Customs Reauthorization Introduced

For ages, the trade has been expecting a bill to continue funding Customs and Border Protection and to make changes to facilitate legitimate trade. A bill has been introduced by Ways & Means Trade Subcommittee Chair Kevin Brady (R-TX) covering some of that ground. Here is a link to the bill summary. Here is the full text.

A few highlights include:
  1. Section 102(b) creates the office of Trade Advocate to serve as a liaison between the trade and Customs and Border Protection
  2. Field Operations would be transferred to the Office of International Trade under Section 102(d)
  3. The creation of an inter-agency Customs Review Board to provide comments on proposed regulatory changes
  4. Under Section 203, CBP must provide to Congress a report on its plans for completing the implementation of ACE
  5. A prohibition on agencies using ITDS from also using other electronic systems for cargo clearance
  6. It appears that cargo data previously only used for cargo safety and security will now be available for targeting for commercial enforcement. See Section 211(b).
  7. Joint training with the private sector to improve tariff classification and the enforcement of antidumping and countervailing duty measures. See Section 217.
  8. New requirements for non-resident importers to maintain an agent in the United States to accept service of process and potentially be liable for penalties. Section 224.
  9. The creation of a Certified Importer Program under Section 225. This gives a statutory right to expedited release for Tier 2 and Tier 3 participants in C-TPAT and ISA.
  10. The immediate release to a rights holder of an image or sample of imported merchandise suspected of infringing a U.S. copyright or trademark. Section 231.
  11. Provisions for the prevention of recurring evasions of antidumping and countervailing duty orders
  12. Increasing the de minimis value for purposes of imports from $200 to $800 in Section 402.
  13. Increasing the value threshold for formal entries to $2500, also in Section 402.

Comments

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