When U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) proposes a change to your tariff classification most often communicated via a CF‑29 (Notice of Action) following a CF‑28 (Request for Information) your response must be swift, structured, and supported by evidence. A reclassification can alter duty rates, trigger trade remedies (e.g., Sections 301 and 232), and even expose goods to antidumping/countervailing duty orders; left unaddressed, it can also escalate into penalties under 19 U.S.C. § 1592 for negligent or willful violations. Treat both forms as critical compliance events that require legal analysis, documentary rigor, and precise timing.
Know the Notice: CF‑28 vs. CF‑29 and Why They Matter
A CF‑28 is CBP’s fact‑finding request: it asks you to substantiate the accuracy of your entry classification, valuation, origin, preferential claims (USMCA/CUSMA and Chapter 98), and AD/CVD applicability with a typical 30‑day window for response. Failure to respond, or responding inadequately, regularly leads to adverse follow‑up. A CF‑29, by contrast, is an action notice: CBP either proposes a change (giving you approximately 20 days to rebut) or takes action (which may proceed to liquidation). If CBP moves to or completes liquidation on the changed classification, your remedy shifts to a protest under 19 U.S.C. § 1514 (filed within 180 days of liquidation). In 2025, trade attorneys and brokers report CBP is issuing more CF‑28s and CF‑29s, in part due to enhanced analytics and the complexity of stacked tariffs, making disciplined responses indispensable.
Immediate Triage: What to Do in the First 48 Hours
Within 48 hours of receiving a classification proposal, assemble a document pack that can serve as the backbone of your rebuttal (and later, a PSC narrative or protest attachment). At minimum, collect: (a) technical specifications, engineering drawings, product literature, high‑quality photos, and where feasible samples; (b) Bills of Materials (BOMs) and manufacturing process descriptions that speak to essential character and component predominance under the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs); (c) commercial invoices, purchase orders, packing lists, and contracts aligning product descriptions to the technical facts; (d) country‑of‑origin proofs and manufacturer addresses (origin notes may affect classification headings and trade remedies); (e) if parties are related, intercompany agreements, transfer‑pricing studies, and documentation on assists; and (f) any CBP rulings (HQ/NY), classification analyses, GRIs, Section/Chapter Notes, and Explanatory Notes supporting your position. Also capture ACE status screenshots and the scheduled liquidation date, so you can determine whether a Post Summary Correction (PSC) is available.
Pre‑Liquidation Pathway: Correcting the Record with PSC (Narrative Guidance)
If the entry has not yet liquidated, and the entry is eligible, consider filing a PSC in ACE to correct the classification before liquidation. PSC is the sole electronic method to adjust entry summaries pre‑liquidation, and it must be filed within the earlier of 300 days from the date of entry or 15 days before the scheduled liquidation. In your PSC narrative, present a concise statement of the correct HTSUS classification, cite the GRIs and applicable Section/Chapter Notes, reference relevant Explanatory Notes and rulings, and attach exhibits (technical, BOMs, invoices, origin, and any rulings). Be prepared to tender any duty increase; PSC is designed to fix data and move forward. If the entry is under certain CBP review statuses, PSC may be temporarily unavailable; in that case, lodge a robust written rebuttal to the CF‑29 “Action proposed,” and where necessary request a liquidation extension through the Center so you have sufficient time to complete the record and preserve your ability to correct via PSC later.
Post‑Liquidation Pathway: Protesting CBP’s Decision (Narrative Guidance)
If CBP has liquidated the entry or proceeds to “Action taken” with liquidation, your recourse is a protest under 19 U.S.C. § 1514, filed within 180 days from liquidation. In the protest, re‑state the product facts, walk through GRIs and legal notes, marshal your technical and commercial exhibits, and directly address CBP’s rationale. Consider an Application for Further Review (AFR) if the case raises novel questions or Center‑level disagreement. CBP’s ACE Protest Module allows multi‑entry protests and status tracking; if timing is tight, request liquidation extensions in advance to keep PSC and rebuttal options open. Protests are the formal vehicle to reverse duty consequences once liquidation is reached; the quality and completeness of your record in effect, what you assembled during the 48‑hour window often determines success.
Prior Disclosure (PD) Considerations: When and Why to Use Them
If your internal review reveals a systemic misclassification multiple SKUs or entries, extended time periods, or patterns across suppliers evaluate whether a Prior Disclosure (PD) under 19 CFR § 162.74 is appropriate. PD is available only before you have knowledge of a formal investigation, and it requires you to disclose the violation circumstances and tender any duty loss; in return, CBP may substantially mitigate penalties for negligent or grossly negligent violations. Timing is critical: certain CF‑28/CF‑29 contexts may be treated as investigative commencement, potentially limiting PD benefits. Engage trade counsel early to assess whether PD should be filed, whether limited or comprehensive scope is advisable, and how PD interacts with your PSC/protest strategy.
