A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc. v. United States

47 Cust. Ct. 494
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedOctober 31, 1961
DocketReap. Dec. 10091; Entry No. 832644, etc.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 47 Cust. Ct. 494 (A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc. v. United States, 47 Cust. Ct. 494 (cusc 1961).

Opinion

LawbbNCe, Judge:

Importations of certain flatware, consisting of spoons, forks, knives, coffee spoons, salad forks, and butter spreaders, all bearing the item number 2050, known as the “Vienna” pattern, were appraised on the basis of their foreign value in Austria in accordance with a home market pricelist.

The merchandise on the invoices dated prior to June 1, 1955, were appraised on the basis of that pricelist, less 25 per centum, less 2 per centum, plus packing. On the invoices subsequent to June 1, 1955, the articles were appraised in accordance with the pricelist, plus 10 per centum, less 25 per centum, less 2 per centum, plus packing.

Plaintiff contends that there is neither foreign nor export, nor United States value, for the subject merchandise or for similar merchandise and that the appraisement should be made on the basis of cost of production.

The pertinent statutory provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402 (c) (d) (e) (f)), as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, read as follows:

(c) Tbe foreign value of imported merebandise sball be tbe market value or tbe price at tbe time of exportation of sucb merchandise to tbe United States, at which sucb or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale for borne consumption to all purchasers in tbe principal markets of tbe country from which exported, in tbe usual wholesale quantities and in tbe ordinary course of trade, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing tbe merebandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to tbe United States.
(d) Tbe export value of imported merchandise sball be tbe market value or tbe price, at tbe time of exportation of such merebandise to tbe United States, at which sucb or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in tbe principal markets of tbe country from which exported, in tbe usual wholesale quantities and in tbe ordinary course of trade, for exportation to tbe United States, plus, when not included in sucb price, tbe cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merebandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to tbe United States.
(e) Tbe United States value of imported merebandise sball be tbe price at which sucb or similar imported merebandise is freely offered for sale for domestic consumption, packed ready for delivery, in tbe principal market of [496]*496the United States to all purchasers, at the time of exportation of the imported merchandise, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, with allowance made for duty, cost of transportation and insurance, and other necessary expenses from the place of shipment to the place of delivery, a commission not exceeding 6 per centum, if any has been paid or contracted to be paid on goods secured otherwise than by purchase, or profits not to exceed 8 per centum and a reasonable allowance for general expenses, not to exceed 8 per centum on purchased goods.
(f) For the purpose of this subtitle the cost of production of imported merchandise shall be the sum of—
(1) The cost of materials of, and of fabrication, manipulation, or other process employed in manufacturing or producing such or similar merchandise, at a time preceding the date of exportation of the particular merchandise under consideration which would ordinarily permit the manufacture or production of the particular merchandise under consideration in the usual course of business;
(2) The usual general expenses (not less than 10 per centum of such cost) in the case of such or similar merchandise;
(3) The cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing, the particular merchandise under consideration in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States; and
(4) An addition for profit (not less than 8 per centum of the sum of the amounts found under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subdivision) equal to the profit which ordinarily is added, in the case of merchandise of the same general character as the particular merchandise under consideration, by manufacturers or producers in the country of manufacture or production who are engaged in the production or manufacture of merchandise of the same class or kind.

At the trial, five reappraisement appeals, enumerated in schedule “A,” attached hereto, were consolidated for trial. The evidence produced at the trial on behalf of plaintiff consisted of the testimony of one witness and two affidavits, which were marked exhibits 1 and 2, respectively. The Government introduced a report of the Treasury representative in Frankfort, Germany, which was marked in evidence as collective exhibit A.

It is provided by statute (19 U.S.C. § 1402(a)) that the value of imported merchandise shall be the foreign value or the export value, whichever is higher, and where such value cannot satisfactorily be ascertained, resort may be had to the United States value or the cost of production, respectively.

Accordingly, consideration will be given first to the presence or absence of a foreign or export value for the stainless steel flatware in issue.

Plaintiff’s exhibit 1 consists of an affidavit of Ur. Friedrich Flach, managing director of the seller, duly sworn to before the American consul, October 17,1960, wherein it is stated as follows:

Dr. Friedrich Flach, being first duly sworn deposes and says that he is a citizen and resident of Austria; that he is the managing director of [497]*497Neuzeughammer Ambosswerk, Neuzeug bei Steyr, Austria; that lie has been with, said company for more than 10 years; that said company is engaged in the manufacture and sale of cutlery and flatware since 1769; that as managing director he is familiar with the items manufactured and solid by said company to A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc., New York, U.S.A. during the period from January 1955 to-date; that said items consisted of certain flatware of Vienna modern pattern item number 2050; that said items were designed and created in 1954 specially and solely for the United States market; that as managing director he is familiar with market conditions in Austria relating to the offer and sale 'of flatware such as or similar to the item sold and exported by his firm to the United States; that at no time during the aboye mentioned period of January 1955 to date did his firm freely 'offer or sell such or similar flatware to all purchasers for home consumption in Austria but limited and restricted offers and sales as follows:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc. v. United States
50 Cust. Ct. 545 (U.S. Customs Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 Cust. Ct. 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-j-van-dugteren-sons-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1961.