Application To Discontinue Enforcement Of Ongoing Support: Fill & Download for Free

Well, I was born on September 26, 1965 the beginning of Vietnam war.What was going on in 1965 in the United States?March 8 – Vietnam War: Some 3,500 United States Marines arrive in South Vietnam, becoming the first American combat troops in Vietnam. ... In response to the events of March 7 and 9 in Selma, Alabama, President Johnson sends a bill to Congress that forms the basis for the Voting Rights Act of 1965.1970U.S. President Richard Nixon orders an invasion of Cambodia, widening the war in Vietnam. ...The U.S. Senate repeals the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that had given Presidents Johnson and Nixon sweeping powers in the Vietnam War.The Beatles break up.Egyptian president Gamal Abdel-Nassar dies.The War in Vietnam comes to an end at the end of April in 1975 as a series of events leads to the fall of Saigon. ... After realizing that it would be impossible to defend the South against North Vietnam, the South Vietnamese president resigned and South Vietnam surrendered unconditionally to the North.1980’sThe history of the United States from 1980 until 1991 includes the last year of the Jimmy Carter presidency, eight years of the Ronald Reagan administration, and the first three years of the George H. W. Bush presidency, up to the collapse of the Soviet Union.1985’sIn world events and culture, 1985 can be characterized as heralding in the new. Windows 1.0 is released, the FDA develops a test for screening blood for AIDS, the first successful artificial heart transplant occurs, Gorbachev becomes the de facto leader of the Soviet Union, and the NES game system hits the US. Heck, even Coke was new in 1985. On the music front, this was the year of both “We Are the World” and “Live Aid.” Big singles of the year included “Rock Me Amadeus,” “Take on Me,” and “Like a Virgin.” The Golden Girls hit the small screen, while “Back to the Future,” “The Goonies,” and “Breakfast Club” hit the big screen. The world lost Rock Hudson but gained the likes of Michael Phelps and Keira Knightley.1990s1990 — Hubble Space Telescope launched during Space Shuttle Discovery mission. ...1991 — The Gulf War is waged in the Middle East, by a U.N.-authorized coalition force from thirty-four nations, led by the U.S. and United Kingdom, against Iraq.1991 — The World Wide Web is publicly debuted as an Internet service.In Bush v. Gore (2000), a divided Supreme Court ruled that the state of Florida's court-ordered manual recount of vote ballots in the 2000 presidential election was unconstitutional. The case proved to be the climax of the contentious presidential race between Vice President Al Gore and Texas Governor George W. Bush.What historical event happened in 2006?Introduction. 2006. The headlines in 2006 were marked by death, scandal and politics: 12 die in Sago Mine disaster. ...Sago Mine disaster. January 5. ...Immigration protests. April 10. ...McCartney-Mills separate. May 17. ...Enron trial. May 25. ...Al-Zarqawi killed. June 7. ...World Cup final. July 9. ...Mumbai train blasts. July 11.What significant events happened in 2010?Event of InterestJan 12 Earthquake occurs in Haiti killing approximately 160,000 and destroying the majority of the capital Port-au-Prince.Jan 12 Colombia officially leaves the recession after achieving 2% economic growth in the last quarter of 2009.Jan 14 Yemen declares war on al-Qaeda.What all happened in 2016?10 Events That Changed Us All in 2016The U.S. Presidential Election. ...The Brexit Referendum. ...The Zika Virus. ...President Obama's official trip to Cuba. ...The continued threat of ISIS. ...The Orlando nightclub shooting. ...The 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. ...Standing Rock and the Dakota Access Pipeline Protests.2018 the presentThe strong civil society and democratic institutions of the United States were tested in the first year of the administration of President Donald Trump. Across a range of issues in 2017, the US moved backward on human rights at home and abroad.Trump has targeted refugees and immigrants, calling them criminals and security threats; emboldened racist politics by equivocating on white nationalism; and consistently championed anti-Muslim ideas and policies. His administration has embraced policies that will roll back access to reproductive health care for women; championed health insurance changes that would leave many more Americans without access to affordable health care; and undermined police accountability for abuse. Trump has also expressed disdain for independent media and for federal courts that have blocked some of his actions. And he has repeatedly coddled autocratic leaders and showed little interest or leadership in pressing for the respect of human rights abroad.The individuals most likely to suffer abuse in the United States—including members of racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, children, the poor, and prisoners—are often least able to defend their rights in court or via the political process. Many vulnerable groups endured renewed attacks on their rights during the year. Other longstanding US laws and practices—particularly related to criminal and juvenile justice, immigration, and national security—continued to violate internationally recognized human rights.December 5, 2017VideoVIDEO: The DeportedA surge in immigration arrests of people living in the United States under the Trump administration is having a devastating impact on long-term immigrants with strong ties to the US.Harsh Criminal SentencingOn any given day in the US, there are 2.3 million people in state and federal prisons and jails, the world’s largest reported incarcerated population. Concerns about over-incarceration in prisons—partly due to mandatory minimum sentencing and excessively long sentences—have led some states and the US Congress to propose reforms. At time of writing, a bipartisan proposal for sentencing and corrections reform was gaining momentum in Congress, but the Trump administration had given no indication of support.Thirty-one US states impose the death penalty. At time of writing, 23 people in eight states had been executed in 2017, all by lethal injection. Debate over lethal injection protocols continued, with several US states continuing to use experimental drug combinations and refusing to disclose their composition.Racial Disparities, Drug Policy, and PolicingRacial disparities permeate every part of the US criminal justice system, including in the enforcement of drug laws. Black people make up 13 percent of the population and 13 percent of all adults who use drugs, but 27 percent of all drug arrests. Black men are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of white men.Police continue to kill black people in numbers disproportionate to their overall share of the population. Black people are 2.5 times as likely as white to be killed by police. An unarmed black person is five times as likely to be killed by police as an unarmed white person.The Trump administration has expressed almost unconditional support for the prerogatives of law enforcement officers, scaling back or altogether removing police oversight mechanisms. The US Department of Justice began to discontinue investigations into, and monitoring of, local police departments reported to have patterns and practices of excessive force and constitutional violations.The administration reversed an order from the Obama administration limiting acquisition of offensive military weaponry by local police departments. In a speech in July, President Trump encouraged officers to use unnecessary force on suspects. Congress introduced the “Back the Blue Act,” which would severely restrict civilians’ rights to sue police officers who unlawfully injure them.Despite voicing concern over the opioid crisis, the Trump administration signaled an intent to re-escalate the “war on drugs” and de-emphasize bipartisan public health approaches to drug policy. Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded his predecessor’s Smart on Crime initiative, which had prioritized federal prosecutions of individuals accused of high-level drug offenses, reduced racial disparities in federal drug sentencing, and improved re-entry opportunities.Youth in the Criminal Justice SystemNearly 50,000 youth age 17 and younger are held in juvenile prisons or other confinement facilities on any given day in the US, and approximately 5,000 more are incarcerated in adult jails or prisons. Every year, 200,000 people under 18 have contact with the adult criminal system, with many children tried automatically as adults.The US continues to sentence children to life in prison without parole, although states increasingly reject its use: as of 2017, 25 states and Washington, DC had banned or did not use the sentence for children.Poverty and Criminal JusticePoor defendants throughout the United States are locked up in pretrial detention because they cannot afford to post bail. A 2017 Human Rights Watch report demonstrated that pretrial detention—often resulting from failure to pay bail—coerces people, some innocent, into pleading guilty just to get out of jail. A movement to reduce the use of money bail is growing in the US, with several states implementing, and others considering, reform.April 11, 2017VideoVideo: California Bail System Penalizes the PoorCalifornia pressures poor people who cannot pay bail to plead guilty in order to be released from jail. The system of money bail and pretrial detention also results in the unnecessary jailing of innocent people and undermines justice for all.Many states and counties fund their court systems, including judges, prosecutors, and public defenders, partly or entirely via fees and fines imposed on criminal and traffic defendants. The privatization of misdemeanor probation services by several US states has led to abuses, including fees structured by private probation companies to penalize poor offenders.Rights of Non-CitizensOne week after his January 20, 2017 inauguration, President Trump issued an executive order to suspend the US refugee program, cut the number of refugees who could be resettled into the US in 2017, and temporarily ban entry of nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries. This and later versions of the order banning entry from various countries have been the subject of ongoing federal litigation.In October, Trump signed an executive order resuming the refugee program but with new screening measures. The annual cap for refugee admissions for 2018 was set at 45,000, the lowest annual limit since Congress passed the Refugee Act in 1980.On the back of rhetoric falsely conflating illegal immigration with increased crime, Trump also moved to make all deportable immigrants “priority” targets for deportation, penalize so-called sanctuary cities and states that have limited local police involvement in federal immigration enforcement; expand abusive fast-track deportation procedures and criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses; and increase the prolonged detention of immigrants, despite evidence, documented by Human Rights Watch and others, of abusive conditions in immigration detention.In August, President Trump repealed a program protecting from deportation immigrants who arrived in the United States as children, putting hundreds of thousands of people who grew up in the US at risk of deportation. President Trump signaled he would support legislation that provided legal status for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. However, in October the White House released a hardline set of immigration principles and policies—including weakening protections for child migrants and refugees—it considers necessary components of any such legislative deal.Some cities and states sought to increase protections for immigrants by creating funds for legal services, limiting local law enforcement involvement in federal immigration enforcement, and resisting efforts to defund “sanctuary” cities. Others sought to pass laws punishing such localities.In December, Human Rights Watch reported on the impact of the Trump administration on immigration policies, profiling dozens of long-term residents with strong family and other ties within the US who were summarily deported. US law rarely allows for individualized hearings that weigh such ties, and most immigrants do not have attorneys to help them fight deportation.At time of writing, seizures for deportation of undocumented people from the interior without criminal convictions had nearly tripled to 31,888 between the inauguration and the end of September 2017, compared with 11,500 during approximately the same period in 2016.Right to HealthTo date, attempts in Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA)—legislation that has greatly expanded access to health care for millions of Americans—have failed. However, the Medicaid program, private insurance subsidies, non-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and other key elements of the ACA remained vulnerable to regulatory action by the Trump administration.The Trump administration’s opioid commission released an interim report endorsing numerous public health approaches, but did not recommend protecting Medicaid, which currently covers drug dependence treatment. The commission endorsed increased access to naloxone, the overdose reversal medication, but did not recommend that it be available over the counter, a potential game-changer in addressing the more than 90 deaths per day from opioid overdose in the US.April 27, 2017VideoVIDEO: "Miracle Drug" Naloxone Saves LivesThe US federal and state governments are taking insufficient action to ensure access to the life-saving medication naloxone to reverse opioid overdose, resulting in thousands of preventable deaths.Around 1.5 million Americans live in nursing homes, where inappropriate and nonconsensual use of antipsychotic medications—for staff convenience or to discipline residents without a medical purpose—is widespread. To date, government agencies have not taken sufficient steps to end this practice.Rights of People with DisabilitiesThe Trump administration’s proposed cuts to the ACA, which provides crucial services to people with disabilities, and a proposed rollback of accessibility obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, could undermine the rights of people with disabilities. In July 2017, a man with a psychosocial disability, William Charles Morva, was executed in Virginia, 2017, despite pleas from lawmakers and UN experts to commute his sentence.A 2017 Ruderman Foundation study found that one-third to one-half of all use of force by police in the US involve people with psychosocial or intellectual disabilities.Women’s and Girls’ RightsPresident Trump, his cabinet appointees, and the Republican-controlled Congress rolled back some important women’s rights protections, domestically and in foreign policy, and pledged to dismantle others. Some state governments also eroded women’s rights by introducing new laws with absurd restrictions on women’s reproductive rights. Several high-profile media revelations related to sexual harassment and misconduct reinvigorated discussions around abuses suffered by women at work and in public places.Congress passed legislation dismantling a rule protecting family planning funds in Title X, a national program that funds services to more than 4 million Americans, ensuring access to reproductive health care. The new legislation makes it easier for states to restrict Title X grants by creating eligibility requirements that could exclude certain family planning providers, like Planned Parenthood. This will leave many women without affordable access to cancer screenings, birth control, and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.Congressional proposals to repeal the ACA would have dealt a major blow to essential women’s health services, including by preventing the nongovernmental organization Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funding, and allowing states to limit insurance coverage for an array of essential women’s health benefits. Trump’s proposed federal budget also called for massive Medicaid cuts.Trump also issued an executive order on “promoting free speech and religious liberty,” which will cut women off from access to reproductive health services. It invites agencies to issue regulations that would allow more employers and insurers to assert “conscience-based objections” to the preventive-care mandate of the ACA, which includes contraception. Religious employers are already exempt, and religious non-profits and certain closely held corporations also have accommodations. Following Trump’s order, the Department of Health and Human Services effectively reversed the contraceptive coverage mandate by expanding exemptions to cover nearly any objecting employer.The White House announced in August that it would scrap an equal pay initiative that was to go into effect in 2018. As a result, large employers and federal contractors will not be required to provide disaggregated information about employees’ compensation to civil rights enforcement agencies. It also revoked executive orders that required federal contractors to comply with fair pay measures and a ban on forced arbitration of sexual harassment and discrimination claims. The Department of Education announced its intention to review and change guidelines on campus sexual assault, notably the Obama-era guidance on Title IX of Education Amendments Act of 1972.Several states adopted highly restrictive laws on abortion and reproductive health. These include new bans on abortion in some circumstances or other restrictive measures in Texas, Arkansas, Kentucky, Iowa, Tennessee. Some states increased efforts to deny public family planning funds to providers who also offer abortion services.Despite these significant assaults on women’s human rights, the picture was not entirely grim. Congress passed the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, which includes new protections for whistleblowers in military sexual assault cases and requires training on preventing sexual assault. Trump signed into law the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017, which aims to increase women’s participation in conflict prevention and security.New York State’s 2017 law reform on child marriage dramatically reduces the circumstances under which children can marry.Millions gathered for Women’s Marches in