Answer first
Core rule
Section 1313(c) covers duty-paid merchandise exported or destroyed under CBP supervision within five years when it failed to conform to sample or specifications, was shipped without the consignee's consent, was defective at importation, or meets the statutory retail-return ground. The claimant must identify the correct ground and give CBP the required opportunity to examine unless a valid waiver applies.
Authority and lookup route
Locate the rule before returning to the facts. Links point to government or official publications.
Reference lookup task
Create a four-path rejected-merchandise checklist from § 190.41. For each path, write the fact that must exist, the records that would prove it, and whether the same facts might instead support unused-merchandise drawback under § 190.43.
Route: § 1313(c) statutory ground → § 190.41 path → § 190.42 timing and notice → §§ 190.91–190.92 approvals
Worked example
Ten imported pumps were proven defective at importation. Duty was $50 per pump. They were timely exported after proper notice and examination opportunity. Assuming all other requirements are met, what is the ordinary maximum drawback?
- 1Match the evidence to the 'defective as of the time of importation' ground rather than relying on a later customer complaint alone.
- 2Calculate eligible duties: 10 × $50 = $500.
- 3Apply the ordinary 99% ceiling: $500 × 0.99 = $495.
Conclusion: $495 on the stated eligible duties. The defect-at-import evidence and compliance with notice and export procedures are essential to that result.
Common traps
- Using a post-import failure as proof that the defect necessarily existed at importation.
- Combining different statutory grounds without proving every element of any one ground.
- Exporting rejected goods before CBP's examination opportunity when no waiver applies.
- Assuming rejected merchandise can never qualify under an alternative unused-merchandise path.