In 2008, this law was expanded to protect many types of trees against illegal logging and transportation as well as foreign species that are protected by their host countries. The idea is to help foreign countries safeguard their own efforts at protecting the trees and plants and wildlife as part of their own conservation efforts. The Lacey Act requires importers to declare the country of origin of harvest and the species name of all plants contained in their products. It also sets forth guidelines for penalties for violations of this Act, including forfeiture of goods and vessels, fines and jail time.

The two main components of the Lacey Act is to guard against the theft of plants and to guard against taking plants from officially protected areas, such as a park or reserve. The Lacey Act does not impose any of the United States laws on foreign lands. It simply supports the efforts of foreign countries to safeguard their own resources. All 50 states in this country are bound by this federal law.

The Lacey Act now stands as one of the broadest and comprehensive forces in the federal arsenal to combat wildlife crime. With the ever-increasing activity in international and domestic wildlife trafficking, this act as evolved into an important protection for fish, wildlife and plants for around the world.

The United States Customs is the agency charged with monitoring this law, and many attorneys have carved out a niche business in analyzing, interpreting, and representing commercial clients with this law in mind.

Years ago, then President Regan wanted to help certain countries divert their economy away from illicit drugs. In an effort to do this, the government allowed certain countries to enjoy a lower rate of duty tax to aid in this endeavor. This system is referred to as GSP. ( Generalized System of Preferences ). This system allows countries that meet certain requirements to enjoy a much lower rate of duty tax than competing nations not meeting the stringent criteria set forth by the United States government.

However, in the timber industry, this law offered certain challenges. The foresters in the Amazon are concerned mostly with timber harvest and they are not experts in determining the genus and specie of each log they harvest. As a matter of fact, this is nearly an impossible task to determine the actual specie of each log harvested. Without the aid of botanists and scientists specifically schooled on tropical species, many loggers and importers just classified the working logs into a general classification based upon the characteristics of the wood itself.

However, the major classification used out of Brazil was a general name known as Virola. This specie enjoyed a low rate of taxable duty. Nevertheless, when this product was imported into the U.S., customs officials used the services of experts to determine that some of the logs were not Virola, but a plethora of species all having different rates of duty.

It was the contention of importers that if a product is purchased as Virola, sold as Virola, and moves in commerce as Virola that it should be dutiable as Virola. The government sees it differently. It is their contention that regardless of the identification and classification difficulties, the importer must classify each log correctly to avoid penalties.

This case is just one of many that show that we have much to do to improve our system of duties and taxes and it is up to lawyers to do this important work.