Post-session follow-up: our trader refuses to name the mill for aluminium extrusions, citing commercial confidentiality. Without a mill cert, is a country-of-smelt declaration from the trader alone defensible at entry?
Webinar Q&AThis discussion belongs to Section 232 Steel & Aluminium: Practical Origin Documentation, the session is over, the thread stays open.
Q&A: Section 232 origin documentation (thread stays open)
Isabel Torres mxOrigin & FTA Specialist · Norteña AutomotiveAsked 8 Jul 2026
Questions from the July 8 session plus everything you thought of afterwards. Isabel is still answering here, melt-and-pour documentation cases especially welcome. Recording is linked on the webinar page.
3 replies
Defensible only as a stopgap: CBP has been issuing inquiry letters exactly on trader-only declarations. Practical fix from the session, a three-way NDA where the mill certifies smelt/cast direct to you (or to your broker) without revealing pricing to the trader. Slide 14 of the recording has the clause structure; two members have since used it successfully.
Late question after watching the recording: do derivative-product entries need melt/pour data even when the 232 duty is already included in the price from a US warehouse? Asking for a resale scenario.