EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0607301
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.
ABC Paper and Paper Mills applied for a TCO in respect of certain yankee hoods on 24 April 2006.
Instrument
TCO No 0607301 was made on 7 July 2006. It declares that those certain yankee hoods 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. 0607301 is taken to have come into force on 24 April 2006.
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 Customs Act 1901, enacted by the Australian Parliament, establishes a framework through which Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) can be made by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs. The Act was introduced to address the need for a scheme that allows for lower rates of customs duty on specific goods, thereby promoting trade and economic benefits. The explanatory statement for Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0607301 indicates that the legislation aims to provide tariff concessions on certain yankee hoods, as no substitutable goods were produced in Australia. This particular TCO, made on 7 July 2006, was a response to an application by ABC Paper and Paper Mills on 24 April 2006. The policy objective is to facilitate the import of these goods at a reduced duty rate, enhancing the competitiveness of Australian businesses and consumers.
Scope and Application
The Customs Act 1901 applies to persons and entities involved in the importation of goods into Australia, particularly those seeking tariff concessions. Specifically, the Act facilitates the process whereby a person or entity can apply for a Tariff Concession Order (TCO) from the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) to reduce the rate of customs duty on certain imported goods, provided that the goods are not substitutable by goods produced in Australia. The Act applies on a national level, covering all states and territories within Australia. The scope of the Act is defined by section 269C, which stipulates that a TCO application meets the core criteria if, on the date the application was lodged, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business. The CEO must be satisfied that the application is not in respect of goods specified in section 269SJ, which lists goods that cannot be subject to a TCO. Once the CEO is satisfied that a TCO application meets the core criteria, they must make a written order declaring the goods to which a prescribed item of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 applies. This instrument was applied in the case of ABC Paper and Paper Mills, who successfully obtained a TCO for certain yankee hoods, resulting in a free rate of duty on these goods. The Act ensures that the TCO does not affect the rights of any person as at the date of registration to their disadvantage or impose any liabilities on any person.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of the Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0607301 under the Customs Act 1901 are sections 269C, 269P, and 269S. Section 269C outlines the core criteria for the granting of a Tariff Concession Order (TCO), requiring that on the date the application was lodged, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business. Section 269P stipulates that if the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) is satisfied that the application meets these core criteria, they must make a written order, which is the TCO, declaring the goods to which a prescribed item of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 applies. Section 269S outlines the commencement of the TCO, which is effective from the day the application was lodged.
The Act imposes several obligations and requirements on the parties involved. Firstly, section 269F mandates that a person can apply to the CEO for a TCO in respect of goods. This application must be made in good faith and must not be in respect of goods specified in section 269SJ, which are ineligible for a TCO. Secondly, the CEO must decide whether the application meets the core criteria set out in section 269C. This involves verifying that no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business on the date of the application. Thirdly, upon accepting a TCO application as valid, the CEO is required by section 269K(1) to publish a notice in the Gazette inviting any person who believes the TCO should not be made to lodge a submission.
Breaching the provisions of the Customs Act 1901 can lead to various civil and criminal consequences. For instance, if an individual or entity fails to comply with the conditions set out in the TCO, they may face penalties as stipulated in the Act. Section 269S(2) provides that 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. However, if the CEO determines that there has been a deliberate or negligent breach of the Act, they may impose fines or other penalties. The maximum penalties for such breaches can include fines of up to $22,200 for individuals and $111,000 for corporations, as per the applicable provisions of the Crimes Act 1914. Furthermore, persistent or severe breaches could result in prosecution, leading to further criminal penalties.