EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concession Instrument No.0503783
Customs Act 1901
Background
Part XVA of the Customs Act 1901 (the Act) sets out a scheme under which Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) may be made by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (the CEO). A lower rate of customs duty applies to goods that are the subject of a TCO.
Under section 269F of the Act, a person may apply to the CEO for a TCO in respect of goods. If the CEO is satisfied that the application is not in respect of goods specified in section 269SJ of the Act, which sets out those goods that cannot be subject to a TCO, the CEO must decide whether the application meets the core criteria.
Section 269C of the Act provides that a TCO application meets the core criteria if, on the day on which the application was lodged, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business. Section 269B of the Act provides that ‘goods produced in Australia’ has the meaning given by section 269D, ‘ordinary course of business’ has the meaning given by section 269E and ‘substitutable goods’ in respect of goods the subject of a TCO application, means goods produced in Australia that are put, or are capable of being put, to a use that corresponds with a use (including a design use) to which the goods the subject of the application can be put.
Subsection 269P(3) of the Act provides that if the CEO is satisfied that a TCO application meets the core criteria, the CEO must make a written order (a TCO) declaring that the goods the subject of the TCO application are goods to which a prescribed item of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 (the Tariff) specified in the order applies.
Joe White Maltings Pty Ltd applied for a TCO in respect of certain stainless steel pressurised doors on 6 April 2005.
Instrument
TCO No 0503783 was made on 10 June 2005. It declares that those certain stainless steel pressurised doors are goods to which item 50 of Schedule 4 to the Tariff applies since the CEO was satisfied that no substitutable goods were produced in Australia. The general rate of duty on these goods is 5%. The rate of duty for the goods subject to the TCO is free.
Consultation
Subsection 269K(1) of the Act provides in part that as soon as practicable after accepting a TCO application as a valid application, the CEO must publish a notice in the Gazette which includes an invitation to any person who considers that there are reasons why the TCO should not be made to lodge a submission with the CEO. The CEO did not receive any submissions in response to this invitation.
Commencement
Subsection 269S(1) relevantly provides that a TCO is to be taken to have come into force on the day on which the application for the TCO was lodged. TCO No. 0503783 is taken to have come into force on 6 April 2005.
The TCO does not affect the rights of a person (other than the Commonwealth) as at the date of registration so as to disadvantage that person or impose liabilities on a person (other than the Commonwealth) in respect of anything done or omitted to be done before the date of registration. The rights of importers will be beneficially affected. Under paragraph 126(1)(r) of the Regulations, importers of such goods will be able to apply for a refund of duty on goods imported since the day on which the TCO is taken to have come into force. The TCO does not impose any liabilities on any person.
Overview
The Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0503783 was enacted under the Customs Act 1901 to provide a concession on the tariff rate for certain stainless steel pressurised doors. The instrument was introduced to address the gap in the tariff scheme by allowing for a lower rate of customs duty for these specific goods. Enacted by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs, the instrument aims to facilitate trade by reducing the financial burden on importers of these goods. This initiative aligns with the policy objective of promoting efficient and competitive trade practices by ensuring that certain imported goods are not subject to the higher general tariff rates. The introduction of this instrument ensures that the rights of importers are positively affected, as they can apply for a refund of any duty paid on these goods from the date the instrument came into effect, without any imposition of liabilities on other parties.
Scope and Application
The Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0503783 under the Customs Act 1901 applies to the specific goods, namely certain stainless steel pressurised doors, for which Joe White Maltings Pty Ltd applied for a Tariff Concession Order (TCO). The application was lodged on 6 April 2005 and the TCO was subsequently made by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs on 10 June 2005. This instrument provides that the goods in question are subject to a free rate of duty instead of the general rate of 5%, as long as no substitutable goods are produced in Australia. The Act mandates that the CEO must make a TCO if the application meets the core criteria, which include the condition that no substitutable goods were produced in Australia on the day the application was lodged. The TCO’s jurisdiction is nationwide, applying to all importers of the specified goods across Australia. There are no exclusions or exemptions specified within this particular TCO, and it does not impose any liabilities on persons other than the Commonwealth. The instrument does not disadvantage any person with existing rights as of the date of registration and allows importers to apply for a refund of duty on goods imported since the effective date of the TCO.
Key Provisions
The main sections of Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0503783 under the Customs Act 1901 (section 269C) involve the application process and core criteria for Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs). An application for a TCO (section 269F) must be made by a person to the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) if the goods in question are not specified in section 269SJ of the Act. The CEO is then required to determine if the application meets the core criteria outlined in section 269C, which include the absence of substitutable goods produced in Australia at the time the application was lodged. If the CEO is satisfied that the application meets these criteria, a TCO must be made in the form of a written order, specifying that the goods are subject to a prescribed item in Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995, as stated in section 269P(3).
The obligations imposed by the Act on the parties involved are primarily centred around the application and decision-making processes. The CEO must publish a notice in the Gazette (section 269K(1)) inviting submissions from any interested parties who believe the TCO should not be made. In the case of TCO No. 0503783, no submissions were received. The CEO must also ensure that the TCO does not affect the rights of any person adversely as of the date of registration (section 269S(1)) and that the TCO does not impose any new liabilities on any person.
Offences and penalties for breaches of the Act are not explicitly detailed in the explanatory statement. However, the implications of non-compliance could include the potential for invalid TCOs, which might result in improper tariff concessions being applied. While specific penalties are not mentioned, any breaches of the Customs Act 1901 could lead to enforcement actions by Customs, which may include fines, legal proceedings, or other administrative actions to rectify the non-compliance. The consequences for failure to adhere to the Act's provisions can range from financial penalties to legal repercussions, depending on the severity and nature of the breach.