CITES, Lacey, & US border problems for instruments/materials

[tippie53]

the 2 links from the post won't work but the first and last are good. Thanks again for your time to help us all . I hope we have an chance here to get this better understood for all concerned

[Duke of Pearl]

Try this link which accesses both statements from NAMM's website: http://www.namm.org/public-affairs/arti ... -declarati

Also...I can personally verify that LMII (who shipped the Indian wood to Gibson) physically holds notarized paperwork dated July 13th, 2011, from the Government of India Ministry of Commerce and Industry and signed by Daya Shankar, the Deputy Director of Foreign Trade, which states under “Subject – Clarification regarding export of Fingerboards made of Rose Wood and Ebony” that "…the Fingerboards made of Rose wood and Ebony [ITC (HS) Code 92099200] is freely exportable", and that "This issues with the approval of Director General of Foreign Trade.”

[tippie53]

thanks Chuck . I know you are a busy person and that your time is valuable .

[Woody OKeefe]

Hi Guys.

Can we back up a minute? Since we are hobbyists or amature kit guitar builders am I to worry about the MOP dots I just received from StewMac or the abalone I received form Andy DePaul? How many of you take a guitar across International borders? I haven't taken a guitar out of the country since a USO tour in 1970. When I buy a kit from Ken at KMG or from John Hall or from LMI I am relying on them to follow legal established guide lines. Life is too short to be worried about things we cannot control ( in other countries). All I want to do is build Kit guitars!!!

[tippie53]

it is moving outside the country for the most part. Lacey has more to do with the importation and exportation from this country . We are all learning about this . For the most part you don't have much to concern yourself as long as you are not taking things out of the country.
I can't speak for Ken but I am sure he is aware of this . I am working with my suppliers so that the supply line is compliant . I can no longer ship BRW out of the country . If I do I need to get an exporters license . You need to be aware of this in case you travel . CITIE material is different from LACEY . Yet one can trigger the other I believe. If BRW is found not to be legal you can loose it and possibly be fined .
For the most part , most large builders have dated serial numbers that are supposed to be proof of date of origin . Still one can never have enough documentation . NAMM is also trying to get involved to help get the government aware of the hardships that this is causing .
Ahhhh if only thing could be made simple .

[Duke of Pearl]

This is all stuff we need to be aware of...and for sure there's a lot of over-reaction on the part of some small-shop builders. But factories, larger shops, and quite a few high-end boutique luthiers sell as much as 30% of their instruments to foreign clients. Canadian makers are hugely dependant on U.S. sales, so they're the hardest hit with all of this. We and our distributors for shell materials typically do about 25-30% of our sales out of the U.S., much of it for smaller sized orders that cannot justify paying the $200.00 or more involved in Express international shipping, custom broker and USFWS "Inspection" fees. With our $300.00 minimum it's still a winning deal for anyone who can buy direct from us, as even with the additional costs the shipment will still probably be less expensive than having paid close to double from a distributor (none of whom are now willing to process international shell orders); combining with other builders to place a larger order brings unit costs even lower (through amortizing the extra expenses amongst more items).

But as for those who never sell instruments internationally, they're hopefully making something that'll be around for more than a lifetime -- which greatly increases the chances that at some point somebody's going to wind up with a second or third hand instrument that may see some traveling. But if the materials weren't sourced and documented properly (or if that documentation doesn't stay with the instrument) there's an increasing risk that it'll be questioned and confiscated. Personally, I'd rather not be producing things which may get someone in trouble down the line, even if not the original purchaser.

By the way, in case it hasn't been posted yet on this forum thread, here's a recently issued guide on how to get exemption certificates for some instruments manufactured before the 2008 Lacey Act regs went into effect: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/ ... -codes.pdf

[tippie53]

thanks again
Your efforts to help and educate are very much appreciated . I use your products , as I do buy from David Nichols. What paper work do I need to export on inlay work ?

[Ken Hundley]

So the instruments get confiscated....then what? Is the government really stupid enough to pay for the indefinite storage of these instruments? Will they detroy them? Or will they secretly end up in the hands of those who know how to get inside the system? Or when the appropriate agency needs a little funding will they hold an auction? Again, what if Clapton had his instruments seized during a road trip through Canada into the states, then what? I highly doubt he has documentation on all his instruments. Or do the famous get a pass because of the business they generate touring? I may have explained this before, but I am in air pollution control, and we are loving the power the EPA has, our business is growing by leaps and bounds, but even we can see this is far from sustainable. Many of our customers are trying to decide whether to comply or fold. Not a good decision to have to make. Regulation in this country is making it too difficult and expensive to manufacture anything here, which means less jobs for americans with every regulation that gets passed.

[David L]

Well said Ken!!!!!!

David L

[Duke of Pearl]

What paper work do I need to export on inlay work?

A USFWS Import/Export Permit at $100.00/year (even if only used once), and a USFWS Declaration Form 3-177 and Instructions. Google either one to find where to apply or download.

So the instruments get confiscated....then what?

Some things are destroyed, a few are used in airport displays or for traveling educational events, a few others are used as training aids for agents, and probably most are warehoused (and can later be sold if it's possible that they could have been legal in the first place -- items such as tortoiseshell antiques can't be auctioned because the material itself is illegal to sell and an auction would thus break the law). I met someone at the recent Healdsburg Guitar Festival who had actually walked through a government warehouse stacked to the ceiling with confiscated goods of all sorts, and he said it was as fascinating as a museum!

...do the famous get a pass because of the business they generate touring?

That's your cynicism showing...understandably so. Nobody's immune, and probably the main reasons there are as yet so few documented cases of confiscation and prosecution are:

1) The most recent phase of the 2008 Lacey revisions only went into effect on April 1, 2010 (no comment on the date choice...) and things are still gearing up as far as training agents and/or accumulating tips to investigate in the field.

2) There are only several hundred agents available and it would take thousands to even begin chasing down all the small illegal movements of plant and animal materials every day.

3) At this point it may not be a high priority to waste agency time on too many little guys given the number of big dogs that can be checked on. It could also be that although the laws don't allow any de minimis exceptions for size or value, it's not really the government's intent to use the regulations in that way. If so, they really need to be rewritten since they don't serve the purposes of Lacey, and to avoid possible future abuses.

4) The several instances I'm personally aware of (including my own investigation by USFWS for almost 9 months last year, which resulted in a seizure and fines) have resulted in items confiscated and fines paid without ever going to court, rather like dealing with a traffic ticket. These don't generate court records or get in the news, so can't be readily tracked or researched. Who knows how many enforcement actions are quietly taking place?