Commentary on Judgment No. 21758 of 2024: Customs Debt and Temporary Storage

The recent Judgment No. 21758 of August 1, 2024, by the Court of Cassation addressed a crucial issue in customs law: the customs debt relating to import duties. Specifically, the Court ruled that the debt does not arise during the period of temporary storage of goods, but only at the time of the presentation and acceptance of the customs declaration by the competent Authority.

The Factual Basis of the Judgment

In the specific case, the Court confirmed the legitimacy of the denial of reimbursement of a provisional anti-dumping duty, introduced by EU Regulation No. 2015/501. The goods in question were already present in Italy, but the necessary declaration of destination had not been made. This led the Court to reiterate that the customs debt is activated only after the acceptance of the declaration, as provided for by current legislation.

CUSTOMS) - IN GENERAL Customs debt relating to import duties - Goods in temporary storage - Exclusion - Declaration of destination and acceptance by the customs authority - Necessity - Factual basis. Regarding duties, the import customs debt does not arise during the period when the goods are held in temporary storage, but only when the declaration from which the destination of the goods is evident is presented and accepted by the customs authority. (In this case, the Supreme Court confirmed the appealed judgment which had deemed legitimate the denial of the request for reimbursement of the provisional anti-dumping duty, established by EU Regulation No. 2015/501 of March 24, 2015, on imports of products originating from the People's Republic of China and Taiwan, as the customs debt had arisen only after its entry into force with the acceptance of the customs declaration, despite the goods already being in Italy in temporary storage).

Regulatory and Legal Implications

The judgment is part of a complex regulatory context, where Presidential Decree 23/01/1973 No. 43 and various European regulations establish a framework for customs operations. It is essential for industry operators to understand that the customs debt is not automatic but depends on specific administrative actions. In particular, the customs declaration must be accepted before the obligation to pay duties arises.

It is important to note that temporary storage serves as a protective measure for the goods but does not exempt importers from their duty to comply with customs regulations. Here are some key points emerging from the judgment:

• Temporary storage of goods does not automatically imply a customs debt.
• The debt is triggered only upon the presentation and acceptance of the customs declaration.
• European and national regulations provide a clear legal framework for the management of goods in temporary storage.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 21758 of 2024 represents an important clarification in the field of customs law. It underscores the need for proper management of customs procedures by economic operators, highlighting that only through compliance with current regulations can the risk of disputes and sanctions be avoided. Legal advice in this area becomes fundamental to ensure safe navigation through complex customs regulations and to protect the rights of importers.