Summary

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Hoeninghaus v. United States — Opinion of the Court

It is urged that, as specific duties were actually assessed in the present case, it therefore appears that the importers were not benefited by the undervaluation; that the revenue has not and could not suffer anything by the undervaluation; and that a mere difference of opinion between the importer and the appraisers, as to the value of the goods, should not subject the former to an additional duty.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Hoeninghaus v. United States — Opinion of the Court

The seventh section, as amended by section 32 of the act of July 24, 1897, provides that the importer, at the time he makes his entry, may make such addition to the cost or value given in the invoice as, in his opinion, may raise the same to the actual market value or wholesale price of such merchandise in the principal markets of the country from which imported
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature