Phil. B. Bekeart Co. v. United States

13 Cust. Ct. 18, 1944 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 523
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedJune 28, 1944
DocketC. D. 861
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 13 Cust. Ct. 18 (Phil. B. Bekeart Co. 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
Phil. B. Bekeart Co. v. United States, 13 Cust. Ct. 18, 1944 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 523 (cusc 1944).

Opinion

EKwall, Judge:

Three packages of fishhooks were sent by parcel post from England to San Francisco, Calif., and were there made the subject of informal entries on customs Form 3419 (Art. 375, Customs Regulations of 1937). On each of such entries the “Value,” and “Rate,” and “Duty” columns are properly filled out, with no mention of the British purchase tax, nor any indication that the appraiser did other than accept the value set out in the entry. The entries were duly liquidated and within 60 days protests were filed against such liquidations. The protests are identical in terms and the pertinent portion thereof reads as follows:

Protest is hereby made against your liquidation * * *. The reasons for objection under Tariff Act of 1930 are as follows:
British purchase tax not dutiable inasmuch as hooks were manufactured for sale in United States only.

When the cases were called for hearing at San Francisco,, the Government attorney moved for their dismissal on the ground that the question sought to be raised by the protests was purely one of value which could be raised only by appeal to reappraisement under section 501 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and not by protest against the liquidation under section 514 of the same act. The attorney for the importer reserved his answer to the motion at the time it was made, but subsequently filed such answer in two briefs which are before us. We may express at once our belief that the issue attempted to be made by the protests concerns the value of the merchandise, and that the Government’s contention based on that ground is sound. We may take judicial notice, of course, of the proceedings in our own court and we know that the matter of the British purchase tax now being litigated lies in reappraisement and not in classification or administration. See Alfred Dunhill, etc. v. United States, R. D. 5794, and Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp. v. United States, R. D. 5976.

However,' giving heed to the somewhat urgent insistence of importer’s counsel that mail entries should have a different treatment, we shall consider the subject in some detail.

Such consideration involves recourse to statute law, to treaties or agreements in the nature of treaties, and to customs regulations made pursuant to express authority granted by Congress.

[20]*20The statute law is found in section 498 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which, insofar as here pertinent, is as follows:

SEC. 498. ENTRY UNDER REGULATIONS.
(a) Authorized por Certain Merchandise. — The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to prescribe rules and regulations for the declaration and entry of—
(1) Merchandise not exceeding $100 in value, including such merchandise imported through the mails;
* * * * * * *

The merchandise here involved was valued at less than $100' on-each entry.

As to parcel-post conventions or agreements, the United States and. the United Kingdom have joined in two, the earlier being the Parcel Post Convention with the United Kingdom and Ireland, effective April 1, 1905 (33 Stat. part 2, p. 2301) and the later, approved by the President November 19, 1924, being designated as a Parcel Post Agreement with Great Britain and Northern Ireland (43 Stat. Part. 2. p. 1854). The latter agreement seems to us to supplement the-earlier one, rather than to supersede it, going more into detail with respect to parcel-post packages, especially insured packages. There.are no repealing words in the later agreement.

Article VII of the Convention of 1905 reads:

1. The sender of each parcel shall make a Customs declaration upon a special form provided for the purpose, giving a general description of the parcel, an accurate statement of its contents and value, the date of posting, and the sender’s-signature and place of address. This declaration shall be placed upon or attached to the parcel.
2. The parcels in question shall be subject in the country of destination to all Customs duties and all Customs regulations in force in that country for the protection of its Cdstoms revenue; and the Customs duties properly chargeable-thereon shall be collected on delivery, in accordance with the Customs regulations-of the country of destination.
*******

The customs regulations in effect at the time of the importations; here in suit were those of 1937 and are set forth in chapter VII, page 221 et seq. They are quite elaborate and include some joint regulations in which the Treasury Department and the Post Office Department collaborated. We are particularly interested in the- following:.

Art. 367. Customs declarations and invoices. — (a) (J. R. 9a.) A customs-declaration (on the form provided by the foreign mailing office), giving an- accurate-description and the value of the contents, shall accompany each parcel post shipment and be securely attached thereto. Commercial shipments- by parcel post shall also be accompanied by commercial invoices. In case the shipment consists; of more than one package, the invoice shall be placed in the package to which the postal form of customs declaration is attached. There shall be enclosed with the contents of all mail articles containing merchandise dispatched under the respective mail classifications of the Universal Postal Union Conventions, an invoice in the case of commercial shipments, or a statement of value in the- case- of mer[21]*21chandise not purchased or consigned for sale, giving an accurate description and value of the merchandise. If impracticable to enclose the invoice or statement within a sealed article, the same shall be securely attached to the article.
Art. 375. Mail entries — Issuance.—(a) Customs officers will issue mail entries in quadruplicate on customs Form 3419 for articles subject to duty, and on customs Form 3421 for articles subject to fine. Information concerning the merchandise shall be stated on the entry in the following order: (1) Quantity; (2) commercial name; (3) description in the terms of the tariff act, and (4) the number of the paragraph of the tariff act covering the item. The original and duplicate copies of the entry shall be placed in a tag envelope attached to the package for disposition by the postmaster according to the instructions printed on the back of the entry. The triplicate copy should be sent immediately to the comptroller of customs, and the quadruplicate copy retained in the files of the issuing office.
(6) Mail entries shall not be issued covering articles unconditionally free of duty, but formal entry is required for such articles when the value thereof exceeds $100.
*******
Art. 378. Liquidation. — Mail entries on customs Form 3419 will be scheduled on customs Form 5171 and liquidated in accordance with article 830.
Art. 380. Dissatisfied addressees — Procedure.—(a) (J. R. 16a.) Amounts collected on mail entry forms shall not be refunded by postmasters. Should an addressee be dissatisfied with the charges he should notify in writing the postmaster, who shall hold the package and report the facts to the collector of customs who issued the entry, forwarding such papers or statements as the addressee may submit.

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

Related

Trinity Episcopal Church v. United States
46 Cust. Ct. 296 (U.S. Customs Court, 1961)
Hirschman v. United States
45 Cust. Ct. 48 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)
Goldstein v. United States
40 Cust. Ct. 213 (U.S. Customs Court, 1958)
Heemsoth Kerner Corp. v. United States
31 Cust. Ct. 113 (U.S. Customs Court, 1953)
Universal Importing Corp. v. United States
30 Cust. Ct. 364 (U.S. Customs Court, 1953)
Ludlow Manufacturing & Sales Co. v. United States
22 Cust. Ct. 17 (U.S. Customs Court, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Cust. Ct. 18, 1944 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phil-b-bekeart-co-v-united-states-cusc-1944.