Legal Blog

The warning letters involve unauthorized nicotine pouches and dissolvable tobacco products. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), manufacturers generally must obtain marketing authorization before introducing new tobacco products into interstate commerce. Products marketed without the required authorization are considered illegal and may be subject to enforcement action.

The Customs Form 29 is issued when CBP believes you have paid a different amount in duties than what is owed, whether due to an entry error or intentional omission. Because CBP may take different types of actions on a CF-29, it's important to understand how to approach the situation and respond appropriately to avoid further escalation.

In this video, we explain how to respond to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) penalty or pre-penalty notice and why taking timely action is critical. These notices can carry strict deadlines and serious financial consequences if left unaddressed or handled incorrectly.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has released an updated Forced Labor Enforcement Operational Guidance for Importers. The document is intended to give the trade community a single, consolidated reference for CBP’s forced labor enforcement framework and how it applies in practice.

In May 2026, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued final guidance titled "Enforcement Priorities for Certain New Tobacco Products Marketed Without Premarket Authorization." While the guidance also addresses oral nicotine pouch products, its most significant impact is on the Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) industry.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced the authorization of four (4) flavored vape products for sale in the United States. This marks the first time the FDA has authorized non-tobacco and non-menthol flavored electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products through the premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) pathway.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has urged importers to exercise caution regarding individuals and companies claiming they can file refund claims on their behalf or “buy” refunds. According to CBP, the agency is concerned about potential fraud and unauthorized activity connected to refund-related filings associated with Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariff refund claims.

The exemption was designed to streamline defense cooperation by reducing licensing requirements for eligible transfers between approved parties in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Instead of requiring traditional ITAR licenses for many transactions, qualifying activities may proceed under an exemption framework, provided strict conditions are met.

Join us on Wednesday, May 27th at 4:00 PM ET for an informative session on how foreign investment deals can be impacted by CFIUS review, covering key risks and requirements. Spots are limited, so register today.

Foreign investment can open doors, but it can also trigger serious legal review. In this video, Brandon explains what the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is and the top three (3) legal issues U.S. companies need to understand before moving forward. Learn what triggers CFIUS jurisdiction, the significance of mandatory filings, and the mitigation measures that may follow. Each step plays a role in your deal's success.

Join us on June 16 & 17, 2026, from 9:00am to 1:00pm EDT, for an export compliance webinar featuring our Managing Attorney, Deanna Clark, Esq. and other experts from the U.S. Census Bureau (CENSUS) and the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). The speakers will provide training on export filing requirements.

Join us on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, at 6:00 PM ET for an informative webinar on legal guidance for U.S. Counsel in Cross-Border Compliance. This 1-hour webinar equips U.S. lawyers with practical strategies for advising clients on cross-border regulatory compliance in highly regulated industries.

In this video, we provide a step-by-step guide to claiming International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) customs duty refunds using the Customs Automated Processing Environment (CAPE) in CBP's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE).

Join us on Wednesday, May 27th at 4:00 PM ET for an informative session on how foreign investment deals can be impacted by CFIUS review, covering key risks and requirements. Spots are limited, so register today.

If your company is bringing on a foreign investor, selling a stake in the business to a foreign company, or considering a foreign acquisition, the transaction may trigger a CFIUS filing, even if a national security issue does not seem obvious at first glance. Below are the top three legal issues U.S. companies should understand when evaluating foreign investment or acquisition opportunities.

In need of assistance? Schedule an intake meeting with our office. With the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), and subsequent directives from the Court of International Trade (CIT) addressing liquidation and re-liquidation of affected entries, importers are now evaluating how best to preserve their rights to obtain refunds of previously paid IEEPA duties. In this evolving environment, filing

CBP seized over 5,000 peptide shipments in a recent enforcement action involving misdeclared, consolidated imports. The case underscores how documentation and labeling issues can trigger seizures for regulated goods overseen by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Importers remain responsible for compliance, but we help evaluate seizures, respond to CBP, and develop strategies to resolve issues and reduce future risk.

By publishing in B2B Wholesaler Magazine, our firm aims to break down complex regulatory and business issues into clear, actionable insights that help industry participants stay informed, compliant, and ahead of emerging trends.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources v. Trump, which held that the President was not authorized to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the White House responded by imposing a surcharge on most imports under a different statutory authority, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

In this video, we discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources v. Trump, which held that the President was not authorized to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). As a result of the decision, certain tariffs imposed under multiple executive orders ceased to be collected as of February 24, 2026.