Just over two years ago, LawCustoms published an article Antidumping Whistleblowers Beaware! The article involved allegedly false declarations by importers designed to avoid antidumping duties, namely pencils. Article emphasized the difficulty of proving false declaration activities to prevail under False Claims Act claim. False Claims Act allows private whistleblowers to bring suit on behalf of federal government if they have knowledge of fraud, or failure to pay proper customs duties due to the Government. Government may or may not intervene. If court agrees with whistleblower’s allegations, that whistleblower is entitled to a portion of recover. While the previous article described unsuccessful whistleblower, this one focuses on relative success. University Loft Company blew the whistle on its competitor University Furnishings for misclassification of wooden bedroom furniture from China. Chinese wooden bedroom furniture is subject to some hefty antidumping duties. With the help of Department of Justice, University Furnishings settled, and University Loft Company got $2.25 million for reporting alleged duty evasion activities. Perhaps, False Claims Act tide is turning in the antidumping duty world. Perhaps University Loft had overcame hurdles that it’s pencil predecessor could not overcome: whistleblower’s statements must not have been publicly disclosed; whistleblower’s information should be based on direct (i.e. through…
Published December 21, 2015 by Yuri Starikov
