Tariff Concession Revocation Order 08/2007 - Tariff Concession Order 0614801/0614804

Legal power and actor: The Order is made under Section 269SD(2) of the Customs Act 1901 by a delegate of the Chief Executive Officer, identified in the instrument as Robert Crawford, dated 02 January 2007. The instrument therefore records an administrative exercise of tariff-concession power by an authorised delegate.

Revocation and replacement: The core mechanical concept is revocation and replacement. The Order revokes Tariff Concession Order 0614737 and, from the same effective date, creates two new Tariff Concession Orders, 0614801 and 0614804. The instrument states that the revocation has effect from 02.01.07, and the new Orders are to have effect from that date as well.

Classification link: The instrument ties specified goods in TABLE B to an item in Part III of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The instrument’s explicit operation is to make those goods “goods to which the item in Part III of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 specified in Column 2 of TABLE B applies.” Column 2 in TABLE B reads “50,” so the operative link is between the goods described and Schedule 4 item 50.

Goods scope and qualifiers: The goods are described both by tariff classification numbers and by a textual scope. Two tariff lines are used in TABLE B: 8708.80.99 and 8708.80.92. The textual scope narrows the class to parts that are original equipment or reproductions fitted as original equipment to vehicles that (a) would fall within Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987 if imported, and (b) were manufactured prior to 1962. The description then enumerates categories of parts included, and separately identifies items in a subsection labelled TABLE B (tie rod ends, suspension ball joints, oil seals and gaskets).

Operational effect: The instrument does not itself specify the substantive effect of applying Schedule 4 item 50; it merely attaches that Schedule 4 item to the listed goods. Any substantive tariff consequences derive from the text of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 Schedule 4 item 50, which is not reproduced in the instrument. The instrument therefore functions as an administrative mapping, connecting particular tariff-classified goods to a specific Schedule 4 item as of the stated effective date.

Formatting and textual features: The instrument is presented as a short administrative order with two tables. The instrument’s text contains repeated cross-references (for example, “TABLE B” appears inside the goods description), and the table headers combine multiple pieces of information (Schedule 4 item number and last date of effect) into a single column. Those presentational elements affect how the reader reads which information is Schedule 4 item number and which is a last date of effect.

Importers and customs brokers: Primary affected parties are importers and their customs brokers who import or plan to import the goods described by the tariff lines 8708.80.99 and 8708.80.92, and who rely on tariff concession orders or Schedule 4 entries to determine tariff treatment. Because the instrument revokes an earlier TCO and replaces it with two new TCO entries effective 02.01.07, import entries processed on or after that date must apply the new mapping to Schedule 4 item 50 rather than the revoked TCO 0614737.

Manufacturers and suppliers of vintage vehicle parts: Suppliers of parts that are original equipment or reproductions fitted as original equipment to vehicles manufactured prior to 1962 need to consider whether individual parts fall within the textual list provided in the Tables. The instrument identifies a set of included parts and a set of items placed separately under a TABLE B label (tie rod ends, suspension ball joints, oil seals and gaskets), and so parts suppliers should assess whether their product descriptions correspond to the listed categories.

Customs administration and delegate decision-makers: The instrument was made by a delegate of the CEO exercising revocation and substitution power under s 269SD(2) of the Customs Act 1901. Customs officers administering entries will apply the Order when determining whether the goods on a given import entry are goods to which Schedule 4 item 50 applies. The instrument therefore directs administrative behaviour at the customs agency level.

Users relying on prior TCO 0614737: Businesses that previously relied on TCO 0614737 for tariff treatment must switch to the new TCOs 0614801 or 0614804 as the basis for claiming the Schedule 4 item. TABLE A shows the original TCO (0614737) with an effective/last date of effect entry linked to 02.01.07, therefore the old TCO ceases to apply from that date.

Parties dependent on Schedule 4 item 50: Because the instrument maps specified goods to Schedule 4 item 50, any party whose cash flows or cost structure depends on the application of Schedule 4 item 50 (for example, in calculating duty or reliefs provided by that item) is affected indirectly. The instrument itself does not state what Schedule 4 item 50 provides, therefore those parties must consult Part III of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to determine the concrete effect.

Legal and compliance advisors: Accountants, customs compliance officers and lawyers advising on tariff classification, concession reliance and retrospective treatment will need to note the revocation and replacement, the effective date, the TCO numbers involved (0614737 revoked; 0614801 and 0614804 created), and the textual scope to advise clients on documentation and classification choices.

Duty to apply correct mapping: The instrument creates an administrative duty on customs officers and importers to treat the goods described in TABLE B as goods to which Part III Schedule 4 item 50 applies, from the effective date 02.01.07. That is the direct legal consequence stated in the instrument: “The goods specified in Column 1 of TABLE B are goods to which the item in Part III of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 specified in Column 2 of TABLE B applies.”

Documentation and evidentiary duties: The textual scope in TABLE B requires certain factual predicates before the mapping applies: the parts must be original equipment or reproductions fitted as original equipment to vehicles that would fall within Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987 if imported, and they must have been manufactured prior to 1962. Those conditions create a duty on importers and brokers to hold and be able to produce evidence that a given part meets both criteria (proof of manufacture date, proof that the part is original equipment or a reproduction fitted as original equipment, and evidence the underlying vehicle would be classifiable within Chapter 87).

Duty to note revocation and TCO numbers: Importers and advisers must note that TCO 0614737 has been revoked and replaced by TCOs 0614801 and 0614804 effective 02.01.07. The instrument records TCO identifiers and their operative dates, and so a practical duty for compliance is to reference the correct TCO number and effective date on customs documentation where reliance on a tariff concession is asserted.

Rights created by the mapping: The instrument itself does not specify substantive tariff relief, but by mapping goods to an item in Part III of Schedule 4 it confers the right to have the statutory effect of that Schedule 4 item apply to the listed goods. To determine the precise legal right (for example, a reduced duty rate or an exemption) an importer must read Schedule 4 item 50 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The Order’s effect is therefore to place goods within the legal category governed by that Schedule entry.

No on-the-face penalty provisions: The Order does not include its own penalty clauses or enforcement measures. It is an administrative instrument that changes the linkage between goods and a Schedule 4 item. Any non-compliance consequences, for example for false claims or misclassification, will arise under the broader statutory framework (the Customs Act 1901 and the Customs Tariff Act 1995), which are referenced in the instrument but not restated.

Rights to rely on the declared effective date: The instrument states that the revocation “has effect from 02.01.07” and that the new Orders shall have effect from that date. Importers may therefore treat entries on or after that date in accordance with the new mapping, subject to the usual limitations and administrative checks that follow from the underlying Acts.

Instrument’s silence on penalties: The Tariff Concession Revocation Order itself does not set out penalties, fines, or criminal consequences. It is an administrative instrument recording revocation and substitution under s 269SD(2) of the Customs Act 1901. The instrument’s text contains no express enforcement provisions. Therefore the instrument’s enforcement implications are indirect: misstatements or incorrect reliance will be addressed under the general compliance and enforcement framework of the Customs Act 1901 and the Customs Tariff Act 1995, which the instrument cites by reference.

Enforcement actors and scope: The instrument was made by a delegate of the Chief Executive Officer under a statutory power. Enforcement and verification of import entries and claims that goods are to be treated under a particular Schedule 4 item are functions of the customs administration. The instrument therefore instructs that customs officers are to treat the listed goods as mapped to Schedule 4 item 50 for entry processing. Any enforcement activity, such as correction of entries, re-assessment of duty, seizure, or administrative penalties for incorrect declarations, would follow the usual administrative processes of the customs regime rather than being prescribed in the instrument.

Risk of misclassification and administrative consequences: Because the instrument ties tariff headings (8708.80.99 and 8708.80.92) to a textual description that has factual predicates, there is a compliance risk that importers or brokers may claim the Schedule 4 item incorrectly. The instrument implies an evidentiary burden for factual claims (manufacture prior to 1962, original equipment or reproduction fitted as original equipment, vehicle classifiable in Chapter 87). If those factual claims are incorrect, customs may reassess entries, require additional duty, impose interest or administrative penalties, or take other enforcement action under the Customs Act 1901 and associated penalty regimes.

No criminal or civil remedies specified: The instrument does not create or remove specific criminal or civil liability; it simply alters the administrative mapping between particular goods and a Schedule 4 item. Any criminal or civil liabilities for false statements, fraudulent documentation, or other unlawful conduct will arise under the broader statutory enforcement provisions (not reproduced in this instrument).

