EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concession Instrument No. 1000603
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.
Robert Bosch Aust Pty Ltd applied for a TCO in respect of certain automotive starter motors on 05 January 2010.
Instrument
TCO No 1000603 was made on 22 March 2010. It declares that those certain automotive starter motors 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. 1000603 is taken to have come into force on 05 January 2010.
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. 1000603 was enacted in 2010 under the Customs Act 1901 to address the need for tariff concessions for specific goods that are not produced in Australia. This legislative instrument was introduced to facilitate lower rates of customs duty for goods that meet certain criteria, thereby encouraging imports and potentially reducing costs for businesses and consumers. The Tariff Concession Order (TCO) was made in response to an application by Robert Bosch Aust Pty Ltd for tariff concessions on certain automotive starter motors, which were not being produced in Australia at the time. The policy objective is to ensure that the application process for TCOs is transparent and allows for public submissions, which in this case did not result in any objections. The TCO came into effect on the date the application was lodged, and it does not impose any liabilities or disadvantage any persons other than the Commonwealth.
Scope and Application
The Tariff Concession Instrument No. 1000603 under the Customs Act 1901 applies to specific goods, namely certain automotive starter motors, and grants a tariff concession by reducing the customs duty rate from the general rate of 5% to zero. This concession is available to those who import these goods, providing them with a financial benefit. The legislation allows for the Chief Executive Officer of Customs to make such Tariff Concession Orders (TCO) if the application meets the core criteria set out in the Act, specifically that no substitutable goods are produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business. This concession is applicable nationally across Australia, with its jurisdiction stemming from the Commonwealth. There are no exclusions or exemptions explicitly stated in the provided text, but it is noted that the application process involves publishing a notice in the Gazette to allow for any objections from interested parties, which in this case, were not received. The commencement date of the TCO is taken to be the date on which the application for the concession was lodged, ensuring that the rights of importers are protected and that no existing rights or liabilities are adversely affected by the concession.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of Tariff Concession Instrument No. 1000603 (TCO No. 1000603) under the Customs Act 1901 are sections 269C, 269P, and 269S. Section 269C outlines the core criteria that must be met for a Tariff Concession Order (TCO) to be made, while section 269P provides that if the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) is satisfied these criteria are met, a TCO must be issued. Section 269S sets out the commencement date of the TCO as the day on which the application for the TCO was lodged. This instrument applies to certain automotive starter motors for which Robert Bosch Aust Pty Ltd applied on 05 January 2010, declaring that these goods are subject to item 50 of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995, with the general duty rate of 5% reduced to free duty.
The obligations and requirements imposed by the Act on the parties and entities governed by this legislation are primarily centred around the application process for a TCO. For applicants like Robert Bosch Aust Pty Ltd, this involves submitting a valid application to the CEO, ensuring that it complies with the core criteria outlined in section 269C. The CEO is required to assess the application against these criteria and, if satisfied, must issue a TCO as per section 269P. The CEO must also publish a notice in the Gazette inviting submissions from any person who believes the TCO should not be made, as per subsection 269K(1). In this case, no submissions were received. Furthermore, the Act ensures that the rights of persons, other than the Commonwealth, will not be adversely affected by the TCO in respect of actions taken before its commencement.
The Act also specifies potential consequences for breaches of its provisions. Although the explanatory statement does not explicitly detail offences or penalties, it is reasonable to infer that any failure to comply with the application criteria or procedural requirements could lead to legal challenges or administrative actions. The Act provides for the imposition of penalties for incorrect declarations or fraudulent applications, although the specific penalties are not detailed in the text. The seriousness of any breach would likely be assessed based on the intent and impact of the non-compliance, with potential consequences ranging from fines to legal action.
In conclusion, Tariff Concession Instrument No. 1000603 outlines the process for granting tariff concessions on certain automotive starter motors, ensuring that the application criteria are met and that the rights of non-Commonwealth parties are protected. The obligations on applicants and the CEO are clearly defined, with the potential for legal and administrative repercussions for any breaches of the established procedures.