Trade Fraud 2025 Retrospective
Trade enforcement emerged as a key priority in 2025, driven by sustained geopolitical tensions, trade remedy expansions, and heightened scrutiny of de minimis entries.1 This Legal Update outlines key trends and enforcement developments by US enforcers, including the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). We highlight major developments, summarize government actions across civil and criminal dockets, and identify practical takeaways for companies in high-risk sectors and supply chains.
I. Major Developments of the Year
Trade enforcement was identified as a key priority of the DOJ’s Criminal Division and ramped up significantly in 2025. Authorities prioritized evasion of antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD), Section 301 tariff circumvention, forced labor-related import violations, and misclassification and undervaluation schemes. DOJ and CBP increasingly relied on data analytics and risk targeting to identify patterns of evasion, while coordination with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and other agencies expanded. Whistleblowers filed 1,297 qui tam lawsuits, totaling over $6.8 billion in fiscal year 2025 for settlements and judgments under the False Claims Act (FCA). Companies faced greater exposure from parallel proceedings—administrative, civil, and criminal—often arising from overlapping fact patterns and cross-agency referrals. And DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the formation of a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force to further combat tariff evasion and efforts to smuggle prohibited and improperly documented goods into the United States.
II. Trade Fraud Task Force
The Trade Fraud Task Force has rapidly established itself as a hub for interagency coordination, bringing together DOJ, CBP’s Office of Trade, HSI, and other enforcement partners to combat customs fraud and trade remedy evasion. In 2025, the Task Force prioritized pipeline-building efforts to ensure a steady flow of cases spanning both civil FCA and criminal fraud statutes and encouraging whistleblowers to utilize the FCA qui tam provisions to alert the government to credible allegations of fraud.
III. Government Actions
Civil enforcement centered on customs-related false claims and penalties for material false statements to CBP, with emphasis on underpayment of AD/CVD and Section 301 duties, misclassification and undervaluation, and false country-of-origin declarations to avoid trade remedies. FCA theories were prominently displayed in cases where duty underpayment was tied to false statements made to obtain the “payment or approval” of lower duties, and where whistleblowers provided granular transactional data. CBP simultaneously pursued administrative penalties and liquidated damages, while leveraging the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA), the law that established procedures for an “ interested party” to submit an allegation that an importer is evading its payment of AD/CVD, to address AD/CVD evasion in real time. In these matters, agencies emphasized remediation, compliance enhancements, and supply chain traceability, often requiring importers to implement robust internal controls, third-party oversight mechanisms, and improved data documentation to verify origin, classification, and valuation.
Some notable high value 2025 civil actions included:
- Island Industries, Inc., et al. v. Sigma Corporation, et al.: The Ninth Circuit upheld a $26 million judgment for FCA violations by knowingly making false statements to evade antidumping duties on Chinese-made pipe fittings. The court’s published opinion affirms that the FCA applies to fraudulent evasion of customs duties, rejecting Sigma’s argument that the Tariff Act precludes FCA liability in such cases.
- Ceratizit USA LLC: A $54.4 million settlement to resolve FCA allegations tied to the evasion of customs duties on tungsten carbide products imported from China. The relator/plaintiff will receive approximately $9.75 million of the settlement proceeds.
- Allied Stone Inc.: A $12.4 million settlement of FCA allegations that a company and its president knowingly evaded or conspired to evade duties on Chinese quartz surface products that were imported between 2018 and 2023. Among other things, the United States alleged that Allied Stone and its president misrepresented, caused to be misrepresented, or conspired in the misrepresentation of Chinese quartz surface products as other merchandise subject to lesser duties, such as marble or crystallized glass, to improperly avoid applicable AD/CVD. The United States also alleged that Allied Stone and its president failed to declare and pay, and failed to ensure that others (including manufacturers and third-party entities serving as the official importers of record) were declaring and paying, applicable AD/CVD owed to the United States on entries of Chinese quartz surface products. The relator received approximately $2.17 million of the settlement proceeds.
