EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concession Instrument No. 1029864
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.
Origin Energy Resources Ltd applied for a TCO in respect of certain offshore oil rig radiant heat and weather shielding screens on 02 July 2010.
Instrument
TCO No 1029864 was made on 20 September 2010. It declares that those certain offshore oil rig radiant heat and weather shielding screens 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. 1029864 is taken to have come into force on 02 July 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. 1029864, enacted under the Customs Act 1901, addresses the issue of providing tariff concessions for specific goods not produced in Australia. This instrument was introduced to assist businesses by reducing the customs duty on certain imported goods, provided that no substitutable goods are produced domestically. The Customs Act 1901, enacted by the Australian Parliament, establishes a framework for customs duty and provides the mechanism for tariff concession orders (TCOs). The policy objective of this legislation is to facilitate trade and support industries by lowering the cost of imported goods, thereby encouraging their use in Australia. Instrument No. 1029864, specifically addressing offshore oil rig radiant heat and weather shielding screens, was created after Origin Energy Resources Ltd applied for a tariff concession. The instrument became effective from the date of the application, 02 July 2010, and no objections were received during the consultation period.
Scope and Application
The Customs Act 1901, specifically through Part XVA, facilitates the creation of Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO). This Act applies to any individual or entity that seeks to import goods eligible for a lower rate of customs duty via a TCO. The Act's reach is national, encompassing all of Australia, as it pertains to the importation of goods across all states and territories. The legislation mandates that applications for TCOs must meet specific criteria, such as the absence of substitutable goods produced in Australia at the time of application, as defined by sections 269C, 269D, 269E, and 269SJ of the Act. Once an application meets these criteria and no objections are raised, the CEO is required to issue a TCO, which can be substantiated through subordinate instruments such as the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The commencement of the TCO is retroactive to the date of the application, ensuring that no person, other than the Commonwealth, is disadvantaged or subjected to new liabilities for actions taken prior to the order's registration.
Key Provisions
The primary operative sections of this legislation include sections 269C, 269B, and 269P of the Customs Act 1901 (the Act), which outline the criteria for Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs). Specifically, section 269C specifies that a TCO application meets the core criteria if, on the day the application was lodged, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business. Section 269B further defines terms such as "goods produced in Australia", "ordinary course of business", and "substitutable goods" in relation to the application. Section 269P(3) mandates that if the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (CEO) is satisfied that an application meets the core criteria, the CEO must issue a written order (a TCO). In this case, Tariff Concession Order No. 1029864 was made on 20 September 2010, declaring that certain offshore oil rig radiant heat and weather shielding screens are goods to which a prescribed item of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 applies.
The Act imposes several obligations on the parties involved. Firstly, any person may apply to the CEO for a TCO in respect of goods under section 269F, provided the goods are not specified in section 269SJ. The CEO must then determine if the application meets the core criteria as outlined in section 269C. If satisfied, the CEO must make a written TCO as per section 269P(3). Additionally, as per section 269K(1), the CEO must publish a notice in the Gazette, inviting submissions from any person who believes there are reasons why the TCO should not be made. The CEO must consider these submissions before making a final decision.
There are no specific offences, penalties, or civil or criminal consequences outlined for breaches of this Act in the provided text. However, the Act ensures that the TCO does not affect the rights of a person (other than the Commonwealth) as at the date of registration in a way that disadvantages that person or imposes liabilities in respect of anything done or omitted to be done before the date of registration. The rights of importers are beneficially affected, as they can apply for a refund of duty on goods imported since the TCO came into force, under paragraph 126(1)(r) of the Regulations. The TCO does not impose any liabilities on any person.
This legislation ensures a structured and transparent process for applying for and granting TCOs, providing clarity and certainty for both applicants and the CEO. By defining clear criteria and obligations, the Act facilitates the administration of customs duties while protecting the rights of importers and ensuring that no liabilities are imposed retroactively. The absence of specific penalties for breaches suggests a focus on procedural compliance and the rights of affected parties rather than punitive measures.