DCN September Edition 2019

INDUSTRY OPINION
Cut to size: exciting
new decision from the AAT
Susan Danks analyses moves to reclassify goods to enable anti-dumping duties
to apply and a decision by the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal
REPORTS HAVE EMERGED THAT
faced with similar quandaries. This
imports of aluminium or steel parts are
matter concerned the tariff classification
being reclassified by the Australian Border
of aluminium extrusions in profile form
Force regarding the application of anti-
imported by the Applicant, Solu Pty Ltd
dumping duties. The situation appears to
from China.
occur when an import declaration is routed
The ABF contended that the goods were
red line on lodgement and the ABF then
classified 7604. The importer contended
determines the goods are properly classified
that they were classified as furniture parts
to, for example, 7604 as aluminium
to 9403 or 8302 depending upon the
extrusions rather than as parts. This is
particular good.
particularly concerning where the subject
The ABF placed great store on the
goods have until then been classified as
requirement for the goods to be cut to size
parts, not only because of the potential
after importation and that as imported
risk of penalties being imposed, but also
they were in varying lengths. They claimed
because of the consequential huge increase
that the imported goods were “materials”
in duties payable.
as it was only after importation that they
were further worked (i.e. cut) into “parts”.
NEED FOR RULINGS
If we ignore the need for all parties to be
A RESPONSE FROM THE AAT
Susan Danks, industry analyst
properly trained in tariff classification and
The AAT response: Firstly, heading 8302 does
anti-dumping, how does a broker respond
not provide that the classification of goods
finger recess. As presented, at the time of
to such a situation? As you know, while
under this heading must be of a specific length
importation, the incomplete or unfinished
industry has often requested a ruling system
or size. Secondly, while the subject goods are
article has the essential character of the
for anti-dumping similar to that which
often cut to size after importation, the process
complete or finished article. The goods are not
exists for tariff classification and valuation,
of cutting the subject goods to size or at an
substantially transformed or worked before
no such decision from the regulator is
angle after importation does not alter the
installation into cabinetry and are as such not
available. Brokers can lodge applications
design or use of the goods, and does not affect
“materials” but “parts” for furniture.
for tariff advice, however, this may not
the classification of these goods as the complete
be determinative and, as we have all
or finished good… No further modification
POSSIBLE APPEAL
experienced, many importers are unwilling
or working of the goods is required. They are
It will be interesting to see if ABF appeal
to pursue an appeal via s.273GA to the
merely glued into place on installation (except
this decision of the AAT. Meantime, given
Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
for the Mounting Track) and in some instances
this interpretation of “parts” v “materials”
they can be installed into furniture in the size
has been a long held practice of the ABF,
IMPORTED GOODS AS “MATERIALS” V
“PARTS”
The decision in this matter will therefore
be of great interest to customs brokers
as imported…
Cutting to size does not change or
alter the design or use of the aluminium
rails, aluminium edge profiles and cabinet
it may be timely to review the tariff
classification of materials/parts imported
by clients that require only being cut to size
before installation.
Image supplied
58 September 2019
thedcn.com.au