United States: (Really) Red Ink: $45 Million Settlement On Ink Imports Highlights The Significance Of Country Of Origin Analysis

Last Updated: April 29 2013
Article by Gregory S. McCue and Victoria E. Murphy

In December 2012, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a $45 million settlement with an importer of pigment used in ink manufacturing.  The importer had been charged with misdeclaring the country of origin of the pigment.  The issue was whether certain intermediate processing operations were sufficient for the imported product to be declared as originating in the country where the processing occurred.  The publicly-released description of the settlement – and the large settlement amount – highlights the importance of country of origin analysis.  Examined closely, the case also is a useful reminder that products do not always have just one country of origin.  US law requires different types of origin analyses for different situations.

Toyo Ink is a Japan-based company with worldwide operations.  Carbazole violet pigment number 23 (CVP-23) is a colorant used in the manufacture of ink.  Since 2004, imports of CVP-23 have been subject to antidumping duties for imports from India and China (ADs) ranging from 5.51% to 217.94%, and additional countervailing duties (CVDs) on imports from India ranging from 17.33% to 33.61%.  These additional import duty percentages are assessed at time of entry – but only on CVP-23 that originates from China or India.  For any CVP-23 manufactured in any other country, these additional US import duties do not apply.

The DOJ announced that Toyo paid the $45 million settlement in order to resolve allegations of false origin declarations – no determination of liability was made.  However, the charges (now settled) were that Toyo had knowingly misrepresented the country of origin in its import declarations for CVP-23, in order to avoid paying the ADs and CVDs that otherwise would have been collected by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at importation.  Toyo sourced its inputs from China and India, but sent the raw material to Japan or Mexico for processing into finished CVP-23.  Upon arrival in the United States, Toyo declared that Japan or Mexico was the country of origin and, accordingly, that the ADs and CVDs did not apply.  The US Government took the position that the finishing process in Japan or Mexico was insufficient to substantially transform the CVP-23, so that the correct country of origin – even of the finished product – remained the country of origin of the raw CVP-23 (China or India), and the additional AD/CVD duties should have been paid upon US importation. 

In the DOJ statement, Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division, warned that the Toyo settlement “demonstrates that the Department of Justice will zealously guard the public fisc – taking action not only against those who fraudulently obtain government funds, but also against those who inappropriately avoid paying money owed to the United States.”  Similarly, Anne M. Tompkins, US Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, stated, “Fair and lawful trade requires importers to truthfully identify their products and pay the appropriate duties.  Our office will vigorously investigate and prosecute importers who make false representations and claims designed to avoid the payment of lawful import duties.”

Although the DOJ announcement states that the (now settled) charges against Toyo were for knowing misdeclaration of origin, it is useful to contrast this ink case with another recent country of origin controversy surrounding products subject to ADs.  In February of this year, the US Government announced commercial fraud charges in connection with misdeclared country of origin of honey.  Honey also is subject to ADs, but only when produced in China, not from any other country.  However, in the honey case, the imports subject to enforcement did not experience any further processing outside of China.  Reports indicate that the honey was entirely of Chinese origin and was shipped directly to the United States, or merely through a third country, and simply declared as originating in a country other than China in order to avoid the additional duties.  In the honey case, the fraud is clear because the honey experienced no processing outside of China, so no country other than China could have been the correct origin for the honey that arrived in the United States.

In contrast, in the CVP-23 case, there was at least some processing outside China and India.  The DOJ notice does not describe the extent of the later processing in Japan or Mexico nor does it state whether anyone involved might have reasonably believed that the further processing properly changed the origin of the goods.  If that processing had been “substantial,” as defined by US law, the origin of the CVP-23 would have changed.  In that case, US law would have required Toyo to declare a country of origin other than China or India.  This aspect of the Toyo case demonstrates the importance for importers to review the processing operations experienced by a product in various countries before arrival in the United States, and to compare those operations to the country of origin definition that applies to the specific product being declared.  Most importantly, importers and purchasers must always keep in mind that the country of origin analysis required by US law will change depending upon the product being declared.  For example:

  • US imports:  For many goods imported into the United States, the country of origin to be declared upon importation, and to be marked on the goods, will be the country in which the item experienced its last “substantial transformation” before arriving in the United States.  “Substantial transformation” is defined by the CBP Regulations as a change in “name, character or use.”  This analysis will change according to the nature of the product and importers often will need to review CBP rulings on similar products to determine which processing can be considered “substantial.”  In addition to CBP’s usual enforcement penalties, imported goods not properly marked are subject to an additional 10% duty on the value of the imported goods.  Moreover, textiles are subject to their own origin rules that require careful scrutiny to determine the correct country of origin.

