RE: Request for Internal Advice; Tariff-Rate Quota; Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells

HQ H350951 August 28, 2026 OT:RR:CTF:EPDR H350951 SAB CATEGORY: ENTRY Alan Aprea, Center Director Electronics Center of Excellence and Expertise 1 World Trade Center, Suite 741 Long Beach, CA 90831 RE: Request for Internal Advice; Tariff-Rate Quota; Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells Dear Center Director: This is in response to the internal advice request, dated July 18, 2025, initiated by Crowell & Moring, LLC, on behalf of [***] (hereinafter “Company”), regarding the tariff-rate quota eligibility for certain entries of imported crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells (“CSPV cells” or “solar cells”). In reviewing the internal advice request, we have also considered supplemental submission filed by counsel on October 31, 2025, and arguments presented during a September 26, 2025, meeting. Our decision is set forth below. Company has requested that the information submitted in, and in connection with, this request be treated as confidential due to its inclusion of proprietary commercial information that would prejudice the Company’s competitive position if disclosed to the public. Inasmuch as this request conforms to the requirements of 19 C.F.R. § 177.2(b)(7), the request for confidentiality is approved. The information contained within brackets, and all attachments contained in this request, will not be released to the public and will be withheld from the published version of this ruling. FACTS: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, codified at 19 U.S.C. § 2251, authorizes the President of the United States to implement safeguard measures designed to protect domestic industries from serious injury resulting from import competition. Solar Energy Indus. Ass’n v. United States, 86 F.4th 885, 890 (Fed. Cir. 2023). Under Section 201, upon petitions from domestic entities or industries, (a) the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) may make an affirmative determination that serious injury or a threat of serious injury to that industry exists; and (b) the President may then authorize “safeguards,” to provide a domestic industry temporary relief from serious injury. Id. (citing 19 U.S.C. §§ 2252 and 2253). On January 23, 2018, the President of the United States issued a presidential proclamation authorizing a safeguard measure for a period of four years against imports of solar panels into the United States. To Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition From Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into Other Products) and for Other Purposes, 83 Fed. Reg. 3541 (Jan. 25, 2018) (“Proclamation 9693”). This safeguard measure included “a tariff-rate quota on imports of solar cells . . . with unchanging within-quota quantities.” Id. at 3542. This limitation on the annual quantity of imported solar cells was implemented because the ITC “reached an affirmative determination that CSPV products are being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to the domestic industry producing a like or directly competitive article.” Id. at 3541. The President exempted an annual aggregate total of 2.5 gigawatts of solar cells from additional duties under the tariff-rate quota, and modified subchapter III of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) accordingly. Id. at Annex 1. This modification was effective with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, from February 7, 2018, through February 6, 2022. Id. Under new U.S. Note 18, products classified under subheading 8541.40, HTSUS, unless specifically excluded, became subject to the additional duties (“Section 201 duties”). Id.; U.S. Note 18, Subchapter III, Chapter 99, HTSUS. On February 4, 2022, after receiving an affirmative determination from the ITC that the safeguard measure continued to be necessary to prevent injury to the domestic industry, the President extended the safeguard measure for an additional period of four years. See To Continue Facilitating Positive Adjustment to Competition From Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into Other Products), 87 Fed. Reg. 7357, 7359 (Feb. 9, 2022). On August 12, 2024, the President expanded the total annual aggregate of solar exempt from additional duties under the tariff-rate quota to 12.5 gigawatts. See To Further Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition From Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into Other Products), 89 Fed. Reg. 66181, 66183 (Aug. 15, 2024). Company imported solar cells from Malaysia between May 20, 2024, and October 23, 2024, for which it filed 61 entries. Each entry was filed as a type “01,” applicable to formal consumption entries of merchandise not claiming quota status or subject to antidumping and countervailing duties (“AD/CVD”). Company classified the solar cells under subheading 8540.42.0010, HTSUSA (Annotated). All of the entered solar cells