The Trump Justice Department has fully embraced the False Claims Act, stretching its use to include trade enforcement. DOJ recognizes the power of the FCA, the issues at stake, and the ability to extract large settlements. DOJ has used the FCA to capture companies that evade customs duties. DOJ’s recent actions are a reminder for import companies to carefully scrutinize valuation and customs duties to make sure they pay the right amount. If they fail to do so, the companies can create significant FCA liability. To mitigate these risks, importers have to implement a robust compliance program and controls.
In two recent cases, DOJ reached settlements with two companies for evading customs duties.
On July 23, 2025, DOJ announced a $6.8 million settlement with two importers, Global Plastic LLC and Marco Polo International LLC, both subsidiaries of MGI International LLC, for failure to pay customs duties on plastic resin products manufactured in China. Global Plastic and Marco Polo failed to declare the correct country of origin and value of plastic resin products that they imported into the United States. Instead of listing China as the country of origin, the companies listed Taiwan and Saudi Arabia as the countries of origin.
MGI voluntarily disclosed the violations, conducted an in-depth internal investigation, produced relevant facts to the government and took prompt remedial actions.
The Global Plastic and Marco Polo case is reported here.
The next day, on July 24, 2025, DOJ announced a $4.9 million FCA settlement with Grosfillex, a French furniture manufacturer, for circumventing anti-dumping and countervailing duties on aluminum products from China. Grosfillex submitted false customs forms to evade the anti-dumping and countervailing duties, representing that their imports were not subject to duties on aluminum products from China.
To disguise the origin of the products, Grosfillex packaged some imports to look resemble furniture kits that buyers may build, which are not covered by the duties.
Grosfillex did not self-disclose its conduct. The case started based on a whistleblower lawsuit brought by a former employee. Also, DOJ noted that Grosfillex failed to correct previously submitted customs forms even after it learned those forms contained erroneous information.
The Grosfillex case is reported here.
The two cases highlight the different treatment afforded by DOJ when companies voluntarily disclose the misconduct, cooperate with the investigation and remediate by disciplining or terminating employees involved and enhancing their compliance programs.
The FCA cases involved only civil violations. Interestingly, DOJ applied this same cooperation framework as typically is applied to companies in a criminal case. DOJ’s Corporate Enforcement Program includes incentives for companies to self-disclose False Claims Act violations, cooperate and remediate.