Washington, DC, and in cities around the world to demand equality and justice.Sexual Orientation and Gender IdentityIn the first five months of 2017, legislators in several states introduced more than 100 bills that would attack or undermine LGBT rights. In March 2017, North Carolina partially repealed a 2016 law requiring transgender people to use government facilities according to their sex assigned at birth and barring local governments from prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people. The 2017 provisions bar local governments from passing transgender-inclusive policies and prohibit local non-discrimination ordinances from protecting LGBT people until 2020.In April, Mississippi enacted a law protecting individuals who discriminate based on their religious convictions regarding same-sex marriage, extramarital sex, and transgender people.Tennessee enacted a law permitting therapists and counselors to decline to serve LGBT people based on their religious beliefs.At time of writing, 20 states have laws banning workplace and housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, while two states prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation but not gender identity.National SecurityPresident Trump made statements during the presidential campaign and once in office supporting the use of torture of detainees and other counterterrorism policies that would amount to violations of US and international law. Trump later backtracked on these proposals saying he would defer to Defense Secretary James Mattis, who was outspoken against torture, on interrogation matters.In November, the Office of the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC) requested judicial authorization to open an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the armed conflict in Afghanistan, including by US personnel in secret detention sites in Afghanistan and elsewhere.At time of writing, media reported that US forces interrogated detainees in secret prisons run by foreign forces in Yemen. Defense Department officials denied that abuses had occurred when US forces were present, although their statements did not preclude possible US complicity in torture. Following the reports, the Senate Armed Services Committee sent a letter to Mattis demanding an investigation into the matter. Mattis’ response remained classified at time of writing.Trump promised to keep the US prison at Guantanamo Bay open and send new detainees there. The US continues to hold 31 men at the facility indefinitely without charge, nearly all of whom have been there for more than a decade. The Obama administration failed to release five that it had cleared for release. It claimed the remaining 26 could neither be prosecuted nor released but did not adequately explain the basis for these determinations or allow detainees to meaningfully challenge them.The US continues to prosecute seven men for terrorist offenses, including the 9/11 attacks on the US, in Guantanamo’s fundamentally flawed military commissions system, which does not meet international fair trial standards. It also is holding three men who have already been convicted by the commissions.SurveillanceThroughout 2017, the US continued to carry out large-scale warrantless intelligence surveillance programs without transparency or oversight. Authorities used Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to target non-citizens (except lawful permanent residents) outside the country for warrantless communications monitoring and to “incidentally” gather large numbers of communications to or from people in the US.Section 702 was scheduled to end at the end of 2017 unless Congress renewed it; at time of writing federal appeals courts had differing conclusions about the constitutionality of certain aspects of the law.US surveillance of global communications under Executive Order 12333 remained shrouded in secrecy, with neither Congress nor the courts providing meaningful oversight. In January, the government disclosed procedures for the National Security Agency (NSA) to share data with domestic law enforcement agencies obtained by surveillance under the order. Documents disclosed to Human Rights Watch during the year revealed a Defense Department policy under the order sanctioning otherwise prohibited forms of monitoring of people inside the United States designated as “homegrown violent extremists.” The Defense Department has not revealed how it designates “extremists” or what types of monitoring may result.In May 2017, the Trump administration approved a proposal that asks US visa applicants for social media handles and accounts from the past five years as part of its enhanced vetting process. The US also continues to assert broad authority to search electronic devices and copy data at the border without any suspicion of wrongdoing.Freedom of Expression and AssemblyIn one of his last acts in office, President Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning, a soldier who had received a 35-year prison term for disclosing US diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks and endured abuse while in custody. However, the US government continued to seek the extradition from Russia of Edward Snowden, the whistleblower who revealed the scope of US mass surveillance in 2013.In June 2017, the Justice Department indicted NSA contractor Reality Winner for allegedly disclosing classified information about possible Russian government interference in the 2016 US election. Under current US law and contrary to international human rights law, Winner will not have a chance to claim that she made her disclosures in the public interest.President Trump repeatedly criticized journalists and posted comments and videos denigrating them during the year, prompting concerns over the chilling of freedom of speech. In August 2017, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed concern that “freedom of the press” in the United States was “under attack from the President.”Two UN experts expressed alarm about state legislative proposals seeking to “criminalize peaceful protests,” and a third described “a militarized, at times violent, escalation of force…” against protesters opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline. In August, a woman protesting at a rally held by white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia, was killed when a man allegedly drove a car into the crowd; the driver was charged with murder.In July 2017, the US Justice Department served a warrant on a company that hosted a website used to coordinate protests at the inauguration, demanding information that included more than 1.3 million Internet Protocol addresses that could identify site visitors.Foreign PolicyDuring his inaugural address, Trump articulated a vision of foreign policy that placed “America First,” vowing to defeat terrorism, strengthen the US military, and embrace diplomacy based on US interests. Some foreign dignitaries invited to the White House early in his presidency included those with poor reputations on human rights, including Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, and Turkish President Recep Erdoğan.On his first full day in office, President Trump reinstated and dramatically expanded the Mexico City Policy, or “Global Gag Rule.” This strips US health funding from foreign nongovernmental organizations if they use funds from any source to supply information about abortions, provide abortions, or advocate to liberalize abortion laws. The expanded Global Gag Rule will have disastrous effects beyond previous gag rules—restricting some $8.8 billion in foreign assistance for health services such as family planning, maternal healthcare, and services to treat HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis in 60 countries.Affected organizations cannot easily replace these funds, which help prevent millions of unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, and tens of thousands of maternal deaths. The US government also severed support for the UN Population Fund, limiting the agency’s ability to provide life-saving care for women and girls, often in crisis zones.Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has sought to overhaul the US State Department’s structure by sharply reducing the State Department’s staffing and global role, including by requesting a 29 percent decrease in funding for the State Department and international aid.In April, the US carried out a targeted military strike on the al Shayrat Syrian airfield in response to a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 80 civilians. The April strike was not accompanied by a clear strategy for continued engagement in Syria.During his first foreign trip in May, which began in Saudi Arabia, Trump announced a US$110 billion weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, and pledged to address human rights concerns through “gradual reforms.” Secretary Tillerson voiced concern during the same trip about lack of free speech in Iran, while ignoring equally onerous restrictions in Saudi Arabia.In June, the US Senate voted 53-47 against a proposal that would have banned $510 million in arms sales to Saudi Arabia because of its role in the conflict in Yemen; a similar measure garnered only 27 votes in 2016. Also that month, the Trump administration announced it might withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) over purported bias against Israel, among other concerns.In July 2016, the US Congress extended through 2019 its authority to freeze assets and ban visas of Venezuelan officials accused of abuses against anti-government demonstrators. In 2017, the Trump administration imposed additional sanctions on Venezuelan officials, including President Maduro, and economic sanctions that prohibit dealings in new securities that the Venezuelan government and its state oil company issue. President Trump’s August threat to use military force against Venezuela met with widespread criticism in the region.In August, the State Department announced that it had re-allocated some of Egypt’s US assistance and had frozen additional monies and military assistance, subject to democracy and human rights conditions.However, joint military exercises that had been on hiatus resumed the next day. After months of review, President Trump announced his administration’s new policy on Afghanistan, calling for more US troops, expanded airstrikes, and looser rules of engagement governing anti-Taliban combat operations. The policy also calls on Pakistan to do more to prevent terrorists from harboring there, and on India to play a more influential regional role.Speaking at the UN General Assembly in September, Trump reaffirmed his commitment to an “America First” agenda and threatened to “totally destroy North Korea,” and referred to Iran as a “rogue nation” and to the Iran nuclear deal as an “embarrassment.”The US did not publicly support calls at the UNHRC for a commission of inquiry into abuses in Yemen, but was active during negotiations and ultimately joined consensus on a resolution to create an international investigation.In November, Trump traveled to Asia, visiting China, Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam while in the region for the ASEAN summit in the Philippines. During the trip, Trump boasted of his good relations with authoritarian leaders and did not publicly comment on core human rights concerns, including the Rohingya crisis.As the fighting against the extremist group Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria continued, the number of US airstrikes and the number of civilian casualties increased significantly with little acknowledgement by the Pentagon. Strikes also resumed in Libya and increased in pace in Somalia. Trump reportedly changed US policy for drone strikes outside conventional war zones to allow attacks on lower-level terrorism suspects in more countries, with less oversight, and greater secrecy. The CIA was reportedly granted authority to carry out covert drone strikes in Afghanistan.The Trump administration was considering withdrawing from the UNHRC, primarily because of concerns about the body's membership and its dedicated agenda item on the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Although the council's membership includes some serial rights violators, this has not prevented it from successfully addressing a wide range of human rights issues.

Our boy Trump has spent a lot of time and money in and out of court. The following very long and ongoing list of court cases won and lost, is compliments of Wikipedia:Trump and his businesses have been involved in 3,500 legal cases in U.S. federal courts and state court, an unprecedented number for a U.S. presidential candidate.[1]Of the 3,500 suits, Trump or one of his companies were plaintiffs in 1,900; defendants in 1,450; and bankruptcy, third party, or other in 150.[1]Trump was named in at least 169 suits in federal court.[2]Over 150 other cases were in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida (covering Broward County, Florida) since 1983.[3]In about 500 cases, judges dismissed plaintiffs' claims against Trump. In hundreds more, cases ended with the available public record unclear about the resolution.[1]Where there was a clear resolution, Trump won 451 times, and lost 38.[4]The topics of the legal cases include contract disputes, defamation claims, and allegations of sexual harassment. Trump's companies have been involved in more than 100 tax disputes, and on "at least three dozen" occasions the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has obtained tax liens against Trump properties for nonpayment of taxes.[1]On a number of occasions, Trump has threatened legal action but did not ultimately follow through.[5]Of Trump's involvement in the lawsuits, his lawyer Alan Garten said in 2015 that this was "a natural part of doing business in [the United States]",[5][6]and in the real estate industry, litigation to enforce contracts and resolve business disputes is indeed common.[5]Trump has, however, been involved in far more litigation than fellow real-estate magnates; the USA Today analysis in 2016 found that Trump had been involved in legal disputes more than Edward J. DeBartolo Jr., Donald Bren, Stephen M. Ross, Sam Zell, and Larry Silverstein combined.[1]The Trump lawsuits[5][6]have attracted criticism from Trump's opponents, who say that this is not a trait that conservatives should support.[5]James Copland, director of legal policy at the conservative-leaning Manhattan Institute, states that "Trump clearly has an affinity for filing lawsuits, partly because he owns a lot of businesses" and has sometimes used litigation as a "bullying tactic".[5]Although Trump has said that he "never" settles legal claims, Trump and his businesses have settled with plaintiffs in at least 100 cases (mostly involving personal injury claims arising from injuries at Trump properties), with settlements ranging as high as hundreds of thousands of U.S. dollars[1]and recently as high as tens of millions of dollars.[7]Among the most well-known Trump legal cases was the Trump University litigation. Three legal actions were brought alleging fraud, one by the New York State Attorney General and the others by class action plaintiffs.[8]In November 2016, Trump agreed to pay $25 million to settle the litigation.[7]In 1985, New York City brought a lawsuit against Trump for allegedly using tactics to force out tenants of 100 Central Park South,[17]which he intended to demolish together with the building next door. After ten years in court, the two sides negotiated a deal allowing the building to stand as condominiums.[18]In 1988, the Justice Department sued Trump for violating procedures related to public notifications when buying voting stock in a company related to his attempted takeovers of Holiday Corporation and Bally Manufacturing Corporation in 1986. On April 5, 1988, Trump agreed to pay $750,000 to settle the civil penalties of the antitrust lawsuit.[19]In late 1990, Trump was sued for $2 million by a business analyst for defamation, and Trump settled out of court.[20]Briefly before Trump's Taj Mahal opened in April 1990, the analyst had said that the project would fail by the end of that year. Trump threatened to sue the analyst's firm unless the analyst recanted or was fired. The analyst refused to retract the statements, and his firm fired him for ostensibly unrelated reasons.[21]Trump Taj Mahal declared bankruptcy in November 1990, the first of several such bankruptcies.[22]After, the NYSE ordered the firm to compensate the analyst $750,000; the analyst did not release the details of his settlement with Trump.[23]In 1991, Trump sued the manufacturers of a helicopter that crashed in 1989, killing three executives of his New Jersey hotel casino business.[24]The helicopter fell 2,800 feet after the main four-blade rotor and tail rotor broke off the craft, killing Jonathan Benanav, an executive of Trump Plaza, and two others: Mark Grossinger Etess, president of Trump Taj Mahal, and Stephen F. Hyde, chief executive of the Atlantic City casinos.[25][26][27]One of the defendants was owned by the Italian government, providing a basis for removing it to federal court, where the case was dismissed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the dismissal in 1992, and the Supreme Court denied Trump's petition to hear the case in the same year.[28]In 1991, Trump Plaza was fined $200,000 by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission for moving African American and female employees from craps tables in order to accommodate high roller Robert LiButti, a mob figure and alleged John Gotti associate, who was said to fly into fits of racist rage when he was on losing streaks.[29]There is no indication that Trump was ever questioned in that investigation, he was not held personally liable, and Trump denies even knowing what LiButti looked like.[29]In 1991, one of Trump's casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was found guilty of circumventing state regulations about casino financing when Donald Trump's father bought $3.5 million in chips that he had no plans to gamble. Trump Castle was forced to pay a $30,000 fine under the settlement, according to New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement Director Jack Sweeney. Trump was not disciplined for the illegal advance on his inheritance, which was not confiscated.