Title 19 CFR · 20 questions in the bank
19 CFR Part 165 — Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties
Every released customs broker license exam question in the CBLEsim bank that tests 19 CFR Part 165. Drawn from 8 released sittings, April 2022 through October 2025.
Sections of this part with their own question sets
- 19 CFR 165.1 — 6 questions
- 19 CFR 165.24 — 5 questions
Other questions from Part 165
April 2022, Q50. An allegation of evasion of AD/CVD filed by an interested party against an importer must include all the following EXCEPT:
- AName and address of importer against whom the allegation is brought
- BApplicable AD/CVD orders
- CDescription of the covered merchandise
- DInformation reasonably available to the interested party to support its allegation that the importer with respect to whom the allegation is filed is engaged in evasion.
- EAn explanation of the relationship between the importer and the interested party
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is E because 19 CFR 165.11(b) explicitly lists the required elements of an allegation of evasion, which include the importer’s name and address (A), applicable AD/CVD orders (B), description of the merchandise (C), and supporting information (D). The regulation does not require an explanation of the relationship between the importer and the interested party, making E the exception. The other options are directly mandated by the cited authority, while E is not mentioned as a requirement.
October 2018, Q22. The Enforce and Protect Act of 2015 (EAPA) provides for:
- AFormal procedures for evaluating an e-allegation of an IPR violation
- BFormal procedures for calculating the proper antidumping duty rates
- CFormal procedures for submitting and investigating antidumping or countervailing allegations of evasion against U.S. Importers
- DA determination as to what interim measures should be taken within 300 days from the date of initiation of the investigation
- EAn increase in the de minimis value exemption
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is C because the EAPA, as outlined in 19 CFR 165.0, establishes formal procedures for submitting and investigating allegations of evasion of antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders, which directly aligns with option C. Option A is incorrect because the EAPA does not address intellectual property rights (IPR) violations; it focuses on AD/CVD evasion. Option B is unrelated, as antidumping duty rate calculations are governed by separate provisions under 19 U.S.C. 1673. Option D misrepresents the EAPA’s scope, which does not involve interim measures or timeframes for determinations. Option E is incorrect because the de minimis exemption pertains to customs valuation rules, not the EAPA’s provisions.
October 2020 (AM), Q60. All of the following information must be provided by an interested party filing an allegation of evasion of AD/CVD orders EXCEPT:
- AName of the interested party to the investigation making the allegation and identification of the agent filing on its behalf, if any, and email address for communication and service purposes
- BSpecification as to the basis upon which the party making the allegation qualifies as an interest party
- CName and address of the shipping company that imported the subject merchandise
- DDescription of covered merchandise
- EApplicable AD/CVD orders
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is C because 19 CFR 165.11(b)(3) explicitly requires the name and address of the importer against whom the allegation is brought, not the shipping company. The regulation does not mention the shipping company as a required detail. The other options (A, B, D, E) are all explicitly listed in 19 CFR 165.11(b)(1)–(5) as mandatory components of the allegation. The tempting error might arise from conflating the importer with the shipping company, but the cited authority only mandates importer information, not the shipping company’s details.
October 2020 (PM), Q58. All of the following information must be provided to CBP by a party to the investigation in an allegation of evasion of AVCVD EXCEPT:
- AName of the party for the investigation providing the information and identification of the agent filing on its behalf, if any, and email address for communication and service purposes
- BSpecification as to the basis upon which the party making the allegation qualifies as an interested party
- CName and address of the shipping company that imported the subject merchandise
- DDescription of covered merchandise
- EApplicable AD/CVD orders
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is C because 19 CFR 165.11(b)(3) explicitly requires the name and address of the importer against whom the allegation is brought, not the shipping company. The other options (A, B, D, E) are all explicitly listed in 19 CFR 165.11(b)(1), (2), (4), and (5), respectively, as mandatory components of the allegation. The shipping company is not mentioned in the cited authority as a required party to the investigation, making C the only exception.
October 2021, Q47. All the following information must be included in other Federal agency requests to CBP for investigation in proceedings relating to the evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) orders consistent with the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (“TFTEA”), EXCEPT:
- AHarmonized Tariff Numbers
- BIdentification of a point of contact at the agency
- CApplicable AD/CVD orders
- DName of importer against whom the allegation is brought
- EDescription of the covered merchandise
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is A because 19 CFR 165.14(b)(1)-(6) explicitly lists the required information as the importer’s name, description of merchandise, applicable AD/CVD orders, evidence of evasion, a point of contact, and health/safety risk notifications. Harmonized Tariff Numbers are not mentioned in the regulation as mandatory, unlike the other options. The tempting wrong answers (B, C, D, E) are all directly required by the cited authority, while HTS numbers are absent from the list of mandatory elements.
