
Who is the Importer of Record: Security Interests and the Right to Act As IOR
By: Gavin Andersen, Law Clerk, LCB and Adrienne Braumiller, Founding Partner, Braumiller Law Group Last June (2023), in response to a ruling request from Your Special

By: Gavin Andersen, Law Clerk, LCB and Adrienne Braumiller, Founding Partner, Braumiller Law Group Last June (2023), in response to a ruling request from Your Special

At the core of the definition, a Parallel import is a non-counterfeit product imported from another country without the permission of the intellectual property owner. They are also goods that are not authorized for importation into the U.S. It’s a global phenomenon, a very grey area, and their presence varies across different parts of the globe.

One of the most important requirements for importing goods into Mexico is to be registered as an importer under the Mexican importer’s registry. There are 2 types of registries for importers, one is for general importers (Padron de Importadores), and the other is for importers of specific industry sectors (Padron the Importadores de Sectores Especificos) which may import goods identified by the MX tariff code (i.e. chemical products, firearms, cigars, footwear, textiles, alcohol, hydrocarbons, steel, automotive, etc.). Generally, these 2 registries are lists with information of individuals and entities authorized to bring goods into Mexico.

Consider this scenario: a client faced the challenge of deferring duty payments while managing a significant volume of imports destined for re-exportation from the U.S. Initially considering duty drawbacks, which proved unsuitable for their specific needs, we turned our attention to bonded warehouses and free trade zones. This scenario is not uncommon in the trade world and highlights a critical decision point for many businesses: choosing between a bonded warehouse and a Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ).

The First Sale Rule applies in circumstances such as the example above. A US company places an order with a middleman in the US. The middleman in turn subcontracts to a foreign supplier. The supplier then ships the product either to the middleman or to the original US company that placed the order, meaning either could be the importer of record. The entered value could be the amount on the original purchase order or the price paid by the middleman to the foreign supplier.

The world of cryptocurrencies on blockchains and the world of traditional assets in markets have often stood in stark contrast to one another since Bitcoin’s creation in 2008. The lack of a reliable bridge between these two worlds has limited the impact of cryptocurrencies on assets in the real-world outside of on-chain speculation and prevented adoption of the benefits that blockchain technologies can bring to real world processes.

President elect Lai Ching-te’s victory in Taipei ignited tensions across the Taiwan strait and now the geopolitical field waits to see if China will kick off World War Three. I’m only slightly joking, but Beijing has exerted diplomatic pressure on nations maintaining close ties with the island in the past and Taiwan’s decision to remain a democracy will no doubt ramp up China’s reunification process in the coming months. But how will that affect trade relations?

In the complex world of international trade compliance, few people possess the expertise, dedication and problem-solving skills that Brad Menard, President of Braumiller Consulting Group, brings to his clients.

In recent years, the global spotlight has illuminated the grave concerns surrounding human rights violations within China’s Xinjiang region, particularly those impacting the Uyghur population. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) stands as a pivotal piece of legislation designed to address these concerns and to ensure that products imported into the United States are devoid of forced labor originating from the Xinjiang region.

The implementation of trade policies in what many consider acts of protectionism and manipulation are the norm, and of course China and the U.S. are a prime example. Solutions include nearshoring, reshoring, and protectionism. It’s complicated, so for the purpose of this article, let’s stick with nearshoring.

It comes as no surprise China has been a major focus point of the second Trump administration. One of the key reasons for this focus is the increasing national security concerns over technology. In particular, the smuggling of AI chips, which China intends to use in developing advanced AI systems for military purposes and surveillance.

Question 1: How are you advising businesses in your jurisdiction when protecting themselves from the impact of trade wars and sanctions, and what strategies can professional services firms offer to mitigate these risks?

If I heard it once, I’ve heard it a thousand times, China is the sourcing capital of the world. I’ve also repeated this statement at least 400+ times in many conversations over the years regarding global trade. China, it’s also where the global market goes for rare earth minerals, among thousands of other necessary elements for a veritable plethora of life’s essential things.

On April 2, 2025, President Trump announced reciprocal tariffs, setting a baseline rate of 10% on imports from all countries, with higher rates on dozens of countries which the United States (U.S.) runs trade deficits. Specifically, Trump imposed a 34% tariff on all Chinese imports in response to China’s 67% tariff and non-tariff barriers on U.S. exports, aiming to address what he sees as an unfair trade imbalance.

Since Trump’s first term, tensions between the United States and China, the world’s two largest economies, have been on the rise. President Trump ran for his second presidential term on a promise to reduce reliance on China – and promise kept. In one of his first Presidential actions, President Trump issued an “America First Trade Policy” memorandum dedicating an entire section to trade relations with China. Since then, several tariffs have been imposed on Chinese goods and the duty-free de minimis treatment for goods valued at $800 or less ended.

In a recent Federal Register notice the Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS) of the Department of Commerce announced that “On May 1, 2025, the Secretary of Commerce initiated an investigation to determine the effects on the national security of imports of commercial aircraft and jet engines, and parts for commercial aircraft and jet engines. This investigation has been initiated under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (Section 232).” The investigation may take up to 270 days but it can be concluded sooner.

Since Bitcoin’s creation in 2008, cryptocurrencies and traditional assets have largely existed in parallel. In our previous exploration of Real World Assets (RWAs) (Assessing the Benefits and Challenges of Tokenizing Real World Assets, February 7, 2024), we identified how the lack of reliable bridges between on-chain and off-chain ecosystems has constrained the transformative potential of blockchain technology.

Several lawsuits challenging the legal validity of the tariff actions taken by President Trump since he took office on January 20, 2025, are in process of moving through the federal courts. They raise a variety of important jurisdictional and constitutional questions and seem poised to lead to challenges in federal circuit courts and the Supreme Court.

On May 8, 2025, the United States and United Kingdom (UK) unveiled the new trade terms of an “economic prosperity” deal. This deal comes after President Trump imposed a 10% reciprocal tariff on all products from the UK and additional tariffs on steel and aluminum, and automobiles and automobile parts. While the 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect, the two countries were able to agree on alternative arrangements for steel and aluminum, automobiles, and other strategic sectors.

On May 28, 2025, the United States’ Court of International Trade (CIT) struck down the President’s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs. This includes tariffs imposed on Canada, China, and Mexico in response to the fentanyl crisis at U.S.’ borders and reciprocal tariffs imposed on almost all foreign imports on April 2, 2025. The Government immediately appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).