[30]In 1993, Donald Trump sued Jay Pritzker, a Chicago financier and Trump's business partner since 1979 on the Grand Hyatt hotel. Trump alleged that Pritzker overstated earnings in order to collect excessive management fees.[31]In 1994, Pritzker sued Trump for violating their agreement by, among other ways, failing to remain solvent.[32]The two parties ended the feud in 1995 in a sealed settlement, in which Trump retained some control of the hotel and Pritzker would receive reduced management fees and pay Trump's legal expenses.[33]In 1993, Vera Coking sued Trump and his demolition contractor for damage to her home during construction of the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino.[34]In 1997, she dropped the suit against Trump and settled with his contractor for $90,000.[35]Coking had refused to sell her home to Trump and ultimately won a 1998 Supreme Court decision that prevented Atlantic City from using eminent domain to condemn her property.[36][37]In 1996, Trump was sued by more than 20 African-American residents of Indiana who charged that Trump reneged on promises to hire 70% of his work force from the minority community for his riverboat casino on Lake Michigan. The suit also charged that he hadn't honored his commitments to steer sufficient contracts to minority-owned businesses in Gary, Indiana. The suit was eventually dismissed due to procedural and jurisdiction issues.[38][39]In the late 1990s, Donald Trump and rival Atlantic City casino owner Stephen Wynn engaged in an extended legal conflict during the planning phase of new casinos Wynn had proposed to build. Both owners filed lawsuits against one another and other parties, including the State of New Jersey, beginning with Wynn's antitrust accusation against Trump.[40][41]After two years in court, Wynn's Mirage casino sued Trump in 1999 alleging that his company had engaged in a conspiracy to harm Mirage and steal proprietary information, primarily lists of wealthy Korean gamblers. In response, Trump's attorneys claimed that Trump's private investigator dishonored his contract by working as a "double agent" for the Mirage casino by secretly taping conversations with Trump. All the cases were settled at the same time on the planned day of an evidentiary hearing in court in February 2000, which was never held.[42]Personal and sexualIn 1992, Trump sued ex-wife Ivana Trump for not honoring a gag clause in their divorce agreement by disclosing facts about him in her best-selling book. Trump won the gag order.[43][44][45]The divorce was granted on grounds that Ivana claimed Donald Trump's treatment of her was "cruel and inhuman treatment".[46][47]Years later, Ivana said that she and Donald "are the best of friends".[48]A sexual assault claim from 1994 for child rape was filed against Trump on October 14, 2016,[49]a case that was dropped and refiled, remaining in suspension as of November 4, 2016.[50]In April 1997, Jill Harth Houraney filed a $125,000,000 lawsuit against Trump for sexual harassment in 1993, claiming he "'groped' her under her dress and told her he wanted to make her his 'sex slave'". Harth voluntarily withdrew the suit when her husband settled a parallel case. Trump has called the allegations "meritless".[51][52]Lawsuits 2000–2009[edit]In 2000, Donald Trump paid $250,000 to settle fines related to charges brought by New York State Lobbying Commission director David Grandeau. Trump was charged with circumventing state law to spend $150,000 lobbying against government approval of plans to construct an Indian-run casino in the Catskills, which would have diminished casino traffic to Trump's casinos in Atlantic City.[53][54]From 2000 on, Trump tried to partner with a German venture in building a "Trump Tower Europe" in Germany. The company founded for this, "TD Trump Deutschland AG" was dissolved in 2003, several lawsuits following in the years thereafter.[55]In 2001, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission brought a financial-reporting case against Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc., alleging that the company had committed several "misleading statements in the company's third-quarter 1999 earnings release". Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. consented to the Commission's cease-and-desist order, said the culprit had been dismissed, and that Trump had personally been unaware of the matter.[56][57][58]Trump sued Leona Helmsley,[59]and Helmsley counter-sued Trump[60]due to contentions regarding ownership and operation of the Empire State Building. In 2002, Trump announced that he and his Japanese business partners, were selling the Empire State Building to partners of his rival Leona Helmsley.[61][62]In 2003, the city of Stuttgart denied TD Trump Deutschland AG, a Trump Organization subsidiary, the permission to build a planned tower due to questions over its financing. Trump Deutschland sued the city of Stuttgart, and lost. In 2004 Trump's German corporate partner brought suit against the Trump Organization for failure to pay back a EUR 200 million pre-payment as promised. In 2005, the German state attorney prosecuted Trump Deutschland and its partners for accounting fraud.[63][64][65]In 2004, Donald Trump sued Richard T. Fields in Broward County Circuit Court (in Florida); Fields was once Trump's business partner in the casino business, but had recently become a successful casino developer in Florida apart from Trump. Fields counter-sued Trump in Florida court. Trump alleged that Fields misled other parties into believing he still consulted for Trump, and Fields alleged improprieties in Trump's business.[66]The two businessmen agreed in 2008 to drop the lawsuits when Fields agreed to buy Trump Marina in Atlantic City, New Jersey, for $316 million,[67]but the deal was unsettled again in 2009 because Trump resigned his leadership of Trump Entertainment after Fields lowered his bid.[68]Fields never bought the company, which went into bankruptcy about the same time and was sold for $38 million.[69][70]Trump's lawsuit was dismissed after a hearing in 2010.[71]In 2004, the Trump Organization partnered with Bayrock Group on a $200 million hotel and condo project in Fort Lauderdale Beach, to be called Trump International Hotel & Tower. After proceeding for five years, real estate market devaluation stymied the project in 2009 and Trump dissolved his licensing deal, demanding that his name be removed from the building. Soon after this, the project defaulted on a $139 million loan in 2010.[72]Investors later sued the developers for fraud. Trump petitioned to have his name removed from the suit, saying he had only lent his name to the project. However his request was refused since he had participated in advertising for it.[73]The insolvent building project spawned over 10 lawsuits, some of which were still not settled in early 2016.[74]In 2006, the Town of Palm Beach began fining Trump $250 per day for ordinance violations related to his erection of an 80-foot-tall (24 m) flagpole flying a 15 by 25 feet (4.6 by 7.6 m) American flag on his property. Trump sued the town for $25 million, saying that they abridged his free speech, also disputing an ordinance that local businesses be "town-serving". The two parties settled as part of a court-ordered mediation, in which Trump was required to donate $100,000 to veterans' charities. At the same time, the town ordinance was modified allowing Trump to enroll out-of-town members in his Mar-a-Lago social club.[75]Trump International Hotel and Tower in ChicagoAfter the 2008 housing-market collapse, Deutsche Bank attempted to collect $40 million that Donald Trump personally guaranteed against their $640 million loan for Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago. Rather than paying the debt, Trump sued Deutsche Bank for $3 billion for undermining the project and damage to his reputation.[76]Deutsche Bank then filed suit to obtain the $40 million. The two parties settled in 2010 with Deutsche Bank extending the loan term by five years.[77]In 2008, Trump filed a $100 million lawsuit for alleged fraud and civil rights violations[78]against the California city of Rancho Palos Verdes, over thwarted luxury home development and expansion plans upon part of a landslide-prone golf course in the area, which was purchased by Trump in 2002 for $27 million.[78]Trump had previously sued a local school district over land leased from them in the re-branded Trump National Golf Club, and had further angered some local residents by renaming a thoroughfare after himself.[78]The $100 million suit was ultimately withdrawn in 2012 with Trump and the city agreeing to modified geological surveys and permit extensions for some 20 proposed luxury homes (in addition to 36 homes previously approved).[79][80]Trump ultimately opted for a permanent conservation easement instead of expanded housing development on the course's driving range.[81]In 2009, Donald Trump sued a law firm he had used, Morrison Cohen, for $5 million for mentioning his name and providing links to related news articles on its website. This lawsuit followed a lawsuit by Trump alleging overcharging by the law firm, and a countersuit by Morrison Cohen seeking unpaid legal fees.[82]The suit was dismissed in a 15-page ruling by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten, who ruled that the links to news articles concerned "matters of public interest."[83]In 2009, Trump was sued by investors who had made deposits for condos in the canceled Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico.[84]The investors said that Trump misrepresented his role in the project, stating after its failure that he had been little more than a spokesperson for the entire venture, disavowing any financial responsibility for the debacle.[85]Investors were informed that their investments would not be returned due to the cancellation of construction.[84]In 2013, Trump settled the lawsuit with more than one hundred prospective condo owners for an undisclosed amount.[86]Lawsuits 2010–presentConstruction and property law matters[edit]In 2011, Donald Trump sued Scotland, alleging that it built the Aberdeen Bay Wind Farm after assuring him it would not be built. He had recently built a golf course there and planned to build an adjacent hotel. Trump lost his suit, with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom unanimously ruling in favor of the Scottish government in 2015.[87][88]In 2013, 87-year-old Jacqueline Goldberg alleged that Trump cheated her in a condominium sale by bait-and-switch when she was purchasing properties at the Trump International Hotel and Tower.[89]In 2015, Trump initiated a $100 million lawsuit against Palm Beach County claiming that officials, in a "deliberate and malicious" act, pressured the FAA to direct air traffic to the Palm Beach International Airport over his Mar-a-Lago estate, because he said the airplanes damaged the building and disrupted its ambiance.[90]Trump had previously sued the county twice over airport noise; the first lawsuit, in 1995, ended with an agreement between Trump and the county; Trump's second lawsuit, in 2010, was dismissed.[90]Trump is suing the town of Ossining, New York, over the property tax valuation on his 147-acre (59 ha) Trump National Golf Club Westchester, located in Briarcliff Manor's portion of the town, which Trump purchased for around $8 million at a foreclosure sale in the 1990s and to which he claimed, at the club's opening, to have added $45 million in facility improvements.[91]Although Trump stated in his 2015 FEC filing that the property was worth at least $50 million, his lawsuit seeks a $1.4 million valuation on the property, which includes a 75,000-square-foot clubhouse, five overnight suites, and permission to build 71 condominium units,[91]in an effort to shave $424,176 from his annual local property tax obligations.(91A) Trump had to pay nearly $300,000 in attorney’s fees in Doral painter’s lawsuit related to unpaid bills brought by a local paint store against the Trump National Doral Miami golf resort, ordered the billionaire politician’s company to pay the Doral-based mom-and-pop shop nearly $300,000 in attorney’s fees. All because, according to the lawsuit, Trump allegedly tried to stiff The Paint Spot on its last payment of $34,863 on a $200,000 contract for paint used in the renovation of the home of golf’s famed Blue Monster two years prior.[92]Trump filed the action after separately being sued by Briarcliff Manor for "intentional and illegal modifications" to a drainage system that caused more than $238,000 in damage to the village's library, public pool, and park facilities during a 2011 storm.[92]In October 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that Trump, together with two principals of a connected developer, could be sued for various claims, including oppression, collusion and breach of fiduciary duties, in relation to his role in the marketing of units in the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Toronto, Canada.[93]A subsequent application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Canada in March 2017.[94]Also in October 2016, JCF Capital ULC (a private firm that had bought the construction loan on the building) announced that it was seeking court approval under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to have the building sold in order to recoup its debt, which then totaled $301 million.[95]The court allowed for its auction[96]which took place in March 2017, but no bidders, apart from one stalking horse offer, took part.[97]Defamation mattersAlso in 2011, an appellate court upheld a New Jersey Superior Court judge's decision dismissing Trump's $5 billion defamation lawsuit against author Timothy L. O'Brien, who had reported in his book, TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald (2005), that Trump's true net worth was really between $150 and $250 million. Trump had reportedly told O'Brien he was worth billions and, in 2005, had publicly stated such.[98]Trump said that the author's alleged underestimation of his net worth was motivated by malice and had cost him business deals and damage to his reputation.[99]The appellate court, however, ruled against Trump, citing the consistency of O'Brien's three confidential sources.[100]In 2014, the former Miss Pennsylvania Sheena Monnin ultimately settled a $5 million arbitration judgment against her, having been sued by Trump after alleging that the Miss USA 2012 pageant results were rigged. Monnin wrote on her Facebook page that another contestant told her during a rehearsal that she had seen a list of the top five finalists, and when those names were called in their precise order, Monnin realized the pageant election process was suspect, compelling Monnin to resign her Miss Pennsylvania title. The Trump Organization's lawyer said that Monnin's allegations had cost the pageant a lucrative British Petroleum sponsorship deal and threatened to discourage women from entering Miss USA contests in the future.[101]According to Monnin, testimony from the Miss Universe Organization and Ernst & Young revealed that the top 15 finalists were selected by pageant directors regardless of preliminary judges' scores.[102]As part of the settlement, Monnin was not required to retract her original statements.[101]On January 17, 2017, Summer Zervos, represented by attorney Gloria Allred, filed a defamation suit against President-Elect Donald Trump for claiming that she had lied in her public sexual assault allegations against him.[103]Financial mattersIn July 2011, New York firm ALM Unlimited filed a lawsuit against Trump, who ended payments to the company in 2008 after nearly three years. ALM was hired in 2003 to seek offers from clothing companies for a Trump fashion line, and had arranged a meeting between Trump and PVH, which licensed the Trump name for dress shirts and neckwear. ALM, which had received over $300,000, alleged in the lawsuit that Trump's discontinuation of payments was against their initial agreement. In pre-trial depositions, Trump and two of his business officials – attorney George H. Ross and executive vice president of global licensing Cathy Glosser – gave contradictory statements regarding whether ALM was entitled to payments. Trump, who felt that ALM had only a limited role in the deal between him and PVH, said "I have thousands of checks that I sign a week, and I don't look at very many of the checks; and eventually I did look, and when I saw them (ALM) I stopped paying them because I knew it was a mistake or somebody made a mistake."[104]In January 2013, a judge ordered that the case go to trial, after Trump and ALM failed to settle the lawsuit.[105]During the trial in April 2013, Trump said that ALM's role in the PVH agreement was insubstantial, stating that Regis Philbin was the one who recommended PVH to him. Trump's attorney, Alan Garten, said ALM was not legally entitled to any money.[105][106][107]The judge ruled in favor of Trump later that month because a valid contract between him and ALM was never created.[107]Trump University litigationMain article: Trump University § Allegations of impropriety and lawsuitsIn 2013, in a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, Trump was accused of defrauding more than 5,000 people of $40 million for the opportunity to learn Trump's real estate investment techniques in a for-profit training program, Trump University, which operated from 2005 to 2011.[108][109][110]Trump ultimately stopped using the term "University" following a 2010 order from New York regulators, who called Trump's use of the word "misleading and even illegal"; the state had previously warned Trump in 2005 to drop the term or not offer seminars in New York.[111][112][113]Although Trump has claimed a 98% approval rating on course evaluations, former students recounted high-pressure tactics from instructors seeking the highest possible ratings, including threats of withholding graduation certificates,[114]and more than 2,000 students had sought and received course refunds before the end of their paid seminars.[114]In a separate class action civil suit against Trump University in mid-February 2014, a San Diego federal judge allowed claimants in California, Florida, and New York to proceed;[115]a Trump counterclaim, alleging that the state Attorney General's investigation was accompanied by a campaign donation shakedown, was investigated by a New York ethics board and dismissed in August 2015.[116]Trump filed a $1 million defamation suit against former Trump University student Tarla Makaeff, who had spent about $37,000 on seminars, after she joined the class action lawsuit and publicized her classroom experiences on social media.[85]Trump University was later ordered by a U.S. District Judge in April 2015 to pay Makaeff and her lawyers $798,774.24 in legal fees and costs.[85][117]Breach of contract matters2013]In 2013 Trump sued comedian Bill Maher for $5 million for breach of contract.[118]Maher had appeared on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and had offered to pay $5 million to a charity if Trump produced his birth certificate to prove that Trump's mother had not mated with an orangutan. This was said by Maher in response to Trump having previously challenged Obama to produce his birth certificate, and offering $5 million payable to a charity of Obama's choice, if Obama produced his college applications, transcripts, and passport records.[119][120]Trump produced his birth certificate and filed a lawsuit after Maher was not forthcoming, claiming that Maher's $5 million offer was legally binding. "I don't think he was joking," Trump said. "He said it with venom."[119]Trump withdrew his lawsuit against the comedian after eight weeks.[121]2014[edit]In 2014, model Alexia Palmer filed a civil suit against Trump Model Management for promising a $75,000 annual salary but paying only $3,380.75 for three years' work. Palmer, who came to the US at age 17 from Jamaica under the H-1B visa program in 2011,[122]claimed to be owed more than $200,000. Palmer contended that Trump Model Management charged, in addition to a management fee, "obscure expenses" from postage to limousine rides that consumed the remainder of her compensation. Palmer alleged that Trump Model Management promised to withhold only 20% of her net pay as agency expenses, but after charging her for those "obscure expenses", ended up taking 80%.[123]Trump attorney Alan Garten claimed the lawsuit is "bogus and completely frivolous".[124][125]Palmer filed a class-action lawsuit against the modeling agency with similar allegations.[126]The case was dismissed from U.S. federal court in March 2016, in part because Palmer's immigration status, via H1-B visa sponsored by Trump, required labor complaints to be filed through a separate process.[123][127]2015[edit]In 2015, Trump sued Univision, demanding $500 million for breach of contract and defamation when they dropped their planned broadcast of the Miss USA pageant. The network said that the decision was made because of Trump's "insulting remarks about Mexican immigrants".[128]Trump settled the lawsuit with Univision CEO Randy Falco out of court.[129]In July 2015, Trump filed a $10 million lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court for breach of contract against Spanish celebrity chef José Andrés, claiming that he backed out of a deal to open the flagship restaurant at Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.[130][131]Andrés replied that Trump's lawsuit was "both unsurprising and without merit"[132]and filed an $8 million counterclaim against a Trump Organization subsidiary.[131][133]Also in July 2015, Chef Geoffrey Zakarian also withdrew from the Washington, D.C., project with Andrés in the wake of Trump's comments on Mexican illegal immigrants, and is expected to lose his own $500,000 restaurant lease deposit as a result.[132]Trump denounced and then sued Zakarian in August 2015 for a sum "in excess of $10 million" for lost rent and other damages.[134]Trump's lawsuit called Zakarian's offense at his remarks "curious in light of the fact that Mr. Trump's publicly shared views on immigration have remained consistent for many years, and Mr. Trump's willingness to frankly share his opinions is widely known".[134][135]Disputes with both chefs were eventually settled in April 2017.[136]In 2015, restaurant workers at Trump SoHo filed a lawsuit that from 2009 to at least the time of the filing, gratuities added to customers' checks were illegally withheld from employees. The Trump Organization has responded that the dispute is between the employees and their employer, a third-party contractor. Donald Trump has been scheduled to testify in court on September 1, 2016.[137][138]2018[edit]In 2018, Noel Cintron, the personal driver for Donald Trump before he became the President of the United States, filed a lawsuit Cintron v Trump Organization LLC with the Supreme Court of the State of New York (Manhattan). The lawsuit claims that during his 25-year employment by Trump, he was not compensated for overtime and the second time his salary was raised he was induced to surrender his health insurance, an action which saved Trump approximately $17,866 per year.[139]The lawsuit seeks $178,200 of overtime back pay, plus $5,000 in penalties that are seen under the New York State Labor Law.[140]Assault claims[edit]In September 2015, five men who had demonstrated outside of a Trump presidential campaign event at Trump Tower in New York City sued Donald Trump, alleging that Trump's security staff punched one of them. They also allege that Trump's security guards had been advised by city police that they were permitted to protest there. Several people videotaped the incident.[141][142]In June 2015, the Culinary Workers Union filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), alleging that the owners of Trump Hotel Las Vegas "violated the federally protected rights of workers to participate in union activities" and engaged in "incidents of alleged physical assault, verbal abuse, intimidation, and threats by management".[143]In October 2015, the Trump Ruffin Commercial and Trump Ruffin Tower I, the owners of Trump Hotel Las Vegas, sued the Culinary Workers Union and another union, alleging that they had knowingly distributed flyers that falsely stated that Donald Trump had stayed at a rival unionized hotel, rather than his own non-unionized hotel, during a trip to Las Vegas.[5][143]Poll watching controversy[edit]On October 31, 2016, a New Jersey federal judge, John Michael Vazquez, ordered the Republican National Committee (RNC) to hand over all communications with the Trump campaign related to poll watching and voter fraud. He asked for testimony and documents relating to Kellyanne Conway, RNC officials Ronna Romney McDaniel of Michigan, and Rob Gleason from Pennsylvania.[144]It is claimed Gleason, McDaniel, and Roger Stone recruited poll watchers to check for voter fraud. The state Democratic parties of Nevada, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Ohio filed lawsuits against Trump for encouraging illegal voter intimidation. The states' Democratic parties are also suing their respective Republican party counterparts, along with Roger Stone, who is allegedly recruiting poll watchers and organizing ballot security efforts in a number of states. Stone runs the group "Stop the Steal." It claims Trump supporters yelled at voters outside Las Vegas area polling places when they said they weren't voting for the Republican nominee, and that Stone is asking supporters to conduct an illegitimate "exit polling" initiative aimed at intimidating voters of color.Pat McDonald, the director of Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in Ohio, reported that "Trump supporters have already visited the county elections board identifying themselves as poll observers, even though they did not appear to be credentialed as poll observers as required under Ohio law." Election officials have expressed concern about "instability on Election Day," one lawsuit claims, and discussed the possibility of bringing police to polling sites to address conflicts. In Clark County of Nevada, a lawsuit claims: "A Trump supporter harassed and intimidated multiple voters outside of the Albertson's supermarket early voting location on Lake Mead Boulevard, repeatedly asking voters for whom they were voting, and then yelling at them belligerently and attempting to keep them from entering the voting location when they stated they were not voting for Donald Trump." When poll staffers told the Trump supporters to stop harassing voters, "the Trump supporter told poll workers that he had 'a right to say anything he wanted to the voters.'" Poll staffers called police, and the Trump supporter left. The lawsuit also claims similar incidents took place in neighboring Nye County as well. In Pennsylvania, Murrysville City Councilman Josh Lorenz supposedly posted instructions for the way Clinton supporters could vote online, even though there is no online voting in Pennsylvania. Eight registered electors, mostly from the Philadelphia area, challenged the portion of the state Election Code that prevents poll watchers from observing elections outside of the counties where they live.[145][146][147]In Pompano Beach, Florida, police asked two poll watchers to leave a polling site. Two precinct clerks were also fired for not adhering to policy and training. No arrests were made. No other incidents were reported in South Florida.[148][149]Nevada early voting Latino turnout controversy[edit]On November 8, 2016, Trump filed a lawsuit claiming early voting polling places in Clark County, Nevada, were kept open too late. These precincts had high turnout of Latino voters. Nevada state law explicitly states that polls are to stay open to accommodate eligible voters in line at closing time. Hillary Clinton campaign advisor Neera Tanden says the Trump campaign is trying to suppress Latino voter turnout. A political analyst from Nevada, Jon Ralston tweeted that the Trump lawsuit is "insane" in a state that clearly allows the polls to remains open until everyone in line has voted. Former Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller, posted the statute that states "voting must continue until those voters have voted". Miller said: "If there are people in line waiting to vote at 7 pm, voting must continue until everyone votes.... We still live in America, right?"[150]A Nevada judge denied Trump's request to separate early voting ballots. Judge Gloria Sturman, of the District Court for Clark County Nevada, ruled that County Registrar of Voters Joe P. Gloria was already obligated by state law to maintain the records that the Trump campaign is seeking. Sturman said: "That is offensive to me because it seems to go against the very principle that a vote is secret."[151][152]Diana Orrock, the Republican National Committeewoman for Nevada and a vocal Trump ally, said she was unaware of the lawsuit before Politico contacted her. "I know that the [Clark County] registrar was on TV this morning saying that anybody who's in line was allowed to participate in the voting process until all of them came through," she said. "If that's what they did, I don't have a problem with that ... I don't know that filing a suit's going to accomplish anything." Orrock doubts the lawsuit will have any impact.[153]Lawsuit for inciting violence at March 2016 campaign rally[edit]During a campaign rally on March 1, 2016 in Louisville, Kentucky, Trump repeatedly said "get 'em out of here" while pointing at anti-Trump protesters as they were forcibly escorted out by his supporters. Three protesters say they were repeatedly shoved and punched while Trump pointed at them from the podium, citing widely shared video evidence of the events. They also cited previous statements by Trump about paying the legal bills of supporters who got violent, or suggesting a demonstrator deserved to be "roughed up."[154][155][156][157]The lawsuit accuses Donald Trump of inciting violence against protesters in Louisville, Kentucky. The plaintiffs are Kashiya Nwanguma (21), Molly Shah (36) and Henry Brousseau (17). The suit is against Trump, his campaign, and three Trump supporters (Matthew Heimbach, Alvin Bamberger and an unnamed defendant). One defendant, Bamburger, who was wearing a Veteran's uniform in the video, apologized to the Korean War Veterans Association immediately after the event, writing that he "physically pushed a young woman down the aisle toward the exit" after "Trump kept saying 'get them out, get them out."[154]Trump's attorneys requested to get the case dismissed, arguing he was protected by free speech laws, and wasn't trying to get his supporters to resort to violence.[156][158]They also stated that Trump had no duty to the protesters, and they had assumed the personal risk of injury by deciding to protest at the rally.[154]On Friday, April 1, 2017, Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled against the dismissal of a lawsuit, stating there was ample evidence to support that the injuries of the protesters were a "direct and proximate result" of Trump's words and actions. Hale wrote, "It is plausible that Trump's direction to 'get 'em out of here' advocated the use of force," and, "It was an order, an instruction, a command." Hale wrote that the Supreme Court has ruled out some protections for free speech when used to incite violence.[159]Defendant Heimbach requested to dismiss the discussion in the lawsuit about his association with a white nationalist group, and also requested to dismiss discussion of statements he made about how a President Trump would advance the interests of the group. The request was declined, with the judge saying the information could be important for determining punitive damages because they add context.[154]Hale also declined to remove the allegation that Plaintiff Nwanguma, who is African-American, was victim to ethnic, racial and sexist slurs at the rally from the crowd. The judge stated that this context may support claims by the plaintiffs' of incitement and negligence by Trump and the Trump campaign. The judge wrote, "While the words themselves are repulsive, they are relevant to show the atmosphere in which the alleged events occurred."[154]The judge stated that all people have a duty to use care to prevent foreseeable injury. "In sum, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that their harm was foreseeable and that the Trump Defendants had a duty to prevent it." The case was referred a federal magistrate, Judge H. Brent Brennenstuhl, who will handle preliminary litigation, discovery and settlement efforts.[160]Heimbach filed a separate counterclaim in April 2017, arguing that Trump was "responsible for any injuries" he [Heimbach] "might have inflicted because Mr. Trump directed him and others to take action". Heimbach, "a self-employed landscaper", and a member of the Traditionalist Youth Network, "which advocates separate American 'ethno states', "spends much of his time" online writing "against Jews, gays and immigrants and urging whites to stand up for their race." He wrote his own lawsuit which requested that Trump pay Heimbach's "legal fees, citing a promise Mr. Trump made at an earlier rally to pay legal costs of anyone who removed protesters."[161]Heimbach's "counterclaim" against Trump has "probed the limits of free speech and public protest while confronting the courts with a unique legal argument".[161]On May 5, Trump's lawyers submitted legal filings that argue that Heimbach's "indemnity claim should be dismissed on the same grounds". According to a University of Virginia law professor, Leslie Kendrick, this indemnity or "impleader" case is "highly unusual."[161]New York University's Samuel Issacharoff, a professor of constitutional law, argued that care must be taken to not allow speech, in the "context of a political rally" to be "turned into something that is legally sanctionable."[161]Payments related to alleged affairs[edit]See also: Stormy Daniels–Donald Trump scandal and Karen McDougal § Alleged affair with Donald TrumpAdult film actress Stormy Daniels has alleged that she and Trump had an extramarital affair in 2006, months after the birth of his youngest child.[162]Just before the 2016 presidential election Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid $130,000 by Trump's attorney Michael Cohen as part of a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), through an LLC set up by Cohen; he says he used his own money for the payment.[163]In February 2018, Daniels filed suit against the LLC asking to be released from the agreement so that she can tell her story. Cohen filed a private arbitration proceeding and obtained a restraining order to keep her from discussing the case.[164]According to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Trump has denied the allegations.[165]On March 6, 2018, Daniels sued Trump in California Superior Court, claiming among other things that the NDA never came into effect because Trump did not sign it personally.[166]On March 16 Cohen, with Trump's approval, asked for Daniels' suit to be moved from state to federal court, based on the criteria that the parties live in different places and the amount at stake is more than $75,000; Cohen asserted that Daniels could owe $20 million in liquidated damages for breaching the agreement.[167]The filing marked the first time that Trump himself, through his personal attorney, had taken part in the Daniels litigation.[168]In early April 2018, Trump said that he did not know about Cohen paying Daniels, why Cohen had made the payment or where Cohen got the money from.[169]On April 30, Daniels further sued Trump for defamation.[170]In May 2018, Trump's annual financial disclosure revealed that he reimbursed Cohen in 2017 for expenditures related to the Daniels case.[171]In August 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to breaking campaign finance laws, admitting paying hush money of $130,000 and $150,000 "at the direction of a candidate for federal office", to two women who alleged affairs with that candidate, "with the purpose of influencing the election". The figures match sums of payments made to Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal.[172][173]American Media, Inc. had reportedly in 2016 bought for $150,000 the rights to a story by McDougal alleging an affair with a married Trump from 2006 which lasted between nine months to a year.[174][175][176]David Pecker (AMI CEO/Chairman and friend of Trump), Dylan Howard (AMI chief content officer) and Allen Weisselberg (chief financial officer of The Trump Organization) were reportedly granted witness immunity in exchange for their testimony regarding the illegal payments.[177][178]In response, Trump said that he only knew about the payments "later on"; Trump also said regarding the payments: "They didn't come out of the campaign, they came from me."[179]The Wall Street Journal reported on November 9, 2018 that federal prosecutors have evidence of Trump’s "central role" in payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal that violated campaign-finance laws.