Transportation

What might not be so obvious in this COVID-19 environment, which we have grown to associate with shortages, is that counterintuitively there are issues beginning to appear dealing with the opposite situation. The Journal of Commerce has reported that “[t]he container shipping industry is marshaling a response to signs of a building import backlog as some retailers and manufacturers fail to pick up containers because warehouses are full or closed due to not being deemed essential service providers responding to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).” This is a development with implications to all stakeholders in the supply chain and will have some impact on retailers/manufacturers, ocean carriers, ocean transportation intermediaries, and warehouses.

In the last year or so, it has become clearly evident to us that ocean carriers are treating European and other forwarders differently than how they deal with U.S. forwarders, creating a distinctly competitive disadvantage for U.S. ocean forwarders, NVOCCs and Customs brokers. The bottom line activity is that ocean carriers are creating beneficial sell rates to “forwarders”, usually in ocean carriers’ tariffs, for use exclusively by European forwarders located in certain locations in Europe and elsewhere (not the U.S.). We are using the term “forwarders” here in the U.S. sense. But for our narrative here, the European forwarder, located in Europe and other locations[1], will dispatch cargo from Europe based on lump sum rates formulated from the sell rates offered to them by the ocean carriers, but will not hold out as NVOCCs, nor issue house bills of lading. Many of these forwarders are neither licensed nor registered with the FMC as NVOCCs. In fact, U.S. forwarders under the current definition of “forwarders” could similarly issue lump sum rates under the current FMC regulations for export transport from the U.S. Unfortunately, the ocean carriers, probably sensitive to U.S. regulatory structures do not provide U.S. forwarders similarly competitive rate structures for exports from the U.S. or for inbound traffic controlled by U.S. consignees. But also, more egregiously, if a U.S. forwarder, who also may be an NVOCC/Customs broker, controls import cargo to be shipped to the U.S. on a “collect” basis, the U.S. Ocean Transportation Intermediary (“OTI”) may have to “purchase” a favorable rate from the unlicensed, unregistered forwarder in Europe who does have the benefit of the competitive rate, even though it may not be a licensed or registered NVOCC.  The question: Is this legal? After discussing this with FMC officials, the answer is, “Probably.”

Court of International Trade

Summary of Decisions

19-66

On June 3, 2019, in the ongoing case of determining whether or not Plaintiff Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon anchor products are considered to be nails, the CIT sustained the Department of Commerce’s final results of the redetermination pursuant to the Court Remand. The CIT concluded that Plaintiff’s zinc and nylon anchors do not function like nails and are considered a separate type of product from nails by the relevant industry. Commerce’s remand results were sustained and Plaintiff Midwest Fastener’s products were excluded from the scope.

19-69

On June 6, the CIT denied Plaintiffs Confederacion de Asociaciones Agricolas del Estado de Sinaloa, Consejo Agricola de Baja California, Asociacion Mexicana de Horticultura Protegida, Asociacion de Productores de Hortalizas del Yaqui y Mayo, and Sistem Producto Tomate (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and preliminary injunction (“PI”) in the antidumping duty investigation of tomatoes from Mexico. The Court determined that the Plaintiffs had not met their burden to establish the likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm absent injunctive relief. They also had failed to establish if the hardships tip in favor of denying the Plaintiff’s motion. The Court also found the public interest to be neutral. For those reasons the CIT denied the plaintiff’s motions.

U.S. International Trade Commission

Section 701/731 Proceedings

Investigations
  • Certain Pasta from Italy and Turkey: On April 10, 2019, the ITC announced its determination that the revocation on certain pasta from Italy and Turkey would lead to the continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States.
  • Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: On April 12, 2019, the ITC announced its final determinations in the AD and CVD investigation that industries in the US would be materially injured by the importation of the subject merchandise.
  • Larges Diameter Welded Pipe from Canada, Greece, Korea, and Turkey: On April 19, 2019, the ITC announced its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by the importation of the subject merchandise.
  • Steel Propane Cylinders from China and Thailand: On April 29, 2019, the ITC issued a revised schedule of the final Phase of the Countervailing Duty and Anti-Dumping Duty Investigations.
  • Certain Large Residential Washers from Korea and Mexico: On April 30, 2019, the ITC released its final determinations on whether or not the continuation of the subject merchandise from these countries would continue to cause material injury in the United States.

According to the American Trucking Association, there is a current shortage of about 51,000 drivers which is impacting U.S. retailers, and it is predicted to get worse in the coming years. The driver shortage is leading to delayed deliveries and higher prices. Also coupled with driver shortages are equipment shortages, including in the maritime container/chassis environment. Many, if not most, retailers are subject to seasonal cycles where timely delivery is key to a “make it or break it” year. Other retailers, such as e-commerce retailers and other lesser known industry groups (the animal feed industry, for example) do not have seasonal peaks, but a substantial percentage of these industry segments have same day or next day delivery requirements essentially on an on-going basis. The retailer industry, including e-retailers, are looking to different solutions for addressing these real bottom-line issues—i.e., getting all kinds of goods to customers in a timely manner.

On September 22, 2018, Bill (SB-1402) was signed into law in California to become effective January 1, 2019. That law will make a “Customer” that engages or uses “a port drayage motor carrier” jointly and severally liable with that port drayage motor carrier if that carrier is listed on the Internet Web site maintained by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. This ominous list will identify port drayage motor carriers which have been found liable to a “port drayage driver” for unsatisfied court judgments, assessments, orders, decisions, or awards, for port drayage services performed for which the drivers have not been paid or expenses for which they have not been reimbursed, plus damages, penalties, and interest.

The reason why this Bill is not as tentative as it sounds is that The California Labor Commissioner’s Office, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, has awarded in excess of $45 million in unlawful deductions from wages and out-of-pocket expenses to more than 400 drivers, and that drivers have seen little of those awards.

The following is a short, to the point, summary of recent developments which impact transportation intermediaries, some of which can be implemented simply without fanfare, others which just bear careful monitoring.  The Federal Maritime Commission (“FMC”) recently passed new regulations relating to Negotiated Rate Arrangements (“NRAs”), and NVOCC Service Arrangements (“NSAs”) which require some simple implementation, but then little else. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (“FMCSA”) has amended Hours of Service regulations which provide for strict usage of Electronic Logging Devices (“ELDs”), and a corresponding obligation for those intermediaries who select motor carriers for transport. Last but not least, we will briefly explore the question of where is the transport intermediary industry headed in the evolving e-commerce revolution?

President Trump signed a new Executive Order on August 6, 2018, titled “Reimposing Certain Sanctions with Respect to Iran”. The Executive Order was timed to coincide with the last day of the 90-day wind-down period established for activities associated with certain sanctions relief authorized by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (“JCPOA”).  As a result, the first round of sanctions against Iran will become effective at 12:01 a.m. on August 7, 2018.

On April 15, 2018, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) issued a denial order against ZTE Corporation and ZTE Kangxun Telecommunications Ltd. (collectively “ZTE”), effectively banning U.S. companies from providing components to ZTE  because the company had failed to comply with the terms of a disciplinary agreement reached in March 2017 arising from violations of U.S. export control restrictions against Iran and North Korea. It is estimated that U.S. companies provide nearly 25-30 percent of the components used in ZTE products. ZTE’s U.S. subsidiary advertises that it has been ranked by independent industry analysts as the fourth-largest supplier of mobile devices in the U.S. overall and second-largest supplier of prepaid devices.