were imported during the 2024 CSPV cell quota period (“2024 quota period”), which spanned February 7, 2024, through February 6, 2025. See CBP.gov, Quota Bulletins, QB 24-507 2024 Solar Cells and Modules Amended August 13, 2024. All 61 entries were released into the stream of commerce of the United States during the 2024 quota period. During the 2024 quota period, filers claiming the in-quota exemption from additional duties were required to enter their CSPV cells under heading 9903.45.21, HTSUS. Once quota filled, filers were required to enter their CSPV cells under out-of-quota heading 9903.45.22, HTSUS. Neither the in-quota nor out-of-quota subheading was claimed on any of the 61 entries filed, consistent with the entries being filed as type 01 for merchandise not claiming quota status. 2 Company asserts that its broker committed a “simple clerical error” by neglecting to include a secondary quota classification for CSPV cells on the entries. To substantiate that its 61 entries did not contain merchandise subject to AD/CVD, Company filed AD/CVD certifications at the time of entry. CBP found that these certificates were invalid and that the entries lacked the required HTSUS subheading for the Section 201 duties owed. Because of this, CBP rejected the entries on February 18, 2025. On March 11, 2025, CBP issued a Notice of Proposed Action (CBP Form 29) requiring Company to refile an entry summary for each of the 61 entries on the basis that the CSPV cells are subject to AD/CVD and Section 201 duties. CBP gave Company until March 31, 2025, to resubmit its entry summaries by adding AD/CVD cases A-557-988 and C-557-989 and the applicable Section 201 duty 1 subheadings. Upon Company’s request, CBP extended this deadline to April 4, 2025. On April 4, 2025, Company responded to the Notice of Action by arguing that its refiled entry summaries were now presented in proper form for quota purposes in the 2025 CSPV cell quota period (“2025 quota period”), which spanned from February 7, 2025, through February 6, 2026. Company amended all 61 entry summaries between the dates of April 1, 2025, and April 4, 2025, by adding heading 9903.45.21, HTSUS, which is the in-quota subheading exempting solar cells from additional Section 201 duties. Company asserted that these April 2025 dates were the presentation dates and entitled the entries to quota status in the 2025 quota period. On April 7, 2025, CBP issued a Notice of Action rate advancing all 61 of the entries identified in the Notice of Proposed Action to assess AD/CVD. The notice did reference, or propose to assess, Section 201 duties. Additionally, on April 7, 2025, a CBP Import Specialist from the Electronics Center for Excellence and Expertise (“Center”) sent counsel for Company an email stating that “CBP will allow the 201 quota exemption.” CBP then accepted the entry summaries with the in-quota subheading for CSPV cells. Company then contacted Headquarters (“HQ”) Quota and sought to have additional entries cancelled so that they could be refiled in the same manner. HQ Quota advised that the process for cancelling and refiling entries could only be done within the quota period when the original entry is filed. HQ Quota contacted Regulations and Rulings (“RR”) to discuss Company’s attempt to refile the entry summaries as type “07” entries, applicable to merchandise subject to AD/CVD and quota, in order to gain quota status in the 2025 quota period for merchandise imported in the 2024 quota period. HQ Quota and RR cautioned the Center that the entries were only eligible to claim out-of-quota heading 9903.45.22, HTSUS. On June 25, 2025, CBP issued a Notice of Action rate advancing 58 of the 61 entries at issue as out-of-quota entries under heading 9903.45.22, HTSUS, and correcting the entry types from type 07 to type “03” – type 03 is applicable to merchandise subject to AD/CVD. The Notice of Action did not list entry numbers XXX-XXXX945-5, XXX-XXXX213-2, and XXX- XXXX265-1 but CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (“ACE”) confirms that these three entries were also rate advanced as out-of-quota entries under heading 9903.45.22, HTSUS. Company asserts that this Notice of Action was a “contrary position and reversal” of the Center’s prior decision to permit Company to obtain quota status in the 2025 quota period. Company filed 1 Company makes additional arguments regarding the AD/CVD certificates that are not within the scope of this Internal Advice decision. 