[180][181]Special Counsel investigation[edit]Main article: Special Counsel investigation (2017–present)The Special Counsel investigation is a United States law enforcement investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and any Russian (or other foreign) interference in the election, including exploring any possible links or coordination between Trump's campaign and the Russian government, "and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."[182]Since May 2017, the investigation has been led by a United States Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, a former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI). Mueller's investigation took over several FBI investigations including those involving former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.It has been noted that Trump has experienced a high turnover with respect to the attorneys handling this matter, as well as a large number of prominent lawyers and law firms publicly declining offers to join Trump's legal team.[183][184]Attorneys known to have been approached include Robert S. Bennett of Hogan Lovells,[185]Paul Clement and Mark Filip, both with Kirkland & Ellis,[186][186]Robert Giuffra Jr. of Sullivan & Cromwell,[185]Theodore B. Olson of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher,[187]and Brendan V. Sullivan Jr. of Williams & Connolly.[186]Other firms with attorneys who have decided not to represent Trump include Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan,[188]Steptoe & Johnson,[188]and Winston & Strawn.[citation needed]Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing were briefly slated to join Trump's legal team, but withdrew their services from Trump in March 2018, citing conflicts of interest.[189]In an article describing the "unique circumstance" of Rudy Giuliani's unpaid leave of absence from Greenberg Traurig while representing Trump, possibly because of "potential conflicts", Christine Simmons said some other law firms may have turned down representing Trump in the Russia case due to "public relations headaches or business and recruitment concerns".[190]Trump has called such views a "Fake News narrative".[191][192]In a National Law Journal article, Ryan Lovelace described how white-collar lawyers must weigh the "risks" and "stigma" of joining the Trump team. He quoted a prominent defense attorney's concerns about "the constant shuffle of attorneys in and out of the president's legal team", and the possibility that an attorney could invest resources and reputation in such representation "only to find yourself on the sidelines a short time later because the president saw someone he liked better on Fox News".[192]The quoted attorney also noted "a stigma to being linked to this president" that might impact business with other clients.[192]A list of other reasons for not wanting to represent Trump is provided by Jill Abramson for The Guardian:The problem for the white-collar defense bar's crème de la crème is that Donald Trump is so blatantly the client from hell. He won't listen. He won't obey instructions. He is headstrong. He is a bully. Sometimes, he doesn't pay his bills. Most of all, it's possible that he isn't capable of discerning fact from fiction. This last foible could get any lawyer who represents him into very deep legal hot water. No one wants to get disbarred for the fame and fortune of representing President Trump. Then there's the justifiable concern over all the unforced legal errors that the defense side, led by Trump himself, has already committed.[193]An Above the Law article states that some law firms have refused to represent the President of the United States because "Donald Trump has somehow turned POTUS into a dog of a client self-respecting lawyers do not want to touch", expressing concern that "[i]f all the good attorneys — the ones with reputations to preserve and ethics to uphold — refuse to represent the president, what's left are the 'bad' attorneys. The ones who don't have the slightest idea what a moral and ethical principle is".[194]Allegations of business links to organized crime[edit]Journalists David Cay Johnston and Wayne Barrett, the latter of whom wrote an unauthorized 1992 Trump biography, have claimed that Trump and his companies did business with New York and Philadelphia families linked to the Italian-American Mafia.[195][196]A reporter for The Washington Post writes, "he was never accused of illegality, and observers of the time say that working with the mob-related figures and politicos came with the territory."[197]Trump helped a financier for the Scarfo family get a casino license, and constructed a casino using firms controlled by Nicodemo Scarfo.[198]Trump also bought real estate from Philadelphia crime family member Salvatore Testa, and bought concrete from companies associated with the Genovese crime family and the Gambino crime family.[195][196][197]Trump Plaza paid a $450,000 fine leveled by the Casino Gaming Commission for giving $1.6 million in rare automobiles to Robert LiButti, the acquaintance of John Gotti already mentioned.[29]Starting in 2003, the Trump Organization worked with Felix Sater, who had a 1998 racketeering conviction for a $40 million Mafia-linked stock fraud scheme, and who had then become an informant against the mafia.[199]Trump's attorney has said that Sater worked with Trump scouting real estate opportunities, but was never formally employed.[200]Use of bankruptcy laws[edit]Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, but hotel and casino businesses of his have been declared bankrupt four times between 1991 and 2009 to re-negotiate debt with banks and owners of stock and bonds.[201][202]Because the businesses used Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they were allowed to operate while negotiations proceeded. Trump was quoted by Newsweek in 2011 saying, "I do play with the bankruptcy laws – they're very good for me" as a tool for trimming debt.[82][203]According to a report by Forbes in 2011, the four bankruptcies were the result of over-leveraged hotel and casino businesses in Atlantic City: Trump's Taj Mahal (1991), Trump Plaza Hotel (1992), Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004), and Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009).[204][205]Trump said "I've used the laws of this country to pare debt.... We'll have the company. We'll throw it into a chapter. We'll negotiate with the banks. We'll make a fantastic deal. You know, it's like on The Apprentice. It's not personal. It's just business."[206]He indicated that many "great entrepreneurs" do the same.[204]1991[edit]In 1991, Trump Taj Mahal was unable to service its debt and filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy.[206]Forbes indicated that this first bankruptcy was the only one where Trump's personal financial resources were involved. Time, however, maintains that $72 million of his personal money was also involved in a later 2004 bankruptcy.[207]1992[edit]On November 2, 1992, the Trump Plaza Hotel filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and Trump lost his 49 percent stake in the luxury hotel to Citibank and five other lenders.[208]In return Trump received more favorable terms on the remaining $550+ million owed to the lenders, and retain his position as chief executive, though he would not be paid and would not have a role in day-to-day operations.[209]1994[edit]Trump Plaza Hotel and Casinoclosed in 2014By 1994, Trump had eliminated a large portion of his $900 million personal debt through sales of his Trump Taj Mahal and Trump Plazaassets,[210]and significantly reduced his nearly $3.5 billion in business debt. Although he lost the Trump Princess yacht and the Trump Shuttle (which he had bought in 1989), he did retain Trump Tower in New York City and control of three casinos in Atlantic City, including Trump's Castle. Trump sold his ownership of West Side Yards (now Riverside South, Manhattan) to Chinese developers including Hong Kong's New World Development, receiving a premium price in exchange for the use and display of the name "Trump" on the buildings.[211]2004[edit]Donald Trump's third corporate bankruptcy was on October 21, 2004, involving Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, the publicly-traded holding company for his three Atlantic City casinos and some others.[212]Trump lost over half of his 56% ownership and gave bondholders stock in exchange for surrendering part of the debt. No longer CEO, Trump retained a role as chairman of the board. In May 2005[213]the company emerged from bankruptcy as Trump Entertainment Resorts Holdings.[214]In his 2007 book, Think BIG and Kick Ass in Business and Life, Trump wrote: "I figured it was the bank's problem, not mine. What the hell did I care? I actually told one bank, 'I told you you shouldn't have loaned me that money. I told you the goddamn deal was no good.'"[215]2009[edit]Trump's fourth corporate bankruptcy occurred in 2009, when Trump and his daughter Ivanka resigned from the board of Trump Entertainment Resorts; four days later the company, which owed investors $1.74 billion against its $2.06 billion of assets, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. At that time, Trump Entertainment Resorts had three properties in Atlantic City: Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino (closed in 2014), and Trump Marina (formerly Trump's Castle, sold in 2011). Trump and some investors bought the company back that same year for $225 million. As part of the agreement, Trump withdrew a $100 million lawsuit he had filed against the casino's owners alleging damage to the Trump brand. Trump re-negotiated the debt, reducing by over $1 billion the repayments required to bondholders.[216][217]In 2014, Trump sued his former company to remove his name from the buildings since he no longer ran the company, having no more than a 10% stake; he lost the suit.[218]Trump Entertainment Resorts filed again for bankruptcy in 2014[219]and was purchased by billionaire philanthropist Carl Icahn in 2016, who acquired Trump Taj Mahal in the deal.[220]Campaign contributions[edit]According to a New York state report, Trump circumvented corporate and personal campaign donation limits in the 1980s – although he did not break any laws – by donating money to candidates from 18 different business subsidiaries, rather than giving primarily in his own name.[197][221]Trump told investigators he did so on the advice of his lawyers. He also said the contributions were not to curry favor with business-friendly candidates, but simply to satisfy requests from friends.[197][222]Donald J. Trump Foundation[edit]During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, media began reporting in detail on how the Donald J. Trump Foundation was funded and how Donald Trump used its funds. The Washington Post in particular reported several cases of possible mis-use, self-dealing and possible tax evasion.[18] [19] [20]Regarding the various irregularities in the Trump Foundation, former head of the Internal Revenue Service's Office of Exempt Organizations Division Marc Owens told The Washington Post: "This is so bizarre, this laundry list of issues.... It's the first time I've ever seen this, and I've been doing this for 25 years in the IRS, and 40 years total.[21]When interviewed for the Post's article, Trump spokesperson Boris Epshtein said that Trump did not knowingly violate any tax laws.[18]The office of New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman investigated the foundation "to make sure it's complying with the laws governing charities in New York."[22]Controversy over tax returns[edit]In October 2016, The New York Times published some tax documents from 1995. These documents indicate that Trump might have evaded paying taxes on as much as 916 million dollars in income at one time. Trump likely gave some of his creditors shares of his failing businesses to avoid taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars he was given in debt relief, which is illegal. Legal scholar Edward Kleinbard of the University of Southern California believes Trump forged tax documents. Trump claimed on his tax returns that he lost money, but did not recognize it in the form of canceled debts. He likely avoided paying 425 million dollars in taxes, says Steven M. Rosenthal, an attorney at the Tax Policy Center. Rosenthal claims he "borrowed other people's money and spent it in spectacular fashion." Trump might have performed a stock-for-debt swap. This would have allowed Trump to avoid paying income taxes for at least 18 years. An audit of Trump's tax returns for 2002 through 2008 was "closed administratively by agreement with the I.R.S. without assessment or payment, on a net basis, of any deficiency." Tax attorneys believe the government may have reduced what Trump was able to claim as a loss without requiring him to pay any additional taxes.[223][224]It is unknown whether the I.R.S. challenged Trump's use of the swaps because he has not released his tax returns. Trump's lawyers advised against Trump using the equity for debt swap, as they believed it to be potentially illegal.[225]Marc Kasowitz, name partner of the Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman firm, wrote a letter threatening The New York Times over publication of the 1995 documents. Kasowitz's action drew attention to the fact that the biglaw firm had done extensive legal work for Donald Trump and his businesses since at least 2001 including also bankrupt casino restructuring.[226]In early 2017, firm member and former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman introduced Pres.-elect Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension committee.[227]Destruction of documents[edit]In June 2016, a USA Today article reported that Donald Trump and his companies have been deleting emails and other documents on a large scale,[228]including evidence in lawsuits, sometimes in defiance of court orders and under subpoena since as early as 1973.[229][230][231]In October 2016, Kurt Eichenwald published new research findings in Newsweek. The findings were first published by Paul Singer[232]on June 13, 2016[233]and gained larger attention[234][235]after a new report in Newsweek on October 31, 2016. According to Newsweek, Trump and his companies "hid or destroyed thousands of documents" involving several court cases from as early as 1973."Over the course of decades, Donald Trump's companies have systematically destroyed or hidden thousands of emails, digital records and paper documents demanded in official proceedings, often in defiance of court orders.... In each instance, Trump and entities he controlled also erected numerous hurdles that made lawsuits drag on for years, forcing courtroom opponents to spend huge sums of money in legal fees as they struggled—sometimes in vain—to obtain records."— Kurt Eichenwald, Donald Trump's Companies Destroyed Emails in Defiance of Court Orders Newsweek, October 31, 2016In 1973 Trump, his father and their company were in court for civil charges for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans. After their lawyers had delayed court requests for documents for several months, Trump, then being under subpoena, said his company had destroyed corporate records of the past six months "for saving space". In a court case beginning in 2005 against Power Plant Entertainment, LLC, an affiliate of real estate developer Cordish Cos., it was revealed that Trump's companies had deleted the data requested by court.[236]Cordish Cos. had built two American Indian[237]casinos in Florida under the Hard Rock brand and Donald Trump accused them of cheating him out of that deal. Nonetheless, Trump's lawyers had refused to instruct workers to keep all records related to the case during litigation.[229]Trump had established a procedure to delete all data from their employees' computers every year at least since 2003,[234]despite knowing at least since 2001 that he might want to file a lawsuit. Even after the lawsuit was filed, Trump Hotelsdisposed of a computer of a key witness without having made a backup of the data. A former general counsel of the Trump casino unit confirmed that all data were deleted from nearly all companies' computers annually. Trump and his lawyers claimed they were not keeping records and digital data although it was revealed that Trump had launched his own high-speed internet provider in 1998 and an IBM Domino server had been installed for emails and digital files in 1999.[229][235]