Delegated decision-making as point of accountability: The instrument explicitly records that it was made by a delegate of the CEO. That establishes who made the administrative decision and therefore where an administrative review or challenge (if any) would be directed under the broader statutory appeal and review mechanisms. The instrument itself does not provide procedural appeal rights, judicial review pathways, or time-limits; those must be sought in the parent Acts.

References to primary legislation: The Order explicitly states it is made “Under Section 269SD(2) of the Customs Act 1901.” It also refers to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 by stating that the goods become “goods to which the item in Part III of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 specified in Column 2 of TABLE B applies.” Additionally, the goods are described partly by reference to Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987; the instrument says the vehicle in question, if imported, “would fall within Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987.” These cross-references mean the instrument operates as an administrative device working within the architecture of tariff law established by those Acts.

Interaction with Schedule 4: The operative legal consequence of the Order is to associate particular goods with a specific item in Part III of Schedule 4. The instrument does not reproduce the content of Schedule 4 item 50, it only attaches the goods to that item number. Therefore a full understanding of tariff consequences requires reading the referenced Schedule 4 item in the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The Order changes which items in Schedule 4 apply to the specified goods, and therefore interacts directly with any substantive relief, concession or condition contained in that Schedule entry.

Tariff classification and Chapter 87: The textual description of goods relies on a predicate that the vehicle, “if imported, would fall within Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987.” Thus the Order presupposes application of tariff classification rules in Chapter 87 to determine whether the parent vehicle is within scope. That creates an interaction where the classification of the underlying vehicle under the Customs Tariff Act 1987 has a downstream effect on whether component parts qualify for the Schedule 4 mapping under this Order.

Administrative law and delegation: The instrument is an exercise of a statutory power by a delegate. That situates the Order within administrative law doctrines about delegated decision-making, procedural fairness and reviewability, as framed by the Customs Act 1901 and general administrative law, although the instrument does not itself set out review or appeal mechanisms. Challenges to the validity or procedural correctness of the Order would engage the parent statute’s procedural and review provisions.

Record-keeping and evidentiary law: Because the Order links entitlement to factual predicates (manufacture date, original equipment status), its operation interacts with statutory record-keeping obligations for imports, evidentiary requirements in customs processing, and audit powers under the customs regime. The instrument therefore functions in the context of those separate legal requirements though it does not detail them.

No change to unrelated legal regimes: The instrument is narrowly focused on tariff classification and Schedule 4 mapping. It does not purport to change, for example, intellectual property, product safety, consumer protection or local taxation laws. Its operational sphere is the customs/tariff framework established in the cited Acts.

Revocation of earlier TCO: The instrument expressly revokes Tariff Concession Order Number 0614737, which it records was made on 23 November 2006. The revocation is stated to take effect from 02 January 2007. That is the central amendment action: removal of an earlier administrative concession order.

Creation of replacement TCOs: In place of the revoked order, the instrument creates the Tariff Concession Orders described in TABLE B. Those entries are identified as TCO 0614801 and TCO 0614804 in the table footers: the TABLE B entries carry the labels “Op. 01.01.07 - TC 0614801” and “Op. 01.01.07 - TC 0614804” respectively, with the instrument overall dated 02 January 2007. The instrument therefore replaces a single earlier TCO with two new TCO entries operative at the start of January 2007.

Effective dates and last date of effect: TABLE A (the revoked order entry) shows a combined Schedule 4 item number and last date of effect column. The printed content reads as “50 02.01.07” in TABLE A’s Column 2, indicating that the previous TCO carried Schedule 4 item number 50 and that its last date of effect was 02.01.07. TABLE B’s Column 2 entries show “50” (the Schedule 4 item number) without a separate last date of effect printed in the table. The instrument’s opening paragraph confirms the revocation has effect from 02.01.07 and that the new Orders shall have effect from that same date, so 02.01.07 is the operative transition date between the old TCO and the new ones.

Delegate and date of instrument: The instrument is signed and dated by Robert Crawford, Delegate of the Chief Executive Officer, on 02 January 2007. That signature line is part of the amendment history because it records who exercised the revocation power and the date on which the administrative change was formalised.

