CBSA తర్కం
&&The primary basis of determination and the five alternate methods are as follows:&&&&Section 48 – The transaction value method&&Section 49 – The transaction value method of identical goods&&Section 50 – The transaction value method of similar goods&&Section 51 – The deductive method of valuation&&Section 52 – The computed method of valuation&&Section 53 – The residual method of valuation&&&&The first and primary method of determining the value for duty of the imported goods is the transaction value method under section 48 of the Customs Act (Act). Subsection 48(1) of the Act identifies three requirements that must be met to apply the transaction value method. These requirements are:&&(a) the imported goods were sold for export to Canada;&&(b) the purchaser in the sale for export is the purchaser in Canada; and&&(c) the price paid or payable for the goods can be determined.&&&&In this scenario, the first requirement is not met as the imported goods are not sold to a Canadian customer and absent any sale transaction, the transaction value method is not applicable in appraising the value for duty for the imported goods.&&&&Without a previously accepted value for duty calculated under section 48 of the Act to serve as a basis, no valuation can be made under sections 49 or 50 (transaction value method of identical or similar goods).&&&&For the deductive method to be applicable, there must be sales in Canada of the goods being appraised or of identical or similar imported goods. In this case, J.R. Electronics does not subsequently sell the imported goods. Once the repair services are completed, the goods are exported back to US clients. Therefore, the deductive method is not applicable in appraising the value for duty of the imported goods.&&&&The computed method bases the valuation on the cost of production of the goods being appraised. Since the US client is not the producer of the goods, the computed method cannot be applied.&&&&Therefore, the value for duty of J.R. Electronics importations can only be determined under the residual method of valuation (section 53 of the Act). Under section 53, the residual method provides for a flexible application of a previous method that requires the least amount of adjustment. The intent of this method is to ensure that the value determined is fair, neutral, objective and reflects commercial reality.&&&&The importer’s proposed methodology is as follows:&&1) Find the price of a new identical or similar commercial battery charger and a used identical or similar battery charger.&&2) Calculate the depreciation rate by finding the difference between the new and the used price of identical or similar goods.&&3) Apply the depreciation rate to the price of a new commercial battery charger at the time of importation to attain the price of a used functional unit.&&4) Value for duty of a used non-functional unit will be equal to the price of a used functional unit as per the above calculation, minus the flat rate repair cost.&&&&Example:&&Step 1&&Market Price of a New Similar Good: 792 Euros Market Price of a Used Similar Good: 500 Euros&&&&Step 2&&Depreciation Calculation: 500 / 792 = 0.63 Therefore, the depreciation rate is 1 - 0.63 = 37%&&&&Step 3&&Market Price of New Battery Charger: $1,356 CAD&&Price of Used Functional Unit = $1,356 – ($1,356* 37%) = $854 CAD&&&&Step 4&&Repair cost: $724 CAD&&&&Value for duty of a used non-functional battery charger ($854 - $724) = $130 CAD&&Based on the above and information provided, the valuation method suggested by the importer to calculate the value for duty for the imported goods under the residual method is deemed reasonable by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).&&&&Note:&&It was stated in the request that the initial declaration was based on the flat rate for the repair cost. Should the importer receive additional information in respect of the goods already imported (i.e. actual repair cost amount), the invoice is the event that gives the importer reason to believe that the previous declaration is incorrect and a self-correction would be required.&&&&In accordance with section 32.2 of the Act, the importer is required to correct a declaration of value for duty within 90 days after having reason to believe that the declaration is incorrect. This obligation applies to a correction that would result in either money payable to the CBSA or is revenue neutral.&&&&If the repair cost is lower then what was initially quoted you will need to self-correct the value for duty to the CBSA.&&&&If the repair cost is higher than initially quoted you may be eligible for a refund of duties (if applicable) under section 74 of the Act.&&&&While corrections to declarations under section 32.2 of the Act are obligatory, refunds under section 74 of the Act are voluntary.