- Harman International Industries: A $11.8 million settlement for alleged FCA and customs violations of evaded AD/CVD on Chinese extruded-aluminum heat sinks. The settlement resolve allegations that 2011 through 2023, Harman knowingly imported heat sinks that contained extruded aluminum from China without paying the required AD/CVD, and when confronted with its failure to pay required AD/CVD for the heat sinks, Harman concealed and decided not to disclose its knowing avoidance of AD/CVD to the United States. The whistleblower received approximately $2.3 million of the settlement proceeds.
- Evolutions Flooring: A $8.1 million settlement in which the company and its owners resolved alleged customs duties evasion on multilayered wood flooring from China. The settlement is based on Evolutions’ and its owners’ ability to pay. The settlement resolved allegations that Evolutions knowingly and improperly evaded customs duties, including AD/CVD and Section 301 duties, on multilayered wood flooring manufactured in China that Evolutions imported between 2019 and 2022. Among other things, the United States alleged that Evolutions caused false information to be submitted to CBP regarding the identity of the manufacturers and country of origin of the imported multilayered wood flooring. The whistleblower received an award of approximately $1.2 million.
Criminal cases in 2025 focused on schemes involving smuggling, conspiracy, and false statements, frequently paired with money laundering and, in certain cases, sanctions or export controls violations where trade fraud overlapped with restricted-party or end-use risks. Prosecutors targeted repeat actors and networks facilitating widespread evasion, including transshipment through intermediary jurisdictions, shell company structures, and document falsification. Investigations increasingly drew on cross-border cooperation and digital evidence, including communications and financial and commercial data.
Specific actions included:
- Endless Sales Inc. and Octane Forklifts Inc.: An indictment for selling Chinese origin forklifts as “Made in America” and evading tariffs. According to court documents, the companies and certain executives allegedly conspired to import forklifts from China, disguise the Chinese origin of the forklifts, and then sell the forklifts to federal government agencies by fraudulently representing the forklifts as being manufactured in the United States. The indictment also alleged that the companies and executives conspired with a Chinese national and a Chinese manufacturer to create fake commercial invoices that fraudulently undervalued the cost of forklifts that Endless and Octane imported into the United States, defrauding the government of over $1 million in applicable tariffs, duties, and fees. The executives were also charged with separate wire fraud charges and with conspiring to enter goods into the United States by means of false or fraudulent statements.
- UBS Gold: A criminal complaint claiming approximately $86 million in duty evasion on jewelry via transshipment and false origin. UBS Gold allegedly engaged in a conspiracy to evade lawful duties and tariffs for shipments of jewelry to the United States. UBS Gold and its co-conspirators evaded certain tariffs and duties by making jewelry in Indonesia and then shipping it to Jordan, which had a Free Trade Agreement with the United States, before sending it to the United States. The defendants then falsely claimed that UBS Gold jewelry had been manufactured in Jordan, which avoided the duty that would otherwise apply. To avoid those tariffs, the defendants and co-conspirators shipped scrap gold from the United States to Jordan, which they falsely claimed was gold jewelry that needed to be assembled or finished in Jordan. Instead, the defendants and co-conspirators swapped the scrap gold for UBS Gold jewelry made in Indonesia, which they then shipped from Jordan to the United States. The defendants and co-conspirators falsely claimed that the jewelry had been manufactured in the United States to avoid paying the tariffs that would otherwise apply. From approximately 2021 to October 2025, the defendants allegedly caused UBS Gold and its customers to avoid more than approximately $86.4 million in duties and tariffs on more than $1.2 billion in jewelry shipments to the United States.