Procedure for Clearance of Imported and Export Goods1. Introduction:1.1 The imported goods before clearance for home consumption or for warehousing are required to comply with prescribed Customs clearance formalities. This includes presentation of a Bill of Entry containing details such as description of goods, value, quantity, exemption notification etc., Customs Tariff Heading. This Bill of Entry is subject to verification by the proper officer of Customs (under self assessment scheme) and may be reassessed if declarations are found to be incorrect. Normally import declarations made are scrutinised without prior examination of goods with reference to documents made available and other information about the value/ classification etc. It is at the time of clearance of goods that these are examined by the Customs to confirm the nature of goods, valuation and other aspects of the declarations. In case no discrepancies are observed at the time of examination of goods ‘Out of Charge’ order is issued and thereafter the goods can be cleared. Similarly Customs clearance formalities for goods meant for export have to be fulfilled by presenting a Shipping Bill and other related documents. These documents are verified for correctness of assessment and after examination of the goods, if warranted, ‘Let Export Order’ is given on the Shipping Bill.2. Import procedure -Bill of Entry:2.1 Goods imported into the country attract Customs duty and are also required to confirm to relevant legal requirements. Thus, unless the imported goods are not meant for Customs clearance at the port/airport of arrival such as those intended for transit by the same vessel/aircraft or transshipment to another Customs station or to any place outside India, detailed Customs clearance formalities have to be followed by the importers. In contrast, in terms of Section 52 to 56 of the Customs Act, 1962 the goods mentioned in the IGM/Import Report for transit to any place outside India or meant for transhipment to another Customs station in India are allowed transit without payment of duty. In case of goods meant for transhipment to another Customs station, simple transshipment procedure has to be followed by the carrier and the concerned agencies at the first port/airport of landing and the Customs clearance formalities have to be complied with by the importer after arrival of the goods at the other Customs station. There could also be cases of transshipment of the goods after unloading to a port outside India. Here also simple procedure for transshipment is prescribed, and no duty is required to be paid.2.2 For goods which are offloaded at a port/airport for clearance the importers have the option to clear the goods for home consumption after payment of duties leviable or to clear them for warehousing without immediate discharge of the duties leviable in terms of the warehousing provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. For this purpose every #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 18 importer is required to file in terms of the Section 46 ibid a Bill of Entry for home consumption or warehousing, as the case may be, in the form prescribed by regulations. The Bill of Entry is to be submitted in sets, different copies meant for different purposes and also bearing different colours, and on the body of the Bill of Entry the purpose for which it will be used is mentioned.2.3 The importers have to obtain an Importer-Export Code (IEC) number from the Directorate General of Foreign Trade prior to filing of Bill of Entry for clearance of imported goods. The Customs EDI System receives the IEC number online from the DGFT.2.4 If the goods are cleared through the EDI system, no formal Bill of Entry is filed as it is generated in the computer system, but the importer is required to file a cargo declaration having prescribed particulars required for processing of the Bill of Entry for Customs clearance.2.5 The importer clearing the goods for domestic consumption through non-EDI ports/ airports has to file Bill of Entry in four copies; original and duplicate are meant for Customs, third copy for the importer and the fourth copy is meant for the bank for making remittances. Along with the Bill of Entry the following documents are also generally required: (a) Signed invoice (b) Packing list (c) Bill of Lading or Delivery Order/Airway Bill (d) GATT valuation declaration form duly filled in (e) Importers/CHA’s declaration (f) Import license, wherever necessary (g) Letter of Credit, wherever necessary (h) Insurance document (i) Import license, where necessary (j) Industrial License, if required (k) Test report in case of items like chemicals (l) DEEC Book/DEPB in original, where relevant (m) Catalogue, technical write up, literature in case of machineries, spares or chemicals, as applicable #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 19 (n) Separately split up value of spares, components, machineries (o) Certificate of Origin, if preferential rate of duty is claimed2.6 While filing the Bill of Entry, the correctness of the information given therein has also to be certified by the importer in the form a declaration at the foot of the Bill of Entry and any mis-declaration/incorrect declaration has legal consequences.2.7 Under the EDI system, the importer does not submit documents as such but submits declarations in electronic format containing all the relevant information to the Service Centre. A signed paper copy of the declaration is taken by the service centre operator for non-reputability of the declaration. A checklist is generated for verification of data by the importer/CHA. After verification, the data is filed by the Service Centre Operator and EDI system generates a Bill of Entry Number, which is endorsed on the printed checklist and returned to the importer/CHA. No original documents are taken at this stage. Original documents are taken at the time of examination. The importer/CHA also needs to sign on the final document before Customs clearance.2.8 The first stage for processing a Bill of Entry is termed as the noting/registration of the Bill of Entry vis-à-vis the IGM filed by the carrier. In the manual format, the importer has to get the Bill of Entry noted in the concerned Noting Section which checks the consignment sought to be cleared having been manifested in the particular vessel and a Bill of Entry number is generated and indicated on all copies. After noting, the Bill of Entry gets sent to the appraising section of the Custom House for assessment functions, payment of duty etc. In the EDI system, the noting aspect is checked by the system itself, which also generates Bill of Entry number.2.9 After noting/registration the Bill of Entry is forwarded manually or electronically to the concerned Appraising Group in the Custom House dealing with the commodity sought to be cleared. Appraising Wing of the Custom House has a number of Groups dealing with commodities falling under different Chapter Headings of the Customs Tariff and they take up further scrutiny for assessment, import permissibility angle etc3. Self-assessment of imported and export goods: 3.1 Vide Finance Act, 2011, ‘Self-Assessment’ has been introduced under the Customs Act, 1962. Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962 provides for self-assessment of duty on imported and export goods by the importer or exporter himself by filing a Bill of Entry or Shipping Bill, as the case may be, in the electronic form (new Section 46 or 50). Thus, under self-assessment, the importer or exporter who will ensure that he declares the correct classification, applicable rate of duty, value, benefit of exemption notifications claimed, if any, in respect of the imported / export goods while presenting Bill of Entry or Shipping Bill.3.2 Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962 makes it mandatory for the importer to make entry for the imported goods by presenting a Bill of Entry electronically to the proper officer except for the cases where it is not feasible to make such entry electronically. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 20 While this is not a new requirement, it provides a legal basis for electronic filing. Where it is not feasible to file these documents in the System, the concerned Commissioner can allow filing of Bill of Entry in manual mode by the importer. These Bills of Entry would continue to be regulated by Bill of Entry (Forms) Regulations, 1976. However, this facility should not be allowed in routine and Commissioner of Customs should ensure that manual filing of Bill of Entry is allowed only in genuine and deserving cases. Similarly, on export side also, Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962 makes it obligatory for exporters to make entry of export goods by presenting a Shipping Bill electronically to the proper officer except for the cases where it is not found feasible to make such entry electronically. The Commissioner concerned in these cases may allow manual filing of Shipping Bill. Again, this authority should be exercised cautiously and only in genuine cases.3.3 The declaration filed by the importer or exporter may be verified by the proper officer when so interdicted by the Risk Management Systems (RMS). In rare cases, such interdiction may also be made with the approval of the Commissioner of Customs or an officer duly authorized by him, not below the rank of Additional Commissioner of Customs, and this will necessarily be done after making a record in the EDI system. On account of interdictions, Bills of Entry may either be taken up for action of review of assessment or for examination of the imported goods or both. If the self-assessment is found incorrect, the duty may be reassessed. In cases where there is no interdiction, there will be no cause for the declaration filed by the importer to be taken up for verification, and such Bills of Entry will be straightaway facilitated for clearance without assessment and examination, on payment of duty, if any.3.4 The verification of a self-assessed Bill of Entry or Shipping Bill shall be with regard to correctness of classification, value, rate of duty, exemption notification or any other relevant particular having bearing on correct assessment of duty on imported or export goods. Such verification will be done selectively on the basis of the Risk Management System (RMS), which not only provides assured facilitation to those importers having a good track record of compliance but ensures that on the basis of certain rules, intervention, etc. high risk consignments are interdicted for detailed verification before clearance. For the purpose of verification, the proper officer may order for examination or testing of the imported or export goods. The proper officer may also require the production of any relevant document or ask the importer or exporter to furnish any relevant information. Thereafter, if the self-assessment of duty is not found to have been done correctly, the proper officer may re-assess the duty. This is without prejudice to any other action that may be warranted under the Customs Act, 1962. On reassessment of duty, the proper officer shall pass a speaking order, if so desired by the importer, within 15 days of re-assessment. This requirement is expected to arise when the importer or exporter does not agree with re-assessment, which is different from the original self-assessment. There may be situations when the proper officer of Customs finds that verification of self-assessment in terms of Section 17 requires testing / further documents / information, and the goods cannot be re-assessed quickly but are required to be cleared by the importer or exporter on urgent basis. In such cases, provisional assessment may be done in terms of Section 18 of the Customs #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 21 Act, 1962, once the importer or exporter furnishes security as deemed fit by the proper officer of Customs for differential duty equal to duty provisionally assessed by him and the duty payable after re-assessment.3.5 One of the salient features of self-assessment is that verification of declarations and assessment done by the importer or exporter, except for cases wherein a speaking order has been passed by the proper officer while re-assessing the duty, can also be done at the premises of the importer or exporter. This provision is being implemented as ‘On Site Post Clearance Audit’ (OSPCA) programme. OSPCA has been applied to importers under the Accredited Client Programme (ACP) with effect from 1.10.2011. The current Post Clearance Audit at Custom Houses shall continue for other importers.3.6 In cases, where the importer or exporter is not able to determine the duty liability / make self-assessment for any reason, except in cases where examination is requested by the importer under proviso to Section 46(1), a request shall be made to the proper officer for assessment of the same under Section 18(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. In this situation an option is available to the proper officer to resort to provisional assessment of duty by asking the importer / exporter to furnish security as deemed fit for differential duty equal to duty provisionally assessed and duty finally payable after assessment. This provision is to be applied in deserving cases only where importer or exporter is not able to assess the goods for duty for want of certain information / documents etc. and not in a routine manner. As far as possible, steps should be taken to provide guidance to importers/ exporters so that they are able to self-assess the duty. It should, however, be made clear that such guidance is not legally binding.3.7 In both cases where no self-assessment is done and when self-assessment is done but reassessment is required under Section 17, the importer or exporter can opt for provisional assessment of duty by the proper officer of Customs. The difference is that when no self-assessment is done, the provisional assessment shall get converted into final assessment and when self-assessment is done, the provisional assessment shall get converted into re-assessment. 3.8 Subsequent to introduction of self-assessment, it was felt that the existing facilitation levels under RMS could be increased as responsibility of filing correct declarations has been shifted to importers and exporters; the idea being to move towards a trust based Customs control while at the same time fine tuning the risk parameters based interdictions through RMS to check against non-compliance. Therefore, consequent to introduction of self-assessment, Board has decided that the facilitation target to be achieved for Bills of Entries would be 80% at Air Cargo Complexes, 70% at Seaports and 60% at ICDs. [Refer Circulars No. 17 /2011-Cus., dated 8-4-2011; and No.39/2011-Cus.,dated 2-9-2011]4. Examination of goods:4.1 All imported goods are required to be examined for verification of correctness of description given in the Bill of Entry. However, ordinarily only a part of the consignment #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 22 is selected on random selection basis and examined. Also, the goods may be examined prior to assessment in case the importer does not have complete information with him at the time of import and requests for examination of the goods before assessing the duty liability or, if the Customs Appraiser/Assistant Commissioner feels the goods are required to be examined before assessment. This is called First Check Appraisement. The importer has to request for First Check Appraisement at the time of filing the Bill of Entry or at data entry stage giving the reason for the same. The Customs Appraiser records on original copy of the Bill of Entry the examination order and returns the Bill of Entry to the importer/CHA for being taken to the import shed for examination of the goods. Thereafter, Shed Appraiser/Dock Examiner examines the goods as per examination order and records his findings. In case appraising group has called for samples, he forwards sealed samples accordingly. The importer is required to bring back the said Bill of Entry to the assessing officer for assessing the Bill of Entry, which is countersigned by Assistant/Deputy Commissioner if the value is more than Rs.1 lakh.4.2 The imported goods can also be examined subsequent to assessment and payment of duty. This is called Second Check Appraisement. Most of the consignments are cleared on Second Check Appraisement basis. In this case whole of the consignment is not examined and only those packages which are selected on random basis are examined.4.3 Under the EDI system, the Bill of Entry, after assessment by the appraising group or first appraisement, as the case may be, needs to be presented at the counter for registration for examination in the import shed. A declaration for correctness of entries and genuineness of the original documents needs to be made at this stage. After registration, the Bill of Entry is passed on to the shed Appraiser for examination of the goods. Alongwith the Bill of Entry, the CHA is required to present all the necessary supporting documents. After examination of the goods, the Shed Appraiser enters the report in EDI system and transfers first appraisement Bill of Entry to the appraising group and gives ‘out of charge’ in case of already assessed Bills of Entry. Thereupon, the system prints Bill of Entry and order of clearance (in triplicate). All these copies carry the examination report, order of clearance number and name of Shed Appraiser. Two copies each of Bill of Entry and the order are to be returned to the CHA/importer, after the Appraiser signs them. One copy of the order is attached to the Customs copy of Bill of Entry and retained by the Shed Appraiser.5 Execution of bonds:5.1 Wherever necessary, for availing duty free assessment or concessional assessment under different schemes and notifications, execution of end use bonds with Bank Guarantee or other surety is required to be furnished. These have to be executed in prescribed forms before the assessing Appraiser. For instance, when the import of goods are made under Export Promotion schemes, the importer is required to execute bonds with the Customs authorities for fulfillment of conditions of respective notifications. If the importer fails to fulfill the conditions, he has to pay the duty leviable on those #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 23 goods. The amount of bond of bond and bank guarantee is in terms of the instructions issued by the Board from time to time as well the conditions of the relevant Notification etc.6. Payment of duty:6.1 The duty can be paid in the designated banks through TR-6 challans. It is necessary to check the name of the bank and the branch before depositing the duty. Bank endorses the payment particulars in challan which is submitted to the Customs. Facility of epayment of duty through more than one authorized bank is also available since 2007 at all major Customs locations.6.2 In order to reduce the transaction costs and expedite Customs clearance the Board has decided to make e-payment of duty mandatory from a date to be notified for the importers paying an amount of Rs. 1 lakh or more per transaction. Likewise, e-payment of duty regardless of amount shall be made mandatory for ACP importers from a date to be notified. [Refer Circular No.33/2011-Cus., dated 29-7-2011]7. Amendment of Bill of Entry:7.1 Whenever mistakes are noticed after submission of documents, amendments to the Bill of Entry is carried out with the approval of Deputy/Assistant Commissioner. The request for amendment may be submitted with the supporting documents. For example, if the amendment of container number is required, a letter from shipping agent is required. On sufficient proof being shown to the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner amendment in Bill of Entry may be permitted after the goods have been given out of charge i.e. goods have been cleared.8. Prior Entry for Bill of Entry:8.1 For faster clearance of the goods, Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962 allows filing of Bill of Entry prior to arrival of goods. This Bill of Entry is valid if vessel/aircraft carrying the goods arrives within 30 days from the date of presentation of Bill of Entry. This Bill of Entry has 5 copies, the fifth copy being called Advance Noting copy. The importer must declare that the vessel/aircraft is due within 30 days and present the Bill of Entry for final noting as soon as the IGM is filed. Advance noting is not available for IntoBond Bill of Entry and also during certain special periods. 