No further amendments recorded: The instrument contains only the revocation of TCO 0614737 and the creation of TCOs 0614801 and 0614804. It does not record subsequent amendments, extensions, supersessions, or later revocations within the text supplied. Any later amendment history would appear in subsequent instruments or legislative records, but none are recorded in this document.

Formatting and text anomalies relevant to amendment history: The printed tables contain duplication and embedded reference labels (for example the goods description includes the phrase “but NOT including ANY of the goods listed in TABLE B TABLE A”), which affects a reader’s ability to parse precisely which items were included or excluded in the earlier TCO and how the new TCOs differ. The instrument does show the TCO numbers and the transition date explicitly, which are the operative amendment markers.

No litigation recorded in the instrument: The text of this Tariff Concession Revocation Order does not record any judicial decisions, appeals, or litigation relating to the revocation or the replacement TCOs. It provides no citations to cases, and does not indicate any pending or concluded challenges to the delegate’s action.

No adjudicative or review procedure set out: The instrument itself is an administrative order and does not include procedural information about review, merits appeal, or judicial challenge. Any legal proceedings that might challenge the lawfulness of the revocation, or disputes about how the mapping should be applied to particular goods, would be brought under the available review mechanisms in the Customs Act 1901 or general administrative law, but those mechanisms are not described in this instrument.

Implication for litigators and advisers: Because the instrument does not include litigation references, parties who anticipate disputes should rely on the parent statutes for procedural and substantive paths to contesting classification decisions or concessions. The absence of recorded litigation in the instrument means researchers must consult court records or administrative tribunals separately if there is any suspected or historical challenge; none is recited in the text provided.

No judicial interpretation of ambiguous text contained: The instrument contains textual ambiguities in the tables and goods descriptions. As drafted, the instrument does not record any adjudication that clarifies those ambiguities. That leaves potential interpretation questions to be resolved, if contested, under the general mechanisms for statutory and administrative interpretation, but there is no litigation history provided here that resolves those points.

Ambiguous internal labelling and repeated phrases: The goods description repeats and intermixes references to TABLE A and TABLE B inside the narrative description. For example the textual description reads “being ANY of the goods listed in TABLE A, but NOT including ANY of the goods listed in TABLE B TABLE A,” which creates parsing ambiguity about what is included and what is excluded. Practitioners should not assume that the printed text is error-free; instead treat the text literally and document reasoning when relying on the mapping.

Schedule 4 item number and date parsing: The table header for Column 2 in TABLE A is “Schedule 4 Item Number Last date of effect.” The printed value in TABLE A Column 2 appears as “50 02.01.07,” which when read across the header suggests Schedule 4 item number 50 with a last date of effect 02.01.07 for the revoked TCO. TABLE B Column 2 shows “50” with no separate last date of effect printed. The instrument’s opening paragraph, however, makes clear the revocation’s date of effect is 02.01.07 and that the new Orders take effect from that date. Practitioners should therefore record the effective transition as 02.01.07 and not rely solely on table formatting when reconstructing the timeline.

Overlap of included and excluded items: The body of the description first lists a set of included parts (steering mechanisms; engine and gearbox mountings; chassis; suspension assemblies; interior linings cut to shape; instrument and dashboard panels; control levers and pedal mechanisms; heaters; fuel tanks and fittings) and then separately lists items under what appears to be a secondary list (TABLE B: tie rod ends; suspension ball joints; oil seals and gaskets). The placement and labelling of these lists make it unclear whether the latter items are additional inclusions, exclusions, or a distinct subgroup. The instrument’s formatting therefore requires careful attention to documentary evidence when claiming Schedule 4 item 50 for particular parts.

Two tariff lines with potentially distinct treatment: TABLE B contains two different tariff classifications, 8708.80.99 and 8708.80.92. The instrument maps both lines to Schedule 4 item 50, but does not explain the substantive difference between the two headings. Users should not assume identical treatment under external tariff rules without checking the Customs Tariff Act and any chapter or subheading notes that apply to those tariff lines.

No substantive content of Schedule 4 item 50 included: The instrument records the mapping to Schedule 4 item 50 but does not state what item 50 provides. A common gotcha is to assume an exemption, concession or rate without checking Schedule 4 itself. The instrument requires the reader to consult Part III of Schedule 4 to know whether the mapping produces an exemption, reduced rate, or other concession and whether any conditions in Schedule 4 item 50 must be separately satisfied.

