The AAT has affirmed the CEO of Customs’ decision refusing to apply a tariff concession order to goods (“Ripsticks”) imported by a taxpayer.
On 26 June 2009, the taxpayer requested a Tariff Advice for goods described as “Ripstick” Caster Boards. On 15 July 2009, the CEO of Customs decided the Ripsticks did not satisfy the terms of Tariff Concession Order 9200879 (the Skateboard TCO) and instead issued a separate Tariff Advice identifying the items as “caster boards”. As a result, the taxpayer was required to pay duty of 5% of the value of the Ripsticks imported. On 27 June 2012, the taxpayer requested a refund of the duty paid (under protest) on imports of Ripsticks from 29 October 2008 to 19 June 2012. The taxpayer argued the Ripsticks were skateboards, or in the alternative, they were snakeboards within the terms of Tariff Concession Order 9204091 (the Snakeboard TCO).
The Tribunal concluded that an informed observer would conclude that a Ripstick should be classified as a caster board and not as either a skateboard or a snakeboard. The Tribunal said neither the Skateboard TCO nor the Snakeboard TCO was applicable and the correct or preferable decision accorded with the CEO of Customs’ Tariff Advice which identified the Ripstick as a “caster board”. In doing so, the Tribunal affirmed the taxpayer was liable to pay duty of 5% on the value of the Ripsticks imported.
(AAT Case [2013] AATA 730, Re Woolworths Ltd and CEO of Customs)
[LTN 199, 15/10/13]