NCBFAA Urges 'Informed Compliance' Policy for Burdensome Holds on In-Bond Shipments

"Until CBP actively pushes out real-time hold notifications eliminating CBP’s perceived need to query every in-bond movement, CBP should only advise customs brokers and other filers when they have proceeded to file subsequent in-bonds via alerts amounting to no more than informed, not enforced, compliance," the NCBFAA said in the Jan. 6 letter signed by its President Jose Gonzalez and addressed to Brad Slutsky, director of the cargo security and controls division for CBP's Office of Field Operations.

This suggested action could address the potential heavy workload under the current process, which is for customs brokers to manually review the ACE system for holds on a per transaction basis.

According to the NCBFAA, CBP, in particular on the Southwest border in ports such as Laredo, expects "the subsequent filer to manually review the ACE system for prior holds by searching in modules apart from where the in-bond is created." In some cases, CBP has said they expected an "hourly query during the life of the shipment to prevent goods from exporting without exam," the NCBFAA said. "At the very least CBP expects the trade to proactively query each master bill of lading multiple times. This simply is not realistic. This is inefficient and overly burdensome for the trade, with most queries resulting in no hold whatsoever," the NCBFAA said.

CBP also should develop a national policy enabling the uniform movement and transfer of cargo throughout all ports of entry, automating the processing of permits to transfer (PTT) among all ports to facilitate a more efficient and streamlined flow of cargo, the trade group said.

This process and others have "grown even more critical due to the proliferation of e-commerce, particularly de minimis trade, especially as much of that volume will be likely to move to 01 and 11 type entries due to CBP’s enforcement of the $800 threshold or the prohibition of de minimis for merchandise subject to section 301 and other trade remedy tariffs. Not providing the opportunity for 'PTTs' simply will lead to unprecedented delays and barriers at the ports of entry," the NCBFAA said.

Another suggestion that the NCBFAA offered is for CBP to "recognize the transfer of liability for in-bonds from the carrier/bond hold to the container station once receipted and turned over to the facility operator." Taking such an action could clarify whether the delivery and receipt of bonded cargo is covered by an in-bond entry or constitutes a formal receipt transferring liability from the carrier to the container freight station operator.

The NCBFAA's final suggestion is for CBP to require all land carriers to possess bonds as a way to bolster CBP's enforcement capabilities and hedge against gaps in security.

Land carriers currently file manifests without a bond, thus avoiding vetting by CBP and other parties. But requiring bonds from land carriers could raise the level of compliance and accountability, the NCBFAA said.

"On the land border, manifest claims are brought against the importer or broker because CBP does not even have a bond to use to go against the manifest filer. And all in-bond claims are brought against the other party whose bond obligates the movement," the NCBFAA said. "We beseech CBP to require land carriers filing manifests and participating in, or at least facilitating, such bonded movements to obtain surety bonds."