  • AD/CVD:  For the CVP-23, separate from the origin analysis for the CBP declaration and marking of the goods, the origin for AD/CVD purposes was governed by an analysis required by the US Department of Commerce (DOC).  Unhelpfully, the DOC’s analysis also is called “substantial transformation,” just like the one used by CBP.  However, the DOC’s test is not the same at CBP’s test for declaration and marking purposes, even though several of the same themes are covered.  The DOC’s analysis for AD/CVD purposes can occasionally result in an origin result different from the CBP test.

  • US Free Trade:  Determining the country of origin of an item according to “substantial transformation” does not mean that US law regards the item as a product of that country for all purposes.  Free trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and import programs such as the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) each have their own definitions of country of origin.  NAFTA origin usually requires an analysis of the harmonized tariff numbers for the finished good and its inputs and may require an analysis of local value content.  GSP requires an analysis of both substantial transformation and local value content, with exceptions for certain products (not to mention expiration of the GSP program from time to time).  Other programs such as the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, and other US free trade agreements with Chile, the Dominican Republic and Central America, Israel, Jordan, Korea, Morocco, Singapore, and other  countries, each have their own definition of origin.  In order to claim duty-free treatment under any one of those programs, the US importer typically must review the standard for that specific program and collect the commercial documents showing that specific standard for that program has been met by the item being imported.  In addition, the trade agreements’ rules may require a separate analysis for country of origin marking.

  • Made in USA:  Even if a product is proven to be processed in the United States such that it no longer must be marked with a foreign country of origin (or even can be declared as US-origin if re-imported), this does not mean that the goods can be marked “Made in USA” when sold in the United States.  The “Made in USA” description is governed by an entirely separate set of rules from the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC).  The FTC requires that “all or virtually all” inputs and labor be of US origin before a “Made in USA” (or similar language) marking or advertisement may be used.  This is a much higher standard than parts from various countries being “substantially transformed.”  It is fairly common for an item to be processed in the United States from imported inputs such that a foreign country of origin marking is not required under CBP rules, but a “Made in USA” marking still is not permitted under FTC rules.  The FTC permits less absolute statements to be used (such as “Assembled in USA” or “Produced in USA from imported parts”) depending on the specific facts.

  •  US Government Procurement:  Regardless of the country of origin found and declared for the imports above, the US Government has further, separate standards for the items it purchases.  Some items purchased by the US Government are subject to the Buy America Act, which requires manufacturing in the United States and 50% US value content.  However, government procurement purchases more often are subject to the Trade Agreements Act (TAA) which permits purchases of goods that are US-origin or that originate from one of several countries with which the United States has a specific treaty arrangement.  The TAA requires goods to be (1) entirely produced in the United States or one of the designated countries, or (2) “substantially transformed” in an approved country.  TAA substantial transformation analysis does rely on CBP standards and rulings, which should be reviewed before certifying compliance to the US Government.  

In the Toyo case, the CVP-23 from India or China was subject to product-specific AD/CVD orders, but the risk arising from errors in a country of origin analysis is much broader than AD/CVD enforcement.  In addition to the usual penalties and enforcement that can come from CBP or the other government agencies described above, country of origin is increasingly seen as an issue that can be addressed under the False Claims Act (FCA).  Under the FCA’s qui tam provision, whistleblowers can sue on behalf of the US government and receive a portion of any funds recovered under the suit.  The allegations that Toyo Ink was making false origin claims for AD/CVD purposes on imports of CVP-23 were first made in a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the FCA by John Dickson, the president of a US producer of CVP-23.  Reports estimate that Mr. Dickson’s share of the Toyo settlement as more than $7,875,000.  Numerous reports, websites and blogs have publicized the Toyo payout as an example of the benefits of filing whistleblower claims in these situations.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions