Skip to main content

Importers Plead Guilty to Import Scheme in Puerto Rico

Image
By
In last month’s blog we warned those who conspire to circumvent U.S. tariffs on Chinese aluminum extrusions would be caught, prosecuted, and convicted.

According to El Vocero de Puerto Rico, this week importers plead guilty to Federal Judge Francisco Besosa. As part of the plea agreement employers are fined $1,000 and face a forfeiture of $4 million.  Samuel Garcia Adarme, Edrick García Vázquez, Armando García Vázquez, Carlos Minguela and PRP Trading Corporation will be sentenced on December 17. The article goes on to say, “The group was indicted by a Grand Jury on July 20, 2013, together with the companies Screens & Aluminum Industries Sales and Aluwest.  According to the indictment, the conspiracy was for defendants Adarme García and García Vázquez brothers and Minguela Ortiz with assistance from Tang Piu Wong, [to] buy aluminum in China, Malaysia transported, repackaged it and created false invoices to make it appear that the Aluminum was originally from Malaysia and then bring it to Puerto Rico.”

The Aluminum Extruders Council continues to collect information regarding circumvention schemes all across the country.  If you have any information that can be of assistance, let us know. Contact Jeff Henderson at AEC Headquarters.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Nice Win to Start the Year!

By
 For months you’ve read my blog posts bemoaning the terrible decisions coming out of Washington D.C. related to our case.  Well, with the New Year, we have a fresh start.  And it’s a good one!  The industry has won its first Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) case involving fencing extrusions.  On December 20, 2023, Fortress withdrew its request for an administrative review, prompting U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) to terminate the administrative review entirely. Termination of the review makes the CBP’s affirmative determination of evasion final.  When terminating the review, CBP clarified that termination does not in any way preclude CBP or other agencies from pursuing additional enforcement actions against Fortress or imposing penalties should the need arise. The other EAPA fencing case is pending, and it appears the respondent is not participating.  We submitted voluntary factual information and the company in question did not submit writte...
Post a Comment
Read more

Keep That Ram Moving Forward

By
By Jason Weber, AEC VP of Government Affairs   On June 17 th , the International Trade Commission (ITC) will issue the Final Producer Questionnaire in the Aluminum Extrusion AD/CVD cases .  The questionnaire is due 30 days after it is issued .  As always, we continue to update membership with Trade Alerts as appropriate to keep them informed .  Beyond the Final Producer Questionnaire, key upcoming dates are the Final Hearing on September 9, 2024, the Final Vote on October 23, 2024, and the Final Determination on November 11 , 2024.   In last month’s essentiALs article and Fair Trade blog post, I outlined the recent Department of Commerce (DOC) changes to the 232 Aluminum Tariffs .  In that article, I outlined the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes that were removed from the General Approved Exclusions (GAEs):    GAE. 1.A : HTS 7609000000 (Aluminum tube or pipe fittings (for example, couplings, elbows, sleeves);   GAE. 4.A : ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Aluminum 232 Exclusion/Objection Process in Full Swing

By
Since our last update, the 232 exclusion/objection process is in full swing.  Over the last several weeks we have continued to refine the workflow and communication of the exclusion requests to make sure membership continues to receive the communications and objects when appropriate. For those members that have been working through the process we at AEC HQ thank you.  If for some reason you’re an AEC Extruder Member who should be receiving these communications, please let me know at jweber@tso.net and we’ll make sure you’re added to the distribution list. Although there are new companies submitting requests, we continue to see the same entities entering the bulk of the exclusion requests.  However, for the most part the exclusion requests are much the same with slight changes here and there.  This does simplify the objection process in a way where similar objections can be filed for multiple exclusion requests. As a reminder, price is not a valid reason for a company...
Post a Comment
Read more