Provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that may force the U.S. to make major changes to how it assesses the merchandise processing fee (MPF) is getting attention on Capitol Hill, a Congressional staffer said. Article 2.15 of the recently agreed text, which still requires approval from Congress, provides that "no party shall levy fees and charges on or in connection with importation or exportation on an ad valorem basis." MPF, which is currently charged at an ad valorem rate of 0.3464% on formal entries, with per entry minimums and maximums, would have to be converted into a flat fee in order to comply, said one staffer.
Drawback
A duty drawback is a refund by CBP of the duties, taxes, or fees paid on imported goods, which were imposed upon importation. More broadly, a drawback also includes the refund or remission of other excise taxes pursuant to other provisions of law. CBP's duty drawback scheme under the Customs Act of 1962 allows exporters to receive a refund on customs duties they paid on imported products that are then used or incorporated into other products for export or remain unused until importation.
Lawmakers finished up work on a conference version of long-debated customs reauthorization legislation that combines the underlying concepts of the Senate- and House-proposed customs bills, said Conference Committee members on Dec. 9 (here). Notably, the compromise legislation (here) would impose the ENFORCE Act's firm deadlines on CBP to investigate claims of antidumping and countervailing duty evasion, and would require new regulations on customs broker identification of importers, under threat of penalty. A new provision in the legislation -- absent from either chamber's original bill -- would hold CBP to stricter deadlines for reliquidating entries. The bill could go to a vote on the House floor as early as Dec. 11, a congressional staffer said. The lawmakers also released a summary (here) and joint explanatory statement (here) on the bill's provisions.
CBP is requesting comments by Feb. 1 on an existing information collection for protests. CBP proposes (here) to extend the expiration date of this information collection without a change to the burden hours or information collected.
The Treasury Department published its fall 2015 regulatory agenda for CBP (here), which lists no new trade-related rulemakings. The agenda lists Treasury's CBP rulemakings that are pending at the proposed, interim final, final, and completed stages, as well as rulemakings that are long-term actions. The agenda lists the regulation title; past regulation(s), if any; the timeframe for the next regulatory action(s), if any; a brief description of the regulation; and a contact party name and telephone number. The Department of Homeland Security also issued its spring 2015 regulatory agenda for CBP (see 1511200014).
CBP headquarters processed customs ruling requests related to tariff classification and marking issues within about 265 days, the lengthiest average processing time among ruling categories, according to CBP ruling statistics for fiscal year 2015. Headquarters processing times vary "based on a number of factors including the nature of the ruling or decision, when complete information is presented, whether other rulings have to be modified or revoked, and the presence of any pending court cases," said a CBP spokeswoman who provided the statistics.
CBP is requesting comments by Jan. 4 on an existing information collection for declaration for free entry of returned American products. CBP proposes (here) to extend the expiration date of this information collection without a change to the burden hours or information collected.
Members of the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America (NCBFAA) were meeting with lawmakers on Capitol Hill Sept. 29 to request that several specific provisions make it into a final customs reauthorization bill. The meetings were part of the NCBFAA's Government Affairs Conference. The NCBFAA hopes to see House