Trade Fraud Case Tracker

What the record shows. Why the outcomes matter.

Explore publicly documented trade-fraud cases involving civil settlements, criminal proceedings and unresolved matters. See what happened, how long it took, and what consequences followed.

Explore All Cases ↓

What the Record Shows

38
Case records with reported outcomes, 2023–2026
7
Additional pending case listings
Approximately 8 years
Average from first documented conduct to reported resolution (35 usable records)
15 of 37
Underlying matters with reported outcomes involving a criminal component

As of October 20, 2026. The 38 records represent 37 underlying matters. The approximately eight-year figure is not the length of a government investigation or court case. Criminal-component matters are not synonymous with convictions occurring in 2023–2026.

These are the publicly visible outcomes—not the full scale of trade fraud or every CBP resolution.

Five Cases. Five Questions.

A settlement or conviction tells us how a legal proceeding ended. It does not always tell us whether the economic rewards of misconduct were eliminated.

1. Wanxiang — Did Collection Deliver Deterrence?

2007–2012 imports | $53M+ reported collected in 2025 | Civil settlement

DOJ reports a substantial recovery, including more than $30 million in penalties. But years of avoided duties can have a financing value—and potentially support pricing, investment and customer gains. Did the eventual payment outweigh those advantages, or simply arrive years later? The public record does not establish the answer.

DOJ source ↗ (opens in a new tab)

2. Ford — What Was the Value of Years at a Lower Tariff?

2009–2013 imports | 2.5% versus 25% duties alleged | $365M settlement in 2024

DOJ alleged that Ford imported Transit Connect cargo vans as passenger vehicles. Ford disputed the allegations and also paid certain earlier duties and interest. Could years of lower landed costs have delivered advantages that a later settlement could not reverse? The total economic benefit and cost have not been established.

3. Uni-Tile — What Happens When a Scheme Adapts?

CBP scrutiny in 2022 | Criminal charges in 2025 | Civil suit in 2026 | Pending

DOJ alleges that, after CBP began investigating, the defendants shifted imports to domestic shell-company importers. The government is pursuing parallel civil and criminal proceedings. Can enforcement intervene quickly enough when alleged misconduct changes form after detection? The allegations remain unproven. Stronger scrutiny of importers of record is central to the June 2026 customs-enforcement order (opens in a new tab).

DOJ source ↗ (opens in a new tab)

4. Boise Cascade / Horizon — What Does Real Accountability Look Like?

Corporate felony plea | $6.382M fine ordered | Individual prison sentences

Boise Cascade’s fine was calculated at twice its gross profit from the illegal wood at issue. Related Horizon principals received prison sentences. This is the kind of financial and individual consequence that can change incentives. An ordered fine is not necessarily a verified collection.

DOJ source ↗ (opens in a new tab)

5. Evolutions Flooring — Does Ability to Pay Weaken Deterrence?

$8.1M settlement in 2025 | DOJ expressly cited ability to pay

The settlement resolved allegations without a liability determination. But when a company's available assets constrain the penalty, what ensures the financial consequences of alleged misconduct still outweigh its potential rewards? Ability to pay may affect collection; it should not end the deterrence inquiry.

DOJ source ↗ (opens in a new tab)

The Questions Enforcement Must Answer

Potential scale: Tens of billions annually

A White House report (opens in a new tab) modeled potential annual tariff-revenue losses from transshipment-related evasion ranging from roughly $10 billion to more than $100 billion under different assumptions. These are scenarios, not verified fraud losses.

SCALE — Can Enforcement Reach Enough Offenders?

The Tracker contains just 37 underlying matters with reported outcomes since 2023. CBP administrative actions, voluntary disclosures and other resolutions are not fully captured, but the small visible output raises a serious question about enforcement reach.

SPEED — Can Government Act Before Markets Change?

Unpaid duties can finance lower prices, investment, capacity and customer relationships. Years later, collecting duties does not automatically restore the competitive position of firms that complied with the law. Delay can change what meaningful accountability requires.

DETERRENCE — Is Cheating More Costly Than Compliance?

DOJ's growing criminal-enforcement commitment is encouraging. It must be matched by collection of duties and applicable interest, penalties large enough to outweigh the benefits of misconduct, prosecution of culpable individuals where warranted, and meaningful remedies for injured American businesses.

The test is not the size of an announced settlement. It is whether enforcement removes the economic incentive to commit trade fraud.

Sources: DOJ Criminal Division remarks (2025) (opens in a new tab) · DOJ Trade Fraud Task Force (2026) (opens in a new tab) · DOJ Global Trade & Commerce Enforcement Section (opens in a new tab) · June 2026 customs-enforcement order (opens in a new tab)

Explore the Case Tracker

Search every underlying matter, expand its proceedings, and examine original DOJ and court sources. Monetary claims, settlements, fines, restitution and reported collections are identified separately.

Status

Showing 44 of 44 matters

About the Data

The Tracker combines 46 original listings into 44 underlying matters, including 37 with at least one reported outcome and seven pending. One matter may have several civil and criminal proceedings. The 38 case-record headline is a different counting unit. Dates of conduct, complaints, outcomes and collections are not interchangeable; “approximately eight years” reflects the first-to-last dates available for 35 case records, not an investigation's duration.

The Tracker is a selected public record, not a census of trade fraud. Some importers voluntarily pay or resolve matters administratively without DOJ litigation. Settlements and judgments do not necessarily prove cash was collected, and estimates of national fraud cannot be divided into Tracker outcomes to produce an enforcement success rate.

Last reviewed: October 20, 2026 · Corrections: