customs Duties.
Section applicable to the 2005 and subsequent crops of tobacco, see section 643 of Pub. L. 108–357, set out as a note under section 518 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2021 · leading case: Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
Swisher International, Inc. v. Schafer (2008)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(1), (e)(1). The percentage *1050 of the total yearly assessment for which each class is responsible was statutorily established for fiscal year 2005, but the Secretary has the authority to adjust the percentages in subsequent years.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
Cigar Association of America v. FDA (2021)
“The “applicable percentage” for six enumerated classes of tobacco products — cigarettes, cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco — is the percentage set pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c) of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act (“FETRA”).”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
International Tobacco Partners, Ltd. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2012)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). The gross domestic volume of cigarettes or cigars is measured by the number of cigarette or cigar sticks that are taken from inventory or released from customs in a given year, and the gross domestic volume of other tobacco products is measured in pounds.”
Prime Time International Co. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2014)
“See 7 U.S.C. § 518d. First, USDA must calculate the total monetary assessment needed to fund the subsidy program.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(3) — 1 case
Neese v. Johanns (2006)
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) — 6 cases
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
International Tobacco Partners, Ltd. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2012)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). The gross domestic volume of cigarettes or cigars is measured by the number of cigarette or cigar sticks that are taken from inventory or released from customs in a given year, and the gross domestic volume of other tobacco products is measured in pounds.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A) — 4 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(B) — 1 case
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3) — 6 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(l) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b) — 2 cases
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
International Tobacco Partners, Ltd. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2012)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). The gross domestic volume of cigarettes or cigars is measured by the number of cigarette or cigar sticks that are taken from inventory or released from customs in a given year, and the gross domestic volume of other tobacco products is measured in pounds.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(1) — 1 case
Swisher International, Inc. v. Schafer (2008)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(1), (e)(1). The percentage *1050 of the total yearly assessment for which each class is responsible was statutorily established for fiscal year 2005, but the Secretary has the authority to adjust the percentages in subsequent years.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(2) — 2 cases
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l) — 4 cases
Swisher International, Inc. v. Schafer (2008)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(1), (e)(1). The percentage *1050 of the total yearly assessment for which each class is responsible was statutorily established for fiscal year 2005, but the Secretary has the authority to adjust the percentages in subsequent years.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c) — 7 cases
Cigar Association of America v. FDA (2021)
“The “applicable percentage” for six enumerated classes of tobacco products — cigarettes, cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco — is the percentage set pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c) of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act (“FETRA”).”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(1) — 7 cases
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
Cigar Association of America v. FDA (2021)
“The “applicable percentage” for six enumerated classes of tobacco products — cigarettes, cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco — is the percentage set pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c) of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act (“FETRA”).”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(1)(A) — 2 cases
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(1)(B) — 1 case
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(2) — 3 cases
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(3) — 1 case
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(l) — 6 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
International Tobacco Partners, Ltd. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2012)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). The gross domestic volume of cigarettes or cigars is measured by the number of cigarette or cigar sticks that are taken from inventory or released from customs in a given year, and the gross domestic volume of other tobacco products is measured in pounds.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(l)(A) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(c)(l)(B) — 1 case
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(d)(3)(A) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(d)(3)(B) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(e) — 5 cases
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
Cigar Ass'n of Am. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin. (2018)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2). Plaintiffs suggest that the FDA could use product equivalencies to assist in calculating user fees for e-cigarettes, asserting that "FDA itself identified metrics in its response to comments.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(e)(1) — 3 cases
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(e)(2) — 2 cases
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(e)(l) — 2 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(f) — 4 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g) — 2 cases
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
Prime Time International Co. v. United States Department of Agriculture (2014)
“See 7 U.S.C. § 518d. First, USDA must calculate the total monetary assessment needed to fund the subsidy program.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(1) — 2 cases
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(2) — 3 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(3) — 5 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
Philip Morris USA, Incorporated v. Thomas Vilsack (2013)
“In February of 2005, USDA promulgated a final rule implementing the FETRA assessment methodology codified at 7 U.S.C. § 518d. Tobacco Transition Assessments, 70 Fed.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Vilsack (2012)
“Title 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2) defines gross domestic volume as “the volume of tobacco products (A) removed [from the factory, internal revenue bond or customs custody] and (B) not exempt from tax.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(3)(A) — 4 cases
Swisher International, Inc. v. Schafer (2008)
“7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(1), (e)(1). The percentage *1050 of the total yearly assessment for which each class is responsible was statutorily established for fiscal year 2005, but the Secretary has the authority to adjust the percentages in subsequent years.”
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(3)(B) — 1 case
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(g)(l) — 2 cases
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(h) — 3 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(h)(2) — 2 cases
Single Stick, Inc. v. Johanns (2009)
“§ 518d(g)(2), which considers the amount of tobacco products removed, see 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(2)(A), and that each manufacturer is to be assessed its pro rata share of gross domestic volume.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(h)(3) — 1 case
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(h)(l) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(i) — 3 cases
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
United States v. Tourtellot (2012)
“In determining a particular manufacturer’s or importer’s assessment, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Commodity Credit Corporation, imposes quarterly assessments under a two-step procedure set out in 7 U.S.C. § 518d. 7 U.S.C. § 518d(b)(l). First, the Secretary…”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(i)(2) — 2 cases
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(i)(4)(B) — 1 case
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(i)(l) — 2 cases
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
United States v. Native Wholesale Supply Co. (2011)
“” 7 U.S.C. § 518d(a)(3). “The “base period” is defined as “the one-year period ending the June 30 before the beginning of a fiscal year.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(j) — 1 case
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(j)(3) — 1 case
United States v. Prime Time International Company (2013)
“Instead, the final legislation created an assessment, administered by USDA only, on six classes of tobacco products — including cigars as a class, but not subdividing large and small cigars into separate classes.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(j)(l) — 1 case
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
— 7 U.S.C. § 518d(k) — 1 case
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. United States Department of Agriculture (2015)
“Per the FETRA, that determination was made *362 by dividing each individual manufacturer’s and importer’s volume of domestic sales of the particular class of tobacco product by the total volume of domestic sales of that product.”
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.