Gibson ping.
Twaaannggggg
“She added that she has heard plenty of anxiety across the country from musical instrument craftsmen and furniture makers, who all feel at risk now that Gibson was raided by armed federal agents.”
I’m sure a few well-placed contributions to Zero would fix this problem right away. And, might even get them federal stimulus money.
I only ask because my daughter's oboe, made of imported grenadilla, a wood considered “scarce” on some import list too? American makers also make oboes from violet wood and rosewood. Should they be worried?
“I think there is almost universal agreement among the tea party and conservative groups that the raids … was an overreach by the federal government."
So if the Indians say they are legal to export, how can the feds decide otherwise????
I hope Gibson fights them in court and wins a judgement so large it will shut these sobees up.
You've hit the nail on the head! The scum in DC want to be continually passing bills that chip away at our freedoms and the right to make our own decisions, partly because if they don't the liberal media calls them "do nothing" and they have nothing to crow about in the next campaign. They need to learn to LEAVE US THE **** ALONE!
FUBO GTFO! 472 Days until Noon Jan 20, 2013
However, articles like these are short and sometimes can be misleading with the facts they leave out.
To me the article suggests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service simply decided that fretboard blanks should be considered raw materials, not finished product. However, The USFWS is following US customs law which has been in effect since 1993 that fingerboard blanks are raw materials, not finished products, that should be classified as 4407 (unfinished) items and not 9902 (finished). In fact, Gibson had imported fingerboard blanks eleven times as 4407 (unfinished) items in the thirteen months preceding this raid and confiscation. When Gibson imported Madagascar ebony fretboard blanks in 2009 (the other raid), it used 4407 as the classification. So Gibson calls them an unfinished product.
Fish and Wildlife didn't make up the "fretboard are unfinished items" on the spur of the moment.
Second, the article says:
What's more, according to the complaint, the Gibson wood was imported with an incorrect tariff code, which was off by one digit from the correct code.
That's technically true.
But the export papers for the fretboard blanks from India permitted export as 9902 (finished items for musical instruments). Somebody at Luthier Mercantile changed the classification to 4408 and the description to "Veneer Wood <6MM Thick" on the customs paperwork." From 9902 to 4408 is more than one digit, and you must take the time to completely write a new description. Plus, by changing from 9902 to 4408, you avoid paying the tariff on a finished product.
Even after the product was confiscated and LMI submitted revised customs paperwork, LMI has not said that the correct code was 4407 and it was one digit off. LMI's revised paperwork says that the correct code was 9902.
The article also does not mention the use of false final consignees on two shipments - one through Dallas, one through Canada, where Gibson's name doesn't appear on the customs paperwork. In the case of the shipment from Canada, the Red Arrow Delivery Service warehouse in Nashville shared an email from LMI with Fish and Wildlife in which LMI said to ignore to customs paperwork - and that Gibson was actually the final consignee.
A lot of the details are in the Affidavit to support the search warrant. Other details are in the pleadings from the civil forfeiture case, U.S. v. 25 Bundles of Indian Ebony Wood, Case No. 3:11cv 00913 (U.S. Dist. Ct., Mid. Dist. Tenn.). The way this wood was imported was strange. That doesn't mean it was illegal (well, the mislabeling was illegal under the Lacey Act, but that would have to be intentional, and I'm not counting that), it jut means it was strange.
I expect this forfeiture case to be stayed within the next week on the grounds that it will "adversely affect the investigation and prosecution of an ongoing criminal investigation." The other civil forfeiture case has been stayed on those grounds after reviewing sealed evidence from the Environmental Crimes Section of the United States Department of Justice. On October 4, the U.S. Attorney in Nashville also asked the U.S. District Court Judge in this case to do the same thing, and he reviewed sealed evidence from the same source. He's the same Judge, so I expect the same result.
Only in America can the Fish and Wildlife Bureau put a guitar maker out of business. Is this an example of Government Overreach or what? There are other brands of guitars and other brands of governments.