CBP Updates FTA Side-by-Side Comparison to Reflect New Post-Import Claims Policy
CBP posted a document to its website that provides side-by-side comparisons of 20 U.S. free trade agreements and preferential trade programs. This updated version removes references to use of protests under 19 USC 1514 for making preference claims under agreements not covered by statute in 19 USC 1520(d). CBP recently advised the ports that importers will only be able to claim duty preference after importation through post summary corrections or post entry amendments for these FTAs (see 14081320).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The eight FTAs that allow for post-import 1520(d) claims are:
- Central America-Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR)
- Chile (CLFTA)
- Colombia (CTPA)
- Korea (UKFTA)
- NAFTA
- Oman (OMFTA)
- Panama (PATPA)
- Peru (PTPA)
The FTAs for which importers must use either post entry amendments (PEAs) or post summary corrections (PSCs) to make post-import preference claims are:
- Singapore (SGFTA)
- Australia (AUFTA);
- Israel (ILFTA);
- Jordan (JOFTA);
- Bahrain (BHFTA);
- Morocco (MAFTA);
- Central America-Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR);
- Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA);
- Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA);
- Generalized System of Preferences (GSP);
- African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA);
CBP removed most information relating to ATPA and ATPDEA, which are now expired. GSP is also currently expired, though CBP did not remove information on that program. CBP also updated the information on AGOA eligible non-textile goods to say "benefits apply to goods listed in 19 CFR 10.178a(b) (petroleum products, watches, footwear, handbags, luggage, flat goods, work gloves and leather apparel)." A previous version of the document, dated Nov. 19, 2013, is available (here).
Provisions Compared Include Compliance Responsibility, MPF Exemptions, Documentation, Etc.
CBP's Side-by-Side compares about 25 provisions, including primary compliance responsibility, Merchandise Processing Fee (MPF) exemptions, direct shipment, rules of origin, documentation requirements, regional value content, de minimis, inventory management methods, port-importation claims, reconciliation claims, etc.
Examples of CBP's comparisons included the following:
Primary compliance responsibility. Under NAFTA, the exporter is primarily responsible for compliance, while under all the other programs, the importer has primary compliance responsibility.
MPF exemptions. Under GSP, the MPF is only exempt for lesser developed countries; for the other FTAs and preference programs it varies - the MPF can be exempt for originating goods only, exempt for all goods, not exempt at all, etc.
Documentation at time of claim. Most only require a "freeform" supporting statement with 10 elements,to be available upon request by CBP; however NAFTA and CBTPA do require certain documentation to be in the importer's possession at the time the claim is made.
Direct shipment (transshipment) requirements. The preference programs, as well as a portion of the FTAs, do not allow the goods to leave Customs control.
Regional value content calculation. These vary. Some have a 35% requirement for materials and direct costs of processing; some are build-up, build-down, and net cost; NAFTA is transaction value and net cost, etc.
CBP notes the document, dated July 16, is for comparative purposes and isn't legally binding.