Drafting a Persuasive Legal Response
Whether you are rebutting a CF‑29 proposal, narrating a PSC, or drafting a protest, organize your memo so the law clearly meets the facts. Begin with an executive summary stating the correct classification and relief requested. Provide a precise product description with exhibits, then set out the legal framework GRIs, Section/Chapter Notes, Explanatory Notes, and relevant CBP rulings. Apply the law to the facts point‑by‑point, addressing each CBP argument explicitly (e.g., why an alternate heading is overbroad or ignores essential character). Close with a specific request (withdraw the proposed action; adopt importer classification; reliquidate with the correct HTSUS). Where trade remedies or AD/CVD exposure are implicated by CBP’s proposal, explain why they should not apply under the correct heading or how they shift with proper classification. Practitioners emphasize that responses should read like litigation‑ready submissions: complete, accurate, and supported by admissible evidence.
Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Do not rely on supplier‑only descriptions or marketing brochures if they lack technical specificity. Do not ignore related‑party valuation questions classification disputes often expand to valuation, assists, and origin. Avoid submitting inconsistent data across exhibits; CBP increasingly uses analytics to detect mismatches in descriptions, origin trails, and pricing. Finally, do not miss deadlines: the 30‑day CF‑28, ~20‑day CF‑29 “Action proposed”, PSC timing (≤300 days / ≥15 days before liquidation), and 180‑day protest deadlines are unforgiving. The best defense is a practiced SOP that triggers the 48‑hour pack, assigns drafting responsibilities, and tracks ACE statuses and liquidation dates.
2025 Enforcement Context
Trade press and practitioner reports indicate a notable increase in CF‑28 issuance and follow‑on CF‑29 actions in 2025, tied to tariff complexity, origin/valuation analytics, and tighter standards around Chapter 98 and USMCA documentation. This has practical implications: expect more requests, shorter response tolerance, and higher evidentiary expectations. Building robust supplier contracts (origin, serial traceability, process logs), maintaining internal classification memos, and performing periodic self‑audits can significantly reduce exposure.
The 48‑Hour Document Pack
Within two days, compile:
- Technical/Engineering: complete specifications, materials, drawings, photos, samples; map features to GRIs and legal notes.
- BOMs & Process: component breakdowns, essential‑character analyses, production narratives, and process flow diagrams.
- Commercial Files: invoices, POs, packing lists, contracts; ensure product descriptions align with technical facts.
- Origin & Manufacturer: COO documents, factory addresses, production records; note any origin‑specific notes in classification.
- Related‑Party & Valuation: intercompany agreements, transfer‑pricing reports, assists; foreclose valuation disputes.
- Legal Authorities: relevant HQ/NY rulings, GRIs, Section/Chapter Notes, ENs, and any prior CBP correspondence.
- ACE Evidence: entry status, scheduled liquidation date; screenshots to confirm PSC/protest windows.
Putting It All Together: A Narrative Playbook
Step 1: Acknowledge and Calendar. Upon CF‑29 “Action proposed,” acknowledge receipt to the Center and calendar the ~20‑day rebuttal deadline. Capture ACE status and scheduled liquidation dates to determine PSC eligibility and whether a liquidation extension request is advisable.
Step 2: Build the Record. Assemble the 48‑hour pack and assign drafting roles (legal, engineering, broker coordination, supplier documentation). Draft an outline linking facts to GRIs and relevant legal notes; identify and cite any CBP rulings that support your classification.
Step 3: Choose Your Path. If unliquidated and PSC‑eligible, prepare to file a PSC with corrected classification and tender duty changes; otherwise, submit a comprehensive CF‑29 rebuttal and seek liquidation extension to preserve options. If liquidation is imminent or completed, plan the protest and AFR.
Step 4: Consider Prior Disclosure. If internal review reveals a broader misclassification history, assess PD timing and scope before any formal investigation is known. Coordinate PD strategy with PSC/protest to avoid conflicting narratives and ensure duty tenders are complete.
Step 5: Execute and Track. Log submissions, confirm Center receipt, and track ACE statuses. If CBP converts to “Action taken,” move to protest within the statutory window. Maintain a communications log to preserve chronology for any later penalty mitigation or litigation needs.