CN25-33 steel surtax now uses CUSMA marking rules for origin determination

The CBSA updated Customs Notice 25-33 last week and didn’t mark the changes. The CSCB had to ask what actually moved. Turns out it wasn’t just housekeeping.

What changed

Paragraph 10 now explicitly ties origin determination to the CUSMA marking rules — the “Determination of Country of Origin for the Purpose of Marking Goods (CUSMA Countries)” framework. That’s new language. The expiry dates in paragraphs 19 and 20 shifted to July 1, 2027, which we expected. The rest is cleanup.

The origin piece is the one that matters.

Why marking rules vs tariff preference rules is not a technicality

If you’ve been filing steel derivative goods under the Section 53 surtax framework, you’ve been making an origin call every time. Until this clarification, most brokers defaulted to the tariff classification origin rules — same framework we use for CUSMA preference claims.

Marking rules are different. They’re shallower. A good can be “made in the USA” for tariff purposes (substantial transformation, RVC thresholds, change in tariff classification) but still get marked as “Country of Origin: China” if the final assembly in the USA didn’t meet the marking-specific substantial transformation test.

CBSA has now said: for steel derivative goods surtax purposes, use the marking rules. That’s a narrower gate. If your customs broker has been filing on the tariff-rule assumption, you’re exposed.

Practical example: steel fasteners imported into the USA from China, re-packaged and labeled in Ohio, then shipped to you in Ontario. Under tariff rules, that might clear as US origin if the US processing hit the threshold. Under marking rules? Still China. The surtax applies.

What this does to your current book

If you’ve been clearing steel derivative goods as CUSMA-origin without running the marking analysis, pull the files. Look at:

• Fasteners, fittings, wire products, rebar, structural components — anything on the Annex to CN25-33
• Goods showing US or Mexico origin on the commercial invoice but with “made in [third country]” language anywhere in the supply docs
• Goods where your supplier did final assembly in a CUSMA country but sourced the steel itself from subject countries (China, most of Southeast Asia, various others on the SIMA lists)

Run the marking test. If the answer flips, you’ve been under-collecting surtax. The CBSA will find it on a verification, and you’ll owe the difference plus daily compounding interest from the original accounting date. On a container of fasteners, that can be a five-figure adjustment.

If you’re using a Montreal sufferance warehouse for PARS release and the origin flips from USA to China mid-verification, that’s a release hold and a duty adjustment while your drayage clock is already running. The cost compounds fast.

The July 1, 2027 expiry is real but don’t bet on it

Paragraphs 19 and 20 now say the order expires July 1, 2027. It’s been extended before. The original Section 53 safeguard measures on steel have been rolling since 2018 in various forms. The current iteration (steel derivative goods surtax, distinct from the broader Section 53 goods) was supposed to be temporary trade defence while SIMA cases worked through the CITT.

We’re now at year six of “temporary”. The CBSA has extended and amended this order multiple times. Unless the domestic steel lobby evaporates or the CITT concludes a pile of SIMA inquiries that make the surtax redundant, expect another extension in Q2 2027.

Don’t plan your 2027 imports on the assumption this goes away. Plan as if it rolls.

Filing adjustments you should make now

If you’ve got steel derivative goods in your regular import stream:

1. Re-verify origin using the CUSMA marking rules, not the tariff classification rules. If you don’t have a marking determination on file from the supplier, get one. If the supplier can’t provide it, run the analysis yourself or have your broker do it.

2. Check your CAD filings for the last 90 days. If any should have been surtax-applicable but weren’t, file a correction through CARM. Voluntary disclosure beats a verification hit.

3. Update your internal import SOPs to flag steel derivative goods at the PO stage. The marking analysis should happen before the goods ship, not when your broker is filing the CAD at 4pm on a Friday. If you need a standing customs compliance protocol for steel goods, we build those.

4. If you’re running CARM release prior to payment with a commercial bond, make sure your surtax exposure is in the bond math. Surtax assessments count as duties owing. If your bond is sized tight, a missed surtax call can eat your headroom fast.

The CBSA didn’t call this out because they didn’t have to

Customs notices get updated all the time. The CBSA posts the revision, updates the PDF, and moves on. They don’t issue a bulletin every time a paragraph gets reworded. That’s why the CSCB had to ask.

The assumption is that importers and brokers are subscribed to the notices and reading the diffs. In practice, most people skim the email subject line and file it. If you’re clearing goods subject to CN25-33, you should be reading the notice in full at least quarterly.

This one wasn’t marked as a major change, but the origin interpretation shift is major if you’re on the wrong side of it. We caught it because we run a standing watch on all SIMA-related notices. Not every broker does.

If your current broker hasn’t mentioned this update, that’s a flag. It means they’re not reading the notices, or they read it and didn’t see the exposure. We file CADs against CN25-33 every week. If you’re not sure whether your steel derivative goods are being marked correctly, that’s the kind of call we take all day. Get in touch.

Source: CSCB