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?
8JulSection 232 Steel & Aluminium: Practical Origin Documentation
Melt-and-pour country, smelt-and-cast declarations, and the paperwork US customs actually accepts.
About this session
What this session covers
Section 232 turned 'where is this from?' into a metallurgical question. This session covered melt-and-pour and smelt-and-cast documentation in practice: what mill certificates must show, how to handle traders who won't disclose the mill, and the entry-line details that trigger CBP inquiries. The Q&A thread stays open, follow-up questions welcome.
Agenda
- 232 scope in 2026: steel, aluminium, derivatives
- Melt-and-pour vs smelt-and-cast: what documents prove it
- When the trader won't tell you the mill
- CBP inquiry letters: real examples
Session materials
2 files · 1 not yours to open yetOne handout was released to the people who attended the live session.
Mill certificate review sheet
What a certificate must show, and the five fields that get queried.
mill-certificate-review.xlsx · 86 KB
Demo build. Files aren't served yet; the covers are real.
Session replay
Available to the 5 members who attendedQ&A, still open
The session ended; the conversation didn't. Follow-up questions welcome.
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.