Effect of revocation on historical entries: The instrument gives the revocation an operative date; however the document does not describe retrospective or transitional arrangements for entries lodged immediately before or straddling the effective date. Practitioners should not assume retrospective coverage or automatic carry-over of prior claims, and should document the date and TCO relied upon at the time of entry.

Documentary evidence requirement for manufacture date: The instrument conditions the scope on parts being “manufactured prior to 1962.” In practice that requires reliable manufacture-date evidence. A typical gotcha is weak provenance documentation for vintage or reproduction parts. The instrument imposes that factual predicate without setting out acceptable proof, so importers should obtain, preserve and present convincing documentary evidence when making a claim tied to the new TCOs.

Identify whether your goods are covered: Begin by comparing the physical goods to the textual description in TABLE B and to the tariff headings 8708.80.99 and 8708.80.92. The instrument requires three factual predicates for coverage: the part must be (1) original equipment or a reproduction of goods fitted as original equipment, (2) fitted to vehicles that would be classifiable under Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987 if imported, and (3) manufactured prior to 1962. Record a clear, itemised match between the product and the description.

Gather documentary proof: To support claims that the goods fall under the TCO mapping to Schedule 4 item 50, obtain contemporaneous supplier documentation or manufacturing records identifying the part, its date of manufacture, and its fitment as original equipment or as a reproduction of original equipment. Photographs, serial numbers, factory records, manufacturer declarations, and provenance statements from sellers provide the evidentiary basis for customs officers to accept the factual predicates embedded in the instrument.

Use correct TCO number and effective date on entries: For imports on or after 02 January 2007, reference the appropriate replacement TCO number when claiming the Schedule 4 mapping: TC 0614801 for goods under 8708.80.99 and TC 0614804 for goods under 8708.80.92, as listed in TABLE B. Note the earlier TCO 0614737 was revoked effective 02.01.07. Ensure that import declarations and customs paperwork identify the TCO number and the effective date to avoid misapplication of the revoked TCO.

Classify carefully and check Chapter 87: Confirm that the underlying vehicle with which the part is associated would, if imported, be classifiable in Chapter 87 of the Customs Tariff Act 1987. Classification of the parent vehicle may determine whether the part meets the textual predicate. Where classification is uncertain, treat the question as a technical tariff classification exercise and document the reasoning and references used to reach a Chapter 87 conclusion.

Distinguish included and excluded items: Because the instrument’s text contains multiple lists and embedded labels, prepare a written internal interpretation showing why each part claimed matches an included item and does not fall within any exclusion as printed. Given the formatting anomalies in the instrument, contemporaneous rationale reduces later contestation risk.

Retain records for audit: Keep all evidence supporting the claim that the part was manufactured before 1962 and that it is original equipment or a reproduction. Retain purchase invoices, manufacture certificates, correspondence with suppliers, technical specifications and any classification advice requested from customs or advisors. The instrument’s operation depends on factual predicates, and customs audits will require documentary proof.

Coordinate with customs brokers and advisors: Make sure customs brokers use the new TCO numbers (0614801 / 0614804) and the correct tariff subheading on declaration. Advise brokers to attach or reference the relevant evidence in the import entry file and to be prepared to respond to information requests regarding the manufacture date and status as original or reproduction equipment.

If uncertain, seek formal classification advice: The instrument attaches goods to Schedule 4 item 50 but does not specify the substantive effect of that item. Where the tariff consequence is material to pricing or viability, consider obtaining formal customs classification advice or a binding ruling under the administrative mechanisms available in the Customs Act framework. The instrument itself does not provide guidance on appeal or review, so any formal ruling should be obtained through the usual channels under the statute.

Monitor for further administrative changes: The instrument shows an administrative change effective 02.01.07. Maintain procedures to track subsequent TCO revocations, variations or Schedule 4 amendments that might change entitlement, conditions or operative item numbers. Although this instrument contains no later amendment notes, ongoing compliance requires watching for future Orders or legislative changes affecting Schedule 4 item 50.

Document transitional positions for pre- and post-effective-date movements: If goods were imported around the transition date, maintain clear internal records stating which TCO was relied upon (the revoked 0614737 or the replacement 0614801/0614804) and the dates of import. This protects against disputes about whether the old or new TCO applied to a particular entry.