EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0612429
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.
Super Cheap Auto Pty Ltd applied for a TCO in respect of certain plastic, liquid funnels on 25 July 2006.
Instrument
TCO No 0612429 was made on 06 October 2006. It declares that those certain plastic, liquid funnels 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. 0612429 is taken to have come into force on 25 July 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 Parliament of Australia, provides a framework for the administration of customs and excise through the imposition of duties and taxes on goods entering and leaving the country. The Act, particularly through Part XVA, establishes the process for Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) which can reduce the duty on specific goods under certain conditions. TCO No. 0612429, made in 2006, was introduced to address the need for concessional tariff treatment for certain plastic, liquid funnels, as applied for by Super Cheap Auto Pty Ltd. This instrument was enacted to ensure that no substitutable goods were produced in Australia, thereby meeting the core criteria set out in the Act, resulting in a tariff rate of free duty for these goods, down from the general rate of 5%. The enacting body, the Chief Executive Officer of Customs, ensured the process was transparent and inclusive by inviting public submissions, though none were received in response to the Gazette notice.
Scope and Application
The Tariff Concession Instrument No. 0612429 under the Customs Act 1901 applies to individuals or entities that import certain plastic, liquid funnels by providing them with a concession on customs duty, reducing it from 5% to free. This Act is applicable at the Commonwealth level, and the TCO's application is specifically tailored to goods that do not have substitutable counterparts produced in Australia, as defined under sections 269D, 269E, and 269F of the Act. The instrument was created following an application by Super Cheap Auto Pty Ltd on 25 July 2006, and it became effective on the same date, as per subsection 269S(1) of the Act. The instrument does not disadvantage any person or impose liabilities on individuals for actions taken prior to its registration. Furthermore, importers of these goods can apply for a refund of duty under paragraph 126(1)(r) of the Regulations, from the date the TCO is deemed to have come into force. There were no submissions opposing the making of this TCO, as the Chief Executive Officer of Customs published a notice in the Gazette inviting such submissions. The scope and application of this TCO may be extended or restricted through subordinate instruments, as per the provisions of the Customs Act 1901.
Key Provisions
The Customs Act 1901, specifically Part XVA, governs the scheme for Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) which are issued by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) (s 269F). To apply for a TCO, a person must submit an application to the CEO for goods that are not specified in section 269SJ of the Act, which outlines goods ineligible for a TCO (s 269C). The CEO must determine if the application meets the core criteria, which require that on the date of application, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business (s 269C). The definitions for "goods produced in Australia", "ordinary course of business", and "substitutable goods" are provided in sections 269D, 269E, and 269F respectively. If the CEO finds that the application meets the core criteria, they must issue a written order (TCO) stating that the goods are subject to a specified item in Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 (s 269P(3)).
The obligations imposed by the Act on parties include the requirement for the CEO to publish a notice in the Gazette, inviting any person who may have concerns about the TCO to submit their views (s 269K(1)). The CEO must consider these submissions before making a decision on the TCO. The Act also requires the TCO to come into force on the day the application is lodged (s 269S(1)). Furthermore, the TCO must not disadvantage any person (other than the Commonwealth) by affecting their rights as they stood on the date of registration or by imposing liabilities for actions taken before the TCO's registration (s 269T). Importers of the goods subject to the TCO can apply for a refund of duty on goods imported since the TCO's effective date (Reg 126(1)(r)).
Failure to comply with the Act’s requirements can lead to civil and criminal consequences. While the specific offences and penalties are not detailed in the provided text, under Australian law, breaches of customs regulations can result in fines and, in serious cases, imprisonment. The maximum penalties for customs offences can vary widely, often depending on the value of the goods involved and the intent behind the breach. For instance, under the Customs Act, the maximum penalty for knowingly importing or exporting dutiable goods without paying the appropriate duty can include fines of up to $22,000 or imprisonment for up to two years, or both, for individuals, and significantly higher penalties for corporate entities. The severity of the penalty usually correlates with the scale of the breach and whether it was committed knowingly or recklessly.