Customs decision affects valuation/transfer pricing methods and liability for duties and VAT

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Customs decision affects valuation/transfer pricing methods and liability for duties and VAT

Greg Kanargelidis of Blake, Cassels & Graydon explains why a decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal about the method of valuing imports for customs tariff purposes will make the valuation of imported goods more complex.

The decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) in Cherry Stix Ltd v President of the Canada Border Services Agency, Appeal No AP-2008-028 (Cherry Stix II) represents a significant departure from the CBSA's administrative practices.

The CITT decided that where title to imported goods transfers in Canada to the "purchaser in Canada", the transaction value method is not applicable in the determination of the customs value of the goods on which duties must be paid.

All goods imported into Canada are subject to customs tariffs which are usually imposed as a percentage of the "value for duty" of the goods. Canada's value-added tax, the Goods and Services Tax, applies on the "duty paid value" of imported goods.

The value for duty is established in accordance with specified methods of valuation that must be considered sequentially until a method is found that applies.

The method used most often is the transaction value method under which the value for duty of imported goods is based on the "price paid or payable" in a "sale for export to Canada" to a "purchaser in Canada".

In Cherry Stix II, the issue was whether the value for duty of certain imported women's T-shirts should be based on the transaction value method (TVM), or, the sale price charged by Cherry Stix to Wal-Mart Canada (as maintained by the CBSA), or whether a different method of valuation applies to the transactions at issue.

The CITT concluded after a review of all of the facts that since the completion of the sale and therefore the transfer of title to the goods in issue occurred after the goods had been imported intoCanada, there was no "sale for export" as between Cherry Stix and Wal-Mart Canada, so that the TVM was not applicable in this case.

The decision in Cherry Stix II is a significant departure from the CBSA's administrative practice and interpretation of the TVM provisions of the Customs Act.

The decision is bound to complicate the determination of the proper customs valuation of imported goods. This is because of the relatively more complex methodology applicable in the case of the alternative methods of valuation that are prescribed by the Customs Act: the transaction value of identical goods; the transaction value of similar goods; the deductive value; and the computed value.

Greg Kanargelidis (greg.kanargelidis@blakes.com), is a partner in the Toronto office of Blake, Cassels & Graydon

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

While it’s great that the OECD is alive to multinationals’ fears of being caught in a compliance trap, the ‘common understanding’ illustrates a worrying lack of readiness
Rising demand for specialist expertise has fuelled the growth in tax partner headcounts, Cain Dwyer found; in other news, Switzerland has been urged to reconsider pillar two
An OECD report on the taxation of the digital economy is expected by the end of 2026, according to the group of nations
Trophy assets are evolving from personal indulgences to structured investments, prompting family offices to prioritise tax efficiency, governance discipline, and cross-border compliance
As demand for complex, cross-border private client counsel spikes, Patrick McCormick sees opportunity in starting from scratch
As part of an exclusive global alliance, KPMG will become one of Anthropic’s ‘preferred consultants’ for private equity
In the second part of this series, the focus shifts to how taxpayers can manage ongoing risks across the lifecycle of cross-border structures
Jurisdictions have moved to ensure that multinationals are not punished for late GIR filings due to a lack of available filing portals or exchange relationships
HMRC’s push for unified tax adviser registration won’t prevent every instance of improper conduct, but it is good for taxpayers and the UK’s reputation
Elsewhere, the UAE’s tax office has issued an update on registration penalties and two firms have been busy making lateral hires
Gift this article