New Criminal Tariff Evasion Charges Signal DOJ’s Escalating Trade Fraud Push
On November 17, 2025, the US Attorney’s Office in the District of New Jersey filed a criminal complaint alleging that Indonesian jewelry company UBS Gold, its Indonesian co-owner Michael Yahya, and two company employees engaged in a five-year-long conspiracy to evade duties and tariffs owed for shipments of jewelry to the United States. The complaint alleges that defendants avoided over $86 million in duties and tariffs on more than $1.2 billion in jewelry shipments. This is the second high-profile criminal tariff evasion case brought since the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced trade and customs fraud as one of its areas of focus in its white collar Enforcement Guidance earlier this year1—an area that likely will remain a priority, regardless of the outcome of ongoing litigation challenging President Donald Trump’s imposition of tariffs. Importers should monitor their current tariff programs and, if needed, develop compliant tariff strategies.
On May 12, 2025, the Criminal Division of the DOJ issued a memorandum covering new guidance on white-collar enforcement priorities—one of which is trade and customs fraud, including tariff evasion. By prioritizing trade and customs fraud, the Criminal Division is tackling “threats to the US economy, American competitiveness, and our national security.”2 Such threats “seek to circumvent the rules and regulations that protect American consumers and undermine the Administration’s efforts to create jobs and increase investment in the United States.”3
The UBS Gold case is the product of a joint investigation by Homeland Security Investigations, Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, and US Customs and Border Protection. At the end of 2020, the duty-free treatment Indonesia had with the United States ended, and the United States imposed duties on products imported from Indonesia at the beginning of 2021. Thereafter, the complaint alleges that defendants and their co-conspirators engaged in a scheme to evade duties by shipping their jewelry through Jordan as a trans-shipment point, which had a Free Trade Agreement with the United States, and then importing the products duty-free into the United States, under the guise that they were made in Jordan and thus not subject to any duty.
The complaint also alleges that defendants and their co-conspirators developed a second tariff evasion scheme involving sending scrap gold from the United States to Jordan, switching the scrap gold out for UBS Gold jewelry made in Indonesia, shipping the product back to customers in the United States, and then representing to Customs and Border Protection that the jewelry was manufactured in the United States.
Takeaways and Recommended Steps
The UBS Gold criminal complaint demonstrates this administration’s continued commitment to reduce consumer harm through fraud and to protect US economic interests, especially when the alleged misconduct involves non-US based individuals and entities, and makes clear that enforcement actions related to trade and customs fraud will not be limited to the use of the False Claims Act alone. This matter also illustrates the close coordination between the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security in this area, consistent with the recent announcement of the DOJ’s cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force in August 2025. The press release announcing the creation of the task force specifically noted that criminal prosecutions, penalties, and seizures would be pursued where appropriate. As DOJ continues to sharpen its focus on instances of trade and customs fraud, additional cases like UBS Gold will likely emerge—brought under various criminal statutes, such as those covering wire fraud and smuggling.
Given the focused priorities of the current Administration on trade, companies should closely supervise compliance with customs and tariff frameworks. In particular, companies should consider engaging outside counsel to conduct (1) audits of import practices to identify potential areas of concern, review of and enhancements to compliance programs (including, in the case of importers, to policies and procedures related to classification, country of origin, and valuation), and (2) timely and thorough internal investigations of potential violations to mitigate both the risk of qui tam actions, as well as criminal enforcement for duty and tariff evasion.
1 On May 28, 2025, two executives of a freight forwarding company were arrested for their role in an alleged scheme to avoid customs duties payments. See Press Release, US Dept. of Justice, Freight Forwarding Company Executive Arrested on Federal Indictment Alleging Massive Scheme to Avoid Customs Duties Payments (May 28, 2025). For more information about the DOJ’s new Enforcement Guidance, please see our Legal Update, DOJ Announces White-Collar Enforcement Priorities and Revised Policies.
2 Matthew R. Galeotti, Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White Collar Crime, US Dept. of Justice 1, 3 (2025).
