Courtesy Notices Endangered?

I just noticed a Federal Register Notice in which U.S. Customs and Border Protection is proposing to eliminate the mailed paper courtesy notice of liquidation (CBPF 4333-A). The reasoning is that an electronic ABI message is already sent to the importer and the broker. According to Customs, that makes the courtesy notice redundant.

I'm just wondering . . . does it really? What do you folks do with the 4333? Personally, I see it a lot when importers want to confirm liquidation dates for purposes of filing protests. While I am aware that the only official notice is the notebook down at the customhouse, I also know that few importers trot down there to check before filing a protest.

I'm all about automation and reducing redundant data. I'm also happy to save the U.S. government $3 million per year, and save a few tress as well. Let me know if you see any problem with this.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Larry -

In this day and age the "book down at the customhouse" is an archaic redundancy. The official notice of liquidation should be the notice provided via ABI - not some clerk's scrawling in a 19th Century ledger.

If CBP were to make THIS change, there would be no need for the courtesy notice to be mailed.

Your faithful Customs retiree.
Mar 24, 2010, 1:49:00 PM
Karin said…
Years ago, a lot of importers tossed them or let them pile up in a drawer somewhere. We always reviewed for discrepancies and filed them with the entry documents. I agree - save time, money and trees!
Mar 25, 2010, 8:26:00 PM
Anonymous said…
I'm not sure that most importers even know what the liquidation notices are. I say: do away with the courtesy notices, but implement a direct notice to the importer rather than to the broker via ABI.
Mar 26, 2010, 11:06:00 PM
Leroy F. Berven said…
For the vast majority of entries which liquidate "as entered", both liquidation notices and the liquidation list posted at the local Customs office are no longer a good use of CBP resources; electronic notification would make much more sense. Paper change notices, however, like notices of suspension of liquidation, continue to serve a very useful reminder function -- particularly for importers who are not yet electronically linked to CBP. So, I would continue the mailed notices of any action (or non-action) which indicates any outcome other than the routine liquidation to close out an entry with no further changes.
Mar 30, 2010, 2:17:00 AM
Peter S Herrick PA said…
The Bulletin Notices of Entries Liquidated should be posted electronically. This would save the government time and money. Pages from the Bulletin are not available through FOIA.
May 28, 2010, 2:53:00 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ruling of the Week 2015.8: Old Jersey and Pitcairn Island

Image
For today's ROTW, I set out looking for a ruling dealing with some far off and preferably warm location. Turns out that, with the exception of coastwise transit issues, there are no Customs and Border Protection rulings involving Pitcairn Island or any of several Pacific Ocean microstates including Tuvalu , Niue , and Kiribati . Pitcairn Island What I did find is an interesting question about the country of origin marking for products of the Bailiwick of Jersey Island, Channel Islands. The ruling is HQ 561938 (Mar. 18, 2002). For those of you who may not know, Jersey is an island off the coast of Normandy, France. It is an independent international actor and not part of the U.K. although the U.K. is responsible for its defense and external relations. Also, the Queen is the Head of State in her capacity as "the Crown in Right of Jersey." It is, according to the U.S. Department of State, a " Crown Dependency " along with the Isle of Man and the Bailiwick o...
Read more

CAFC Decision in Double Invoicing Case

The Federal Circuit has issued a decision on the merits in United States v. Inn Foods, Inc.  There had been a previous decision on jurisdiction, which was followed by a trial at the Court of International Trade and then this appeal on the substance. The initial issue is whether Inn Foods' invoicing practice amounts to fraud.  Inn Foods had been receiving an invoice from growers in Mexico that had a relatively low sales prices on it.  Subsequent to entry, Inn Foods created a second invoice at something more similar to market value, retaining the original invoice number, and paid at that higher amount.   Superficially, this looks like a standard-issue double-invoicing scheme.  But, in the age of reconciliation, is it really more like a provisional pricing mechanism?  It might have been possible to make that argument had Inn Foods adjusted its entries accordingly.  It didn't and the loss of revenue was approximately $624,000.  Based on testimony and evidence indicating both knowl...
Read more

Ninestar and UFLPA Exhaustion

Image
Exhaustion is a key doctrine in administrative law. When applicable, it requires that a party unhappy with an agency’s determination complete the administrative appeal process before turning to the courts for judicial review. Requiring exhaustion typically promotes judicial efficiency by ensuring that disputes are resolved at the agency and, if they are not, that there is a complete record of the agency process. Exhaustion also ensures that the judiciary respects the executive agencies and their expertise.  There are, on the other hand, times when the courts will find that exhaustion is not necessary or appropriate. Such is the case in  Ninestar Corporation et al. v. United States  et al., a decision of the U.S. Court of International Trade.  Ninestar is also interesting because it is one of the first cases in the CIT involving the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, known as UFLPA. In my hiatus from active blogging, I missed the rise of UFLPA as a major compliance t...
Read more