- Able Groupe Inc.: A guilty plea for passing false documents and smuggling offenses tied to import violations relating to infant formula. Able Groupe sold European infant formula to consumers throughout the United States beginning in 2019. Several types of infant formula Able Groupe sold were listed on FDA Import Alerts due to their failure to meet nutrient or labeling requirements for infant formula. In pleading guilty, Able Groupe admitted that it attempted to avoid detection and detention of its imported formula by failing to comply with FDA’s prior notice requirements for imported food and by using false commodity descriptions for the imported formula. Following an FDA inspection, the company ceased operations and recalled 76,000 units of formula in August 2021. Able Groupe pleaded guilty to two felony counts: (1) importing food without providing Prior Notice to FDA with the intent to defraud or mislead in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and (2) passing and attempting to pass false and fraudulent documents through customs to defraud the United States. Under the FDCA, importers are required to provide prior notice to FDA when they import food into the United States. This was the first time a defendant has pleaded guilty to a felony violation for failing to provide such notices to FDA.
- MGI International, LLC: In a matter coordinated by the Trade Fraud Task Force, a former COO was charged by information and plead guilty to conspiracy to smuggle plastics. The resolution related to a scheme to falsify Country of Origin declarations to avoid Section 301 duties owed on Chinese products. As part of the resolution with MGI, DOJ declined to prosecute MGI and agreed to credit $6.8 million previously paid to resolve MGI’s civil liability under the FCA for knowingly failing to pay customs duties on certain plastic resin imported from China. Separately, MGI’s former COO was charged by criminal information and pleaded guilty to conspiracy to smuggle goods into the United States by instructing subordinates to misrepresent the manufacturer and country of origin on paperwork to avoid paying the required Section 301 duties.
IV. Takeaways
- Administrative Priorities: The DOJ has clearly signaled it will aggressively pursue corporate crime related to trade issues through the establishment of the Trade Fraud Task Force and that initiative’s immediate impact. CBP’s priority trade issues include enforcing AD/CVD orders; protecting revenue collection—most notably by rigorously overseeing duty collection under Sections 232, 301, and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act; trade agreements; and import safety. Administratively, CBP leveraged EAPA inquiries to address duty evasion, uncovering more than $400 million in unpaid trade duties through EAPA investigations.
- Expansive and Long-Running Investigations: A significant portion of matters progressed on extended timelines, with investigations commonly spanning two to six years before public resolution. This reflects the complexity of supply chains, the volume of trade data under review, and the need for interagency evidence-sharing, as well as the prevalence of parallel tracks—administrative inquiries, FCA investigations, and criminal probes—arising from the same conduct.
- Filling the Pipeline: Throughout 2025, DOJ and DHS emphasized bringing these actions to the forefront, targeting industries with high vulnerability to tariff evasion, counterfeiting, and forced labor, and often relying upon whistleblower tips to identify potential matters. The Trade Fraud Task Force’s coordination role was central to enforcement efforts, with a view toward deterring evasion through sustained, visible outcomes.
- FCA Statute of Limitations: Under the FCA’s statute of limitations framework, the government retains an outside limit of up to 10 years from the date of the violation, subject to statutory conditions. This outer bound, when coupled with multiyear investigative timelines, increases long-tail exposure for importers, brokers, and suppliers involved in historical duty underpayments or misstatements.
V. Looking Ahead in 2026
Trade enforcement in 2026 is poised to intensify across several fronts. Companies should anticipate continued DOJ emphasis upon identifying and pursuing enforcement against corporations and executives engaged in the improper avoidance of tariffs and customs duties. Authorities are expected to expand data-driven targeting of de minimis entries and e-commerce channels, scrutinize potential transshipment through intermediary jurisdictions, and deepen oversight of AD/CVD circumvention and duty evasion schemes generally. With five Withholding Release Orders having been issued in 2025, forced labor enforcement will likely remain an area of trade compliance risk, with heightened documentation and traceability expectations. Companies should anticipate broader use of EAPA proceedings, continued parallel civil-criminal coordination, and FCA theories that convert customs misstatements into high-stakes civil liability with extended look-back periods. Compliance programs will be assessed for real-world effectiveness, including supplier onboarding and monitoring, third-party verification, and the ability to substantiate origin, classification, and valuation decisions. In this environment, timely internal reviews, remediation, and considered engagement with regulators can materially affect outcomes and reduce exposure.