October 2022, Q13. Carbon and alloy steel threaded rod originating in China is subject to antidumping and/or countervailing duty cases in the United States. Steel Importers, Inc. (SII) is an import client of your brokerage firm. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of SII has contacted you for assistance in making an allegation under the Enforce and Protect Act of 2015 (EAPA) and CBP implementing regulations. SII’s allegation is that a competitor is importing Chinese-origin carbon and alloy steel threaded rod from Germany and is avoiding paying the anti-dumping and/or countervailing duties (AD/CVD) by claiming that the merchandise is country of origin Germany. Which of the following statements is FALSE under these facts?
- AA licensed Customs broker is an interested party under the EAPA implementing regulations found in Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which allows the brokerage to notify CBP of SII’s allegations as an interested party and allows SII’s business to remain confidential.
- BUnless the person or other entity bringing the allegation is an interested party as defined in EAPA implementing regulations found in Title 19 of the CFR, the person making the allegation must either be an attorney or have a valid power of attorney from the interested party.
- CWhen an interested party or the interested party’s duly authorized attorney or agent makes an allegation through CBP’s e-Allegations system or authorized method, the Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Directorate (TRLED) receives the allegation and conducts the investigation.
- DIf the CBP investigator lacks sufficient information to know whether the merchandise at issue in the allegation is properly within the scope of a valid AD/CVD order, the investigator will refer the matter to the Department of Commerce for a “scope” determination and notify the parties.
- EThe Customs broker should expect that liquidation of the unliquidated entries for which CBP has reasonable suspicion that the importer entered covered merchandise into the customs territory of the United States through evasion will be suspended.
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is A because 19 CFR §165.1 defines an "interested party" as a person directly affected by an AD/CVD order, such as an importer or a party to the order, not a licensed customs broker merely by virtue of being licensed. A customs broker is not automatically an interested party unless they have a direct stake in the matter, making A false. The other options align with EAPA regulations: B correctly notes that non-interested parties must have legal representation or a power of attorney; C accurately describes TRLED’s role in investigations; D correctly identifies the referral to the Department of Commerce for scope determinations; and E correctly states that CBP may suspend liquidation if evasion is suspected.
October 2024, Q69. Upon conclusion of an investigation under 19 CFR 165.15, CBP will make a determination based on _____ as to whether covered merchandise was entered into the customs territory of the United States through evasion.
- Aprobable cause
- Bclear and convincing evidence
- Cpreponderance of evidence
- Dsubstantial evidence
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is D) substantial evidence because 19 CFR 165.27(a) explicitly states that CBP must base its determination on "substantial evidence" when concluding an investigation under 19 CFR 165.15. The other options are not supported by the cited authority: "probable cause" applies to law enforcement actions, "clear and convincing evidence" is a higher standard used in legal proceedings, and "preponderance of evidence" is typically applied in civil cases, none of which are referenced in the regulation.
October 2024, Q70. Three importers of covered merchandise have multiple allegations of evading antidumping/countervailing (AD/CVD) orders. Which of the following is TRUE about the consolidation of these allegations?
- AConsolidation into a single investigation may be made at any point, including after the issuance of a determination of evasion to at least one of the importers.
- BConsolidation into a single investigation is not permissible when multiple importers are involved.
- CConsolidation into a single investigation is permissible only when another Federal agency requests it.
- DConsolidation into a single investigation may be made at CBP’s discretion.
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is D because 19 CFR 165.13(a) explicitly states that CBP may consolidate multiple allegations into a single investigation at its discretion, without requiring external requests or limitations on timing beyond the issuance of an evasion determination. Option A is incorrect because consolidation is prohibited after a determination of evasion is issued, as per the same section. Option B is false because the regulation permits consolidation even with multiple importers. Option C is unsupported, as the authority does not mention any requirement for another federal agency to request consolidation.
October 2025, Q79. An allegation by an interested party that an importer of covered merchandise has evaded antidumping or countervailing (AD/CVD) duty order under the Enforce and Protect Act of 2015 (EAPA) must include all of the following information EXCEPT:
- ADescription of the covered merchandise
- BApplicable AD/CVD orders
- CName and address of importer against whom the allegation is brought
- DAn explanation of the relationship between the importer and the interested party
Show the answer and explanation
The correct answer is D because 19 CFR 165.11(b) explicitly lists the required information for an allegation, including the importer’s name and address (b)(3), description of the merchandise (b)(4), and applicable AD/CVD orders (b)(5), but does not mention the relationship between the importer and the interested party. The regulation focuses on factual details directly relevant to the alleged evasion, such as the importer’s identity and the merchandise involved, rather than the relationship between the parties. The other options are explicitly required by the cited authority, making them incorrect as exceptions.
CBLEsim is free: every past-exam question CBP has released, the CFR and the HTSUS a tap away, timed mock exams, and tracking that sends you back to what you keep missing.
Start practising free