3 the present request for internal advice with the Center on July 18, 2025, to clarify whether the solar cells are eligible to obtain quota status in the 2025 quota period. In its request, Company first contends that quota status may be obtained because it “properly refiled” its 61 original type 01 entries, filed in 2024, during the 2025 quota period. Company asserts that these refiled entries are in proper form because they complied with CBP’s instruction to “include the ‘201 Trade Remedy HTSUS’” when refiling. Company further asserts that CBP “agreed to reclassify the . . . entries at issue” based on statements from an Import Specialist at the Electronics Center of Excellence and Expertise (“Center”). Company next contends that it changed the presentation date for the original entries by refiling in proper form during the 2025 quota period. Company cites to Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) 965049, dated July 23, 2002, to substantiate this contention. Finally, Company contends that CBP may not assess the over-quota duty rate for the 61 entries at issue on the basis that CBP released the goods for which quota status was claimed. Company cites to HQ 116055, dated February 6, 2004, to substantiate this contention. As part of its request, Company’s counsel requested a meeting with RR to discuss its entries and their history as detailed above. RR met with Company’s counsel on September 26, 2025. During this meeting, RR raised a concern that counsel had not identified any legal authority permitting tariff-rate quota class merchandise to obtain quota status in a future period. RR also provided Company’s counsel with various rulings in which CBP ruled that entries were unable to achieve presentation in proper form for purposes of claiming quota status in a future quota period. Accordingly, Company requested to file a supplement to their request for internal advice, which was filed on October 31, 2025. In its supplement, Company raised additional arguments. Company concedes that its entries “were not presented ‘in proper form’” to obtain quota status in the 2024 quota period but contends that CBP misconstrues 19 C.F.R. § 132.13(b) as precluding status in the 2025 quota period because this regulation does not define the period applicable to quota-class merchandise. Company asserts that the quota period is necessarily defined as the period in which presentation in proper form is achieved, such that eligibility to obtain quota status is not limited to the period in which the merchandise arrived. Company also contends that none of the rulings identified by RR limit eligibility for quota status to a particular quota period. Finally, Company asks CBP to interpret its regulations in a manner “that is consistent with the intent and policy behind the solar cell TRQs” under Section 201. Company’s contentions can be summarized into two principal arguments: first, that the 61 entries at issue may obtain quota status in the 2025 quota period because 19 C.F.R. § 132.13(b) does not limit the applicable quota period to the period in which the underlying merchandise arrived. If we accept this argument, then Company posits that by refiling the 61 entries at issue in proper form during the 2025 quota period it changed their quota presentation date, such that the entries actually obtained quota status in this period; second, that CBP may not reassess the duty rate for quota-class merchandise once it has achieved quota status and been released. We address each argument below as part of our determination regarding the permissibility of obtaining quota status in a future period. 4 ISSUE: Whether CBP properly determined that the CSPV cells imported by Company in the 2024 quota period are not eligible for quota priority and status in the 2025 quota period. LAW AND ANALYSIS: The time of entry for merchandise that is entered for consumption is established in accordance with 19 C.F.R. § 141.68. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 141.68(d), the time of entry for quota-class merchandise “will be the time of presentation of the entry summary or withdrawal for consumption in proper form, with estimated duties attached, or if the entry/entry summary information and a valid scheduled statement date . . . have been successfully received by CBP via the Automated Broker Interface.” Presentation of an entry summary in proper form is critical for quota-class merchandise because it establishes quota priority and quota status. See 19 C.F.R. § 132.11(a). Quota priority is the precedence granted to an entry of quota-class merchandise over other entries of merchandise subject to the same quota. 19 C.F.R. § 132.1(f). Quota status is the standing which entitles quota- class merchandise to admission under an absolute quota, or to a reduced rate of duty under a tariff-rate quota, or to any other quota benefit. 