8.2 Often goods coming by container ships are transferred at intermediate ports (like Colombo) from mother vessel to smaller vessels called feeder vessels. At the time of filing of advance Bill of Entry, the importer does not know which vessel will finally bring the goods to Indian port. In such cases, the name of mother vessel may be filled in on the basis of the Bill of Lading. On arrival of the feeder vessel, the Bill of Entry may be amended to mention names of both mother vessel and feeder vessel. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 249 Bill of Entry for bond/warehousing:9.1 A separate form of Bill of Entry is used for clearance of goods for warehousing. All documents, as are required to be attached with a Bill of Entry for home consumption are also required with the Bill of Entry for warehousing which is assessed in the same manner and duty payable is determined. However, since duty is not required to be paid at the time of warehousing, the purpose of assessing the duty at this stage is only to secure the duty in case the goods do not reach the warehouse. The duty is paid at the time of ex-bond clearance of goods for which an Ex-Bond Bill of Entry is filed. The rate of duty applicable to imported goods cleared from a warehouse is the rate inforce on the date of filing of Ex-Bond Bill of Entry.10. Risk Management System:10.1 ‘Risk Management System’ (RMS) has been introduced in Customs locations where the EDI System (ICES) is operational. This is one of the most significant steps in the ongoing Business Process Re-engineering of the Customs Department. RMS is based on the realization that ever increasing volumes and complexity of international trade and the deteriorating global security scenario present formidable challenges to Customs and the traditional approach of scrutinizing every document and examining every consignment will simply not work. Also, there is a need to reduce the dwell-time of cargo at ports/airports and also transaction costs in order to enhance the competitiveness of Indian businesses, by expediting release of cargo where compliance is high. Thus, an effective RMS would strike an optimal balance between facilitation and enforcement and promote a culture of compliance. RMS is also expected to improve the management of the Department’s resources by enhancing efficiency and effectiveness in meeting stakeholder expectations and bringing the Customs processes at par with best international practices. [Refer Circular No. 43/2005-Cus., dated 24-11-2005]10.2 With the introduction of the RMS, the practice of routine assessment, concurrent audit and examination is discontinued and the focus is on quality assessment, examination and Post Clearance Audit of selected Bills of Entry.10.3 Bills of Entry and IGMs filed electronically in ICES through the Service Centre or the ICEGATE are transmitted by ICES to the RMS. The RMS processes the data through a series of steps and produces an electronic output for the ICES. This output determines whether a particular Bill of Entry will be taken-up for action (appraisement or examination or both) or be cleared after payment of duty and Out of Charge directly, without any assessment and examination. Also where necessary, RMS provides instructions for Appraising Officer, Examining Officer or the Out-of-Charge Officer. It needs to be noted that the appraising and examination instructions communicated by the RMS have be necessarily followed by the proper officer. It is, however, possible that in a few cases the proper officer might decide to apply a particular treatment to the Bill of Entry which is at variance with the instruction received from the RMS. This may happen due to risks which are not factored in the RMS. Such a course of action #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 25 shall however be taken only with the prior approval of the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs or an officer authorized by him for this purpose, who shall not be below the rank of Addl./Joint Commissioner of Customs, and after recording the reasons for the same. A brief remark on the reasons and the particulars of Commissioner’s authorization should be made by the officer examining the goods in the departmental comments section in the EDI system.10.4 The system of concurrent audit has been abolished and replaced by a Post-Clearance Compliance Verification (Audit) function. The objective of the Post Clearance Verification Programme is to monitor, maintain and enhance compliance levels, while reducing the dwell time of cargo. The RMS will select the Bills of Entry for audit, after clearance of the goods, and these selected Bills of Entry will be directed to the audit officers for scrutiny by the EDI system. In case any possible short levies are noticed, the officers will issue a Consultative Letter mentioning the grounds for their view to the importers/CHAs. This is intended to give the importers an opportunity to voluntarily comply and pay the duty difference if they agree with the department’s point of view. In case there is no agreement, the formal processes of demand notices, adjudication etc. would follow. It may also be noted that the auditors are specifically instructed to scrutinize declarations with reference to data quality and advise the importers/CHAs suitably where the quality of their declarations is found deficient. Such advice is expected to be followed by the trade and monitored by the local risk managers.10.5 The facilitation schemes viz., Self-assessment scheme, Fast Track / Green Channel, Accelerated Customs Clearance etc., are phased out with the implementation of the RMS and the Accredited Clients Programme.11 Risk Management Division:11.1 With a view to streamline the operations of the RMS, a Risk Management Division (RMD) has been created under the Directorate General of Systems with the following charter of functions: (i) The RMD has the overall responsibility for designing, implementing and managing RMS using various risk parameters and risk management tools to address risks facing Customs, i.e., the potential for non-compliance with Customs and allied laws and security regulations, including risks associated with the potential failure to facilitate international trade. (ii) The RMD will suggest assessment and examination in respect of consignments perceived to be risky and facilitate the remaining ones. (iii) The RMD is responsible for collecting and collating information and developing an intelligence database to effectively implement the RMS and also carry out effective risk assessment, risk evaluation and risk mitigation techniques. It will update and maintain risk parameters in relation to the trade, commodities and all stakeholders associated or involved with the supply chain logistics. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 26 (iv) The RMD is the nodal agency for Accredited Client’s Programme (ACP). It will maintain a list of accredited clients in the RMS and closely monitor their compliance standards. (v) The RMD will closely interact with all Custom Houses, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and Directorate of Valuation (DOV) to enable it to effectively address national risks. The RMD shall also work in close coordination with Directorate General of Audit (DG Audit). The local risks will be largely addressed by RMD in co-operation with the Custom Houses. Further, the RMD will also closely interact with DOV on all matters pertaining to the Valuation Risk Assessment Module (VRAM) of RMS. DOV will also supply the list of Most Sensitive Commodities with value bands, the list of valid valuation alerts and the list of Unusual Quantity Code (UQC) at agreed intervals. (vi) The RMD will review the performance of the RMS in terms of reviewing the various targets/interventions inserted by the Local Risk Management (LRM) Committee, make objective assessment of the effectiveness of such insertions, and ensure that the performance is consistent with the objective laid down. For this purpose, the RMD shall provide necessary advice and guidance to Custom Houses as and when required, which shall be followed. The RMD will also review the extent of facilitation being provided to the trade and offer necessary guidance to the officers in the Custom Houses with a view to providing appropriate facilitation and also ensuring compliance. (vii) The RMD will coordinate and liaise with other Government Departments (OGDs), in order to deal with risks relating to the compliance requirements under relevant Allied Acts. (viii) The RMD will work in close coordination with NACEN in developing training manuals and other documentation necessary for implementing RMS and also work out regular training schedules for officers responsible for the RMS in major Customs locations.12. National Risk Management Committee: 12.1 A National Risk Management (NRM) Committee headed by DG (Systems) reviews the functioning of the RMS, supervise implementation and provide feedback for improving its effectiveness. The NRM Committee includes representatives of Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence (DGRI), Directorate General of Valuation (DGOV), Directorate General of Audit (DG Audit), Directorate General of Safeguards (DGS) and Tax Research Unit (TRU), and Joint Secretary (Customs), CBEC. The NRM Committee meeting is to be convened by RMD at least once every quarter. The following are some of the functions of the NRM Committee: (i) Review performance of the RMS including implementation of ACP and PCA. (ii) Review risk parameters and behavior of important risk indicators. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 27 (iii) Review economic trends, policies, duty rates, exemptions, market data etc. that adversely impact Customs functions and processes and suggest remedial action thereof. [Refer Circular No 23/2007-Cus., dated 28-06-2007, Circular No 39/2011- Cus., dated 2-09-2011]13. Local Risk Management (LRM) Committee:13.1 A Local Risk Management (LRM) Committee headed by Commissioner of Customs has been constituted in each Custom House / Air Cargo Complex / ICD, where RMS is operationalised. The LRM Committee comprises the Additional / Joint Commissioner in charge of Special Investigation and Intelligence Branch (SIIB), who is designated as the Local Risk Manager and includes the Additional / Joint Commissioner in charge of Audit and a nominee, not below the rank of a Deputy Director from the regional / zonal unit of the DRI, and a nominee, not below the rank of Deputy Director from the Directorate of Valuation, if any. The LRM Committee meets once every month and some of its functions are as follows: (i) Review trends in imports of major commodities and valuation with a view to identifying risk indicators (ii) Decide the interventions at the local level, both for assessment and examination of goods prior to clearance and for PCA. (iii) Review results of interventions already in place and decide on their continuation/ modification or discontinuance etc. (iv) Review performance of the RMS and evaluate the results of the action taken on the basis of the RMS output. (v) Send periodic reports to the RMD, as may be prescribed by the RMD, with the approval of the Commissioner of Customs.14. Accredited Clients Programme:14.1 The Accredited Clients Programme (ACP) has been introduced with the objective of granting assured facilitation to importers who have demonstrated capacity and willingness to comply with the laws administered by the Customs. This programme replaces all existing schemes for facilitation in the Customs stations where EDI and RMS is implemented. Importers registered as “Accredited Clients” form a separate category to which assured facilitation is provided. Except for a small percentage of consignments selected on random by the RMS, or cases where specific intelligence is available or where a specifically observed pattern of non-compliance is required to be addressed, Accredited Clients are allowed clearance on the basis of self assessment without examination of goods as a matter of course. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 2814.2 Considering the likely volume of cargo imported by the Accredited Clients, Custom Houses may create separately earmarked facility/counters for providing Customs clearance service to them. Commissioners of Customs are also required to work with the Custodians for earmarking separate storage space, handling facility and expeditious clearance procedures for these clients.14.3 The RMD administers the ACP and maintains the list of Accredited Clients centrally in the RMS. The importers who have been granted the status of Accredited Clients are required to maintain high levels of compliance, which is closely monitored by the RMD in co-ordination with the Commissioners of Customs. Where compliance levels fall, the importer is at first informed for improvement and in case of persistent noncompliance, the importer may be deregistered under the ACP.14.4 In order to ensure that there is no misuse of the program by imposters (persons who assume the Accredited Client’s name and identity), the Accredited Clients should file Bills of Entry using digital signatures. Additionally, all Bills of Entry must be filed through the ICEGATE and duty in respect of these consignments paid though such the Accredited Clients’ bank account at the designated bank.14.5 The eligibility criteria for importers to get ACP status are as follows: (i) They should have imported goods valued at Rs. Ten Crores [assessable value] in the previous financial year; or paid more than Rs. One Crore Customs duty in the previous financial year; or, in the case of importers who are also Central Excise assesses, paid Central Excise duties over Rs. One Crore from the Personal Ledger Account in the previous financial year, or they should be recognized as ‘status holders’ under the Foreign Trade Policy. (ii) They should have filed at least 25 Bills of Entry in the previous financial year in one or more Indian Customs stations. (iii) They should have no cases of Customs, Central Excise or Service Tax, as detailed below, booked against them in the previous three financial years: (a) Cases of duty evasion involving mis-declaration/ mis-statement/collusion / willful suppression / fraudulent intent whether or not extended period for issue of SCN has been invoked. (b) Cases of mis-declaration and/or clandestine/unauthorized removal of excisable / import / export goods warranting confiscation of said goods. (c) Cases of mis-declaration/mis-statement/collusion/willful suppression/ fraudulent intent aimed at availing CENVAT credit, rebate, refund, drawback, benefits under export promotion/reward schemes. (d) Cases wherein Customs/Excise duties and Service Tax has been collected but not deposited with the exchequer. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 29 (e) Cases of non-registration with the Department with intent to evade payment of duty/tax. (iv) They should not have any cases booked under any of the Allied Acts being implemented by Customs. (v) The quality of the submissions made by the applicants to Customs should be good as measured by the number of amendments made in the Bills of Entry in relation to classification of goods, valuation and claim for exemption benefits. The number of such amendments should not have exceeded 20% of the Bills of Entry during the previous financial year. (vi) They should have no duty demands pending on account of non-fulfillment of export obligation. (vii) They should have reliable systems of record keeping and internal controls and their accounting systems should conform to recognized standards of accounting. They are required to provide the necessary certificate from their Chartered Accountants in this regard.14.6 The ACP accreditation is initially valid for a period of one year and would be renewable thereafter upon a review of the compliance record of the Accredited Client. [Refer Circulars No. 22/97-Cus., dated 4-7-1997; No.63/97-Cus., dated 21-11-1997; No.42/2005-Cus., dated 24-11-2005; and No.43/2005-Cus dated 24-11-2005]15. Export procedure – Shipping Bill:15.1 For clearance of export goods, the exporter or his agent has to obtain an ImporterExport Code (IEC) number from the Directorate General of Foreign Trade prior to filing of Shipping Bill. Under the EDI System, IEC number is received by the Customs System from the DGFT online. The exporter is also required to register authorised foreign exchange dealer code (through which export proceeds are expected to be realised) and open a current account in the designated bank for credit of any Drawback incentive.15.2 All the exporters intending to export under the export promotion scheme need to get their licences/DEEC book etc. registered at the Customs Station. For such registration, original documents are required.16. Octroi exemption for export goods:16.1 Since the Shipping Bill is generated only after the ‘Let Export’ order is given by Customs, the exporter may make use of export invoice or such other document as required by the Octroi authorities for the purpose of Octroi exemption. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 3017. Waiver of GR form:17.1 Generally the processing of Shipping Bills requires the production of a GR form that is used to monitor the foreign exchange remittance in respect of the export goods. However, there are few exceptions when the GR form is not required. An example is export of goods valued not more than US $25,000/- and another is export of gifts valued upto Rs.5,00,000/-. [Refer RBI Notifications No.FEMA.23/2000-RB, dated 3-5-2000; and No.FEMA.116/2004-RB, dated 25-3-2004]18. Arrival of export goods at docks:18.1. The goods brought for the purpose of export are allowed entry to the Dock on the strength of the check list and other declarations filed by the exporter in the Service Center. The custodian has to endorse the quantity of goods actually received on the reverse of the check list.19. Customs examination of export goods:19.1 After the receipt of the goods in the Docks, the exporter/CHA may contact the Customs Officer designated for the purpose, and present the check list with the endorsement of custodian and other declarations along with all original documents such as, Invoice and Packing list, AR-4, etc. The Customs Officer may verify the quantity of the goods actually received and enter into the system and thereafter mark the Electronic Shipping Bill and also hand over all original documents to the Dock Appraiser who assigns a Customs Officer for examination and indicate the officers’ name and the packages to be examined, if any, on the check list and return it to the exporter/CHA.20. Examination norms:20.1 The Board has fixed norms for examination of export consignments keeping in view the quantum of incentive, value of export goods, the country of destination etc. The scale of physical examination of various categories of exports at the port of export is as follows: A. Factory stuffed export cargo: Category of Exports Scale of Examination Export goods stuffed and sealed in the presence No examination except: of the Customs/Central Excise officers at the (a) where the seals are found tampered with; or factories of manufacture, ICD/CFS, notified (b) there is specific intelligence in which case, warehouses and other places where the permission of Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Commissioner has, by a special order, would be required before checking. permitted examination of goods for export. