CBP's Answers to Questions Submitted at its January 2005 Trade Symposium (Part V - Final)

(CBP's 2004 Trade Symposium was held on January 12-14, 2005 in Washington, DC. See ITT's Online Archives or 01/27/05 and 01/28/05 news, 05012710 and 05012810, for Parts I and II of BP's summary of this trade symposium.)

This is Part V, the final part of a multi-part series of summaries on this document, and provides "highlights" of the questions and answers concerning the Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS).

(See ITT's Online Archives or 06/10/05, 06/13/05, 06/14/05, and 06/15/05 news, 05061005, 05061305, 05061410, and 05061510, for Parts I-IV.)

Highlights of Questions & Answers on ACE/ITDS

The following are highlights of the questions and answers related to ACE/ITDS:

Ability for brokers to participate in PMS to be expanded in near future. CBP states that it is its goal to make PMS participation widely available, and to allow brokers to easily make PMS payments on behalf of their clients. According to CBP, the ability for brokers to participate in PMS will be expanded in the near future.

(See ITT's Online Archives or 09/14/04 news, 04091405 for BP summary of 'current' broker ability to participate in PMS.)

CBP intends to make ACE available to a number of entities. In response to a question on whether ACE will be available to entities other than importers or customs brokers (e.g., consultants or attorneys that work with importers), CBP responds that it intends to make ACE as widely available as possible.

According to CBP, ACE will be available to importers, brokers, carriers, freight forwarders, foreign trade zone (FTZ) operators, bonded warehouse proprietors, etc. In turn, trade account users may provide account access or administrative rights to other members of the trade community as they wish such as their brokers, consultants, and/or attorneys. In doing so, the trade account user can delegate how much information can be accessed by these other members.

ACE full deployment in 2011, no decision at this time on whether ACH payment will be mandatory. In response to a question on when ACE is expected to be made mandatory and will Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) be mandatory for payment, CBP states that ACE is scheduled for completion in 2011 with full deployment in 2012, and notes that at this time, no decision has been made mandating the use of ACH for payment.

An EDI system will still be required even when ACE is fully operational. CBP states that ACE cannot be used as a back-up system for Automated Broker Interface (ABI) entry filing in the event ABI is down due to a terrorist attack. CBP explains that as Entry processing is rolled out in ACE, ABI will continue to be the electronic data interface (EDI) system. According to CBP, even when fully operational, entry processing will not be completed directly in ACE; an EDI system will still be required. Therefore, ACE will never be a back-up system for ABI entry filing.

Input of manifest/bill of lading information into ACE from shipping point. A questioner asked what is the probability of electronic input into ACE from the shipping point for manifest/bill of lading information (i.e., EDI).

CBP responds that this capability is under review. 19 CFR 123.92 provides for the carrier, U.S. importer or its Customs broker to file portions of an electronic truck manifest. However, the ability for an actual shipper to file information for an e-Manifest in the truck environment does not exist today. CBP states that if this functionality is a business need, it should be identified to the appropriate Trade Support Network (TSN) committee.

Paper submissions where electronic records already exist. A questioner asked why CBP continues to require paper submissions where electronic records already exist (e.g., reconciliation entries, paper submissions required for Header, Association, and ACH payment). The questioner notes that this information has all been sent electronically previously. A hardcopy and disc containing an 'xls' (i.e., Excel) spreadsheet must also be sent so CBP can update/upload to the Census Bureau. The questioner asked if the spreadsheet can be sent electronically to Census, why not to CBP.

CBP responds that the Automated Commercial System (ACS) is not equipped to receive financial spreadsheet information through ABI. However, ACE will have this capability, which will end the need to provide the information via paper and/or diskette. According to CBP, a goal of ACE is to eliminate the submission of paper forms/documents; however, depending upon the specific paper submission, there may be a legal requirement that mandates the presentation of paper.

Processing time for ACE Portal approval. CBP states that the current processing time for ACE Portal approval can vary, but on average it is approximately two weeks.

ACE's replacement of AMS in Release 6. One questioner states that in Release 6, ACE replaces the Automated Manifest System (AMS), and asks if this will require new programming development for cargo manifest submissions by carriers and if so, are the data coding maps available yet.

CBP responds that data maps are not yet available, but will be provided well in advance of any implementation. CBP states that it is its goal to minimize the impact of these changes on the trade, and at this time, CBP envisions little or no change for importing carriers. CBP states that its current intention is to allow carriers to continue using the data feeds they currently use in AMS to send information to CBP, noting that it is the storage and use of the data within CBP that will change.

FWS is a full ACE participant. A questioner asked CBP to comment on the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pull out from ABI and if this means that it will not participate in ACE. CBP responds that FWS is a full participant in ACE.

Payment of taxes on spirits and wines through ACE. In response to a question on whether federal excise tax calculations and payment status will be available through ACE for importers of distilled spirits and wines and if so, will it be lumped into "duties and fees," CBP states that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has expressed an interest in the ITDS effort and the requirements for collecting such taxes are under development. CBP notes that as more details become available, they will be shared with the trade community.

Difference between ACE and ITDS. In response to a question on what the difference is between ACE and ITDS and whether they are the same system, CBP states that ITDS is no longer a separate system, but a process whereby participating government agencies (PGAs) are cooperating to create a single window in ACE for the receipt of import/export information.

According to CBP, ITDS focuses on the necessary aspects of building ACE that relate to trade data essential for the PGAs, and how that data gets from ACE to and/or from the PGAs.

Harmonizing data requirements under ITDS initiative. A questioner asked when CBP anticipates harmonizing the data requirements under the ITDS initiative, and who will be the final approving authority.

CBP responds that data harmonization is proceeding. The ITDS Board of Directors is continually refining data requirements for all PGAs, and the Standard Data Set (SDS) is currently being distributed to all the PGAs who submitted data lists to ensure that their understanding of the data fields is consistent. CBP states that the SDS will be mapped to the Logical Data Model (Enterprise level) and the World Customs Organization (WCO) data set.

(See ITT's Online Archives or 06/15/05 news, 05061515, for BP summary of CBP's update on ITDS.)

Linking trade documentation from the exporting side (outside US) to ACE. In response to a question on how much of the trade documentation under ACE takes cognizance of the link from the exporting side where the component is essentially outside the U.S., how much harmonization is envisaged, etc., CBP responds that it is actively engaged with the WCO to ensure that international data models are developed.

ITDS participation for national security reasons. A questioner asked, if ITDS is necessary as a data security system for the government through ACE, why hasn't CBP moved to make ITDS participation mandatory for national security reasons.

CBP responds that not all government agencies use trade data for security purposes, as some have a statistical mandate that is separate from the issues of security. While it is a desired outcome of ACE/ITDS that all government agencies that need trade data will receive it through ACE/ITDS, CBP does not have the legal authority to mandate participation. CBP states that it continues to meet with participating PGAs to ensure that the goals of the ITDS effort are fully understood.

CBP Answers to Question Cards Submitted at the Trade Symposium 2004 available at http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/import/communications_to_industry/trade_2004/trade_answers.ctt/trade_answers.doc