19 C.F.R. § 132.1(g). In order to prevent circumvention of quota, importers must comply with strict presentation requirements to obtain quota priority and status. See HQ 229188 (Mar. 4, 2002) (“[Q]uota priority and status are determined as of the time of presentation of the entry summary . . . in proper form, and in strict compliance with the applicable Customs regulations.”). A quota entry will not be deemed presented “for purposes of quota priority and . . . quota status” if it is not in proper form. 19 C.F.R. § 132.11(b); see also 19 C.F.R. §§ 132.1(d), 132.11a. The requirements to establish “proper form” of presentation for purposes of quota priority and status are stringent. See generally DMV USA, Inc. v. United States, 25 C.I.T. 970, 979 (2003) (“While plaintiff’s entry summary might have been sufficient solely for purposes of classification, it was not in proper form for purposes of gaining the benefit of quota-class priority and status.”). A presentation may not be in proper form for purposes of quota priority and status if the merchandise is misclassified, the wrong duty rate is claimed, or the entry summary does not have the proper estimated duties attached. Id. at 978. Nor will quota priority or status attach to merchandise when the entry summary is presented after the closing of the applicable quota period. See 19 C.F.R. § 132.12(b); HQ 230031 (Aug. 27, 2003); HQ 115507 (Mar. 26, 2002). Entries are only eligible for quota priority and status in the quota period in which quota- class merchandise is imported and originally entered. Importation is generally defined as the date on which merchandise arrives within the customs territory of the United States. 19 C.F.R. § 101.1. This timeframe for obtaining quota status is limited to the quota period specified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, and CBP Regulations mandate that entries of merchandise subject to such quota limits are “not entitled to any quota benefits” if quota status is not obtained prior to the closing of the applicable quota period. 19 C.F.R. § 132.13(b). 5 First, we address Company’s argument that 19 C.F.R. § 132.13(b) does not limit the applicable quota period to the period in which the underlying merchandise arrived/was imported. See 19 C.F.R. § 101.1. Company asserts that because quota status is tied to the date of presentation in proper form, quota status may be obtained in a future quota period if presentation in proper form occurs in that period. Stated alternatively, Company’s position is that goods are eligible to obtain quota status in any future period in which presentation in proper form could occur – regardless of the specific quarterly or annual period in which such quota-class was imported and originally entered. A tariff-rate quota, by its very definition, permits “a specified quantity of merchandise to be entered or withdrawn for consumption at a reduced duty rate during a specified period.” 19 C.F.R. § 132.1(b) (emphasis added). Such import quotas “ordinarily are established by legislation or by Presidential proclamations pursuant to specific legislation and [thereafter] are included in the tariff schedules of the United States.” T.D. 78-228 (July 6, 1978). Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 132.2(c), “[t]he terms of a Presidential proclamation . . . establishing a quota . . . must be strictly complied with.” The 61 entries of solar cells at issue were subject to a tariff-rate quota under Section 201 with an “annual aggregate quantity” for imported CSPV established by Presidential Proclamation 9693 of January 23, 2018. 83 Fed. Reg. 3541 (Jan. 25, 2018). The “in- quota quantity in each year under the tariff-rate quota” was subsequently amended. 87 Fed. Reg. 7357 (Feb. 9, 2022); 89 Fed. Reg. 66181 (Aug. 15, 2024). The “specified period” for this tariff- rate quota is therefore an annual period with a total limit applicable to all CSPV imported and entered during that annual period. As stated above, Company does not dispute that its 61 entries did not obtain quota status during the 2024 period in which they were imported and originally entered. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 132.11(b), quota priority and status require presentation in proper form. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 132.13(b), “at the closing of a quota all entries . . . which have acquired quota status due to priority of presentation shall be entitled to quota benefits. All other entries . . . are without quota status and are not entitled to any quota benefits.” In circumstances where entries are not presented in proper form prior to the close of the quota period, the covered merchandise “shall be disposed of in accordance with § 132.5.” Id. Quota status thus cannot be obtained after the applicable quota period closes. This limitation on obtaining quota status is further demonstrated by CBP rulings, which have consistently denied quota status to entries for which presentation in proper form did not occur within the quota period in which the quota-class merchandise was imported and originally entered. To illustrate, in HQ 229480, dated June 21, 2002, CBP considered whether a certificate of quota eligibility (“CQE”) could be “corrected” in the next tariff-rate quota period to render merchandise eligible to obtain quota status in that period. In that case, an importer submitted an entry for sugar imported in 1999 – specifically a type 02 entry subject to quota classified under the in-quota HTSUS subheading. Included with the entry was a CQE for the 1998/1999 quota period which covered the fiscal year from October 1, 1998, through September