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 31 B. Export under Free Shipping Bills: Category of Exports Scale of Examination Exports under Free Shipping Bills i.e. where No examination except where there is a specific there is no export incentive. intelligence. C. Export under Drawback Scheme: http://S.No. Category of Exports Scale of Examination Export consignments Others shipped to sensitive places viz. Dubai, Sharjah, Singapore, Hong Kong and Colombo (i) Consignments where the amount of 25% 2% drawback involved is Rs.1 lakh or less. (ii) Consignments where the amount of 50% 10% drawback involved is more than Rs.1 lakh. D. Export under EPCG/DEEC schemes: http://S.No. Category of Exports Scale of Examination Export consignments Others shipped to sensitive places viz. Dubai, Sharjah, Singapore, Hong Kong and Colombo (i) Consignments where the FOB value is Rs.5 lakh or less. 25% 2% (ii) Consignments where the FOB value is more than Rs.5 lakhs. 50% 10% E. Export under Shipping Bills claiming benefits under Reward Schemes: http://S.No. Category of Exports Scale of Examination Export consignments Others shipped to sensitive places viz. Dubai, Sharjah, Singapore, Hong Kong and Colombo (i) Exports under Free Shipping Bills where benefits under Chapter 3 of the FTP have been claimed by the Exporter and where the FOB value is Rs.20 lakhs or less. 25% 2% (ii) Exports under Free Shipping Bills where benefits under Chapter 3 of the FTP have been claimed by the Exporter and where the FOB value is more than Rs.20 lakhs. 50% 10% #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 32 20.2 In all cases referred to above, in respect of consignments selected for examination, a minimum of two packages with a maximum of 5% of packages (subject to a maximum of 20 packages from a consignment) shall be opened for examination. The package number to be opened for examination is selected by the EDI system. 20.3 It is to be ensured that exporters do not split up consignments so as to fall within the lower examination norms. Therefore, wherever on the same day the same exporter attempts to export a second consignment (other than under Free Shipping Bills) involving export incentive of Rs.1 lakh or less (Drawback/DEPB) or in other cases having the FOB value upto Rs.5 lakhs to the same country, the EDI system would alert the Examining Officer. The Examining Officer can then decide whether to subject the second consignment for examination or not. In case the buyer in both or more consignments happens to be the same person, subsequent consignments should be examined. 20.4 After the goods have been presented for registration to Customs and determination has been made whether or not to examine the goods, no amendments in the normal course are expected. However, in case an exporter wishes to change any of the critical parameters resulting in change of value, Drawback, DEPB credit, port etc. such consignment should be subjected to examination. 20.5 Notwithstanding the examination norms, any export consignment can be examined by the Customs (even upto 100%), if there is any specific intelligence in respect of the said consignment. Further, to test the compliance by trade, once in three months a higher percentage of consignments (say for example, all the first 50 consignments or a batch of consecutive 100 consignments presented for examination in a particular day) would be taken up for examination. Out of the consignments selected for examination a minimum of two packages with a maximum of 5% of packages (subject to a maximum of 20 packages from a consignment) would be taken up for checking/ examination. 20.6 In case export goods are stuffed and sealed in the presence of Customs/Central Excise officers at the factory of manufacture/ICD/CFS/warehouse and any other place where the Commissioner has, by a special order, permitted, the containers should be bottle sealed or lead sealed. Also, in such case the consignments shall be accompanied by an examination report in the prescribed form. In case of export through bonded trucks, the truck should be similarly bottle sealed or lead sealed. In case of export by ordinary truck/other means, all the packages are required to be lead sealed. [Refer Circulars No.6/2002-Cus., dated 23-1-2002; and No.1/2009-Cus., dated 13-1-2009] 20.7 If the export is made claiming benefits of Drawback / DEPB or any other export promotion scheme in addition to claiming benefits under any Schemes of Chapter 3 of FTP, then the examination norms as prescribed by the Board for the respective export promotion schemes would apply. In order to claim benefits under the Reward #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 33 Schemes, the exporter is required to declare the intention to claim such benefits on the Shipping Bill itself. 20.8 Exports by EOUs and units in SEZs are governed by examination norms, as applicable for EPCG/DEEC schemes. However, if the export consignment of EOUs or SEZs units has been sealed by Customs/Central Excise Officer, the norms for factory stuffed cargo will apply. 20.9 Routine examination of perishable export cargo is not to be conducted. Customs should resort to examination of such cargo only on the basis of credible intelligence or information and with prior permission of the concerned Assistant Commissioner/ Deputy Commissioner. Further, the perishable cargo which is taken up for examination should be given Customs clearance on the day itself, unless there is contravention of Customs laws. [Refer Circular No.8/2007-Cus., dated 22-1-2007] 20.10 In cases of cargo transported for exports through containers or bonded closed trucks to Gateway Port after following the Central Excise/ Customs officer supervised sealing or self-sealing by manufacturer exporters, EOUs; and containers aggregated with LCL cargo in CFSs/ ICDs sent to the port after sealing in the presence of officers the tamper proof one-time bottle seal alone should be adopted as it ensures safety and security of sealing process and avoid any resealing at the point of export. In respect of one-time bottle seals provided by the department, its cost may be recovered from exporters/ manufacturers or their agents. However, exporters/manufacturers need not be compelled to procure such bottle seals only from the department as this would defeat the very purpose of self-sealing facility and avoid delay. When trucks/ other means used for export cargo cannot be bottle sealed, same would be subject to normal examination norms at gateway port. [Refer Circular No.1/2006-Cus., dated 2-1-2006] 20.11 The exporters can avail of the facility of removal of export goods from the factories on the basis of self-certification and self-sealing; but these shall be examined at the port of export on the basis of prescribed examination norms. [Refer Circulars No.6/2002-Cus., dated 23-1-2002; and No.31/2002-Cus., dated 7-6-2002]21. Factory stuffing permission:21.1 The grant of a single factory stuffing permission valid for all the Customs stations instead of Customs station-wise permission is permitted. This facility is subject to the following safeguards: (i) The exporter is required to furnish to Customs a list of Customs stations from where he intends to export his goods. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 34 (ii) The Custom House granting the factory stuffing permission should maintain a proper register to keep a track-record of such permissions, and also create a unique serial number for each of such permissions. (iii) The Custom House should circulate the factory stuffing permission to all Custom Houses concerned clearly indicating the name and contact details of the Preventive Officer/Inspector and Superintendent concerned of the Custom House granting the permission as well as those of the Central Excise Range concerned to facilitate real time verifications, if required. (iv) In case something adverse is noticed against the exporter, the Customs station concerned shall promptly intimate the Custom House granting the permission, which will, in turn, withdraw the permission, and inform all Custom Houses concerned. [Refer Circular No.20/2010-Cus., dated 22-7-2010]22. Variation between declaration and physical examination:22.1 The check list and the declaration along with all original documents submitted with the Shipping Bill are retained by the Appraiser concerned. In case of any variation between the declaration in the Shipping Bill and physical documents/examination report, the Appraiser may mark the Electronic Shipping Bill to the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Exports) alongwith sending the physical documents and instruct the exporter or his agent to meet the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Exports) for settlement of dispute. In case the exporter agrees with the views of the Department, the Shipping Bill needs to be processed accordingly. Where, however, the exporter disputes the view of the Department the issue will be finalized in accordance with the principles of natural justice.23. Drawl of samples:23.1 Where the Appraiser Dock (Export) orders for samples to be drawn and tested, the Customs Officer may proceed to draw two samples from the consignment and enter the particulars thereof along with details of the testing agency in the ICES/EDI system. There is no separate register for recording dates of samples drawn. Three copies of the test memo shall be prepared by the Customs Officer and signed by the Customs Officer and Appraising Officer on behalf of Customs and the exporter or his agent. The disposal of the three copies of the test memo are as follows: (i) Original – to be sent along with the sample to the test agency. (ii) Duplicate – Customs copy to be retained with the 2nd sample. (iii) Triplicate – Exporter’s copy. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 35 23.2 If he considers it necessary, the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner, may also order sample to be drawn for purposes other than testing such as for visual inspection and verification of description, market value inquiry, etc.24. Stuffing / loading of goods in containers: 24.1 The exporter or his agent should hand over the Exporter’s copy of the Shipping Bill duly signed by the Appraiser permitting “Let Export” to the steamer agent who would then approach the proper officer (Preventive Officer) for allowing the shipment. In case of container cargo the stuffing of container at Dock is done under Preventive Supervision. Further, loading of both containerized and bulk cargo is to be done under Preventive Supervision. The Customs Preventive Superintendent (Docks) may enter the particulars of packages actually stuffed into the container, the bottle seal number, details of loading of cargo container on board into the EDI system and endorse these details on the Exporter’s copy of the Shipping Bill. If there is a difference in the quantity/ number of packages stuffed in the containers/goods loaded on vessel the Superintendent (Docks) may put a remark on the Shipping Bill in the EDI system and that it requires amendment or change in quantity. Such Shipping Bill may not be taken up for the purpose of sanction of Drawback/DEEC logging, till it is suitably amended. The Customs Preventive Officer supervising the loading of container and general cargo into the vessel may give “Shipped on Board” endorsement on the Exporters copy of the Shipping Bill.24.2 Palletisation of cargo is done after grant of Let Export Order (LEO). Thus, there is no need for a separate permission for palletisation from Customs. However, the permission for loading in the aircraft/vessel would continue to be obtained. [Refer Circular No.18/2005-Cus., dated 11-3-2005]25. Amendments:25.1 Any correction/amendments in the check list generated after filing of declaration can be made at the Service Center provided the documents have not yet been submitted in the EDI system and the Shipping Bill number has not been generated. Where corrections are required to be made after the generation of the Shipping Bill number or after the goods have been brought into the Export Dock, the amendments will be carried out in the following manner: (i) If the goods have not yet been allowed “Let Export” the amendments may be permitted by the Assistant Commissioner (Exports). (ii) Where the “Let Export” order has already been given, amendments may be permitted only by the Additional/Joint Commissioner in charge of Export.25.2 In both the cases, after the permission for amendments has been granted, the Assistant Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner (Export) may approve the amendments on the EDI system on behalf of the Additional/Joint Commissioner. Where the print out of the #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 36 Shipping Bill has already been generated, the exporter may first surrender all copies of the Shipping Bill to the Dock Appraiser for cancellation before amendment is approved on the system. 25.3 In respect of amendment in AEPC Certificate on receipt of request from the exporter, the Assistant Commissioner /Deputy Commissioner (Exports) should allow the change of port in EDI Shipping Bills / invoice to help exporters in getting the goods cleared without waiting for an amendment of documents by AEPC. The ratification of the port of change would be done subsequently by AEPC. [Refer Circular No.46/2003-Cus., dated 5-6-2003] 26. Drawback claim: 26.1 After actual export of the goods, the Drawback claim is automatically processed through EDI system by the officers of Drawback Branch on first-come-first-served basis. The status of the Shipping Bills and sanction of Drawback claim can be ascertained from the query counter set up at the Service Center. If any query is raised or deficiency noticed, the same is also shown on the terminal and a print out thereof may be obtained by the authorized person of the exporter from the Service Center. The exporters are required to reply to such queries through the Service Center. The claim will come in queue of the EDI system only after reply to queries/deficiencies is entered in the Service Center. 26.2 All the claims sanctioned on a particular day are enumerated in a scroll and transferred to the Bank through the system. The bank credits the drawback amount in the respective accounts of the exporters. The bank may send a fortnightly statement to the exporters of such credits made in their accounts. 26.3 The Steamer Agent/Shipping Line may transfer electronically the EGM to the Customs EDI system so that the physical export of the goods is confirmed, to enable the Customs to sanction the Drawback claims. 27. Generation of Shipping Bills: 27.1 After the “Let Export” order is given on the EDI system by the Appraiser, the Shipping Bill is generated in two copies i.e., one Customs copy, one exporter’s copy (EP copy is generated after submission of EGM). After obtaining the print out the Appraiser obtains the signatures of the Customs Officer and the representative of the CHA on both copies of the Shipping Bill and examination report. The Appraiser thereafter signs and stamps both the copies of the Shipping Bill. 27.2 The Appraiser also signs and stamps the original and duplicate copy of SDF and thereafter forward the Customs copy of Shipping Bill and original copy of the SDF along with the original declarations to Export Department. The exporter copy and the second copy of the SDF are returned to the exporter or his agent. #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal 37 28. Export General Manifest: 28.1 All the shipping lines/agents need to furnish the Export General Manifests, Shipping Bill-wise, to the Customs electronically before departure of the conveyance. 28.2 Apart from lodging the EGM electronically the shipping lines need to continue to file manual EGMs along with the exporter copy of the Shipping Bills in the Export Department where they would be entered in a register. The shipping lines may obtain acknowledgement indicating the date and time at which the EGMs were received by the Export Department. . [Refer Circulars No.33/96-Cus., dated 17-6-1996; No.6/2002-Cus., dated 23-1-2002; No.31/2002-Cus., dated 7-6-2002; No.3/2003-Cus., dated 3-3-2003; No.53/2004-Cus., dated 13-10-2004; No.18/2005-Cus., dated 11-3-2005; No.42/2005-Cus., dated 24-11-2005; No.43/2005-Cus., dated 24-11-2005; No.1/2006-Cus., dated 2-1-2006; No.8/2007-Cus., dated 22-1-2007; No.23/2007-Cus., dated 28-6-2007; and No.1/2009-Cus., dated 13-1-2009] 29. Electronic Declarations for Bills of Entry and shipping Bills: 29.1 Bill of Entry (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 2011 has been framed in supersession of the Bill of Entry (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 1995 to incorporate changes made vide Finance Act, 2011 and mandate self-assessment by the importer or exporter, as the case may be. Likewise, Shipping Bill (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 2011 are framed in tune with statutory provisions of Sections 17, 18 and 50 of the Customs Act, 1962. [Refer Notifications No.79/2011-Customs (N.T.) dated 25-11-2011; and No.80/2011-Customs (N.T.) dated 25-11-2011] *** #1 web site on India's DGFT, Customs, Free Export Import Shipment data, Excise, Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014. - India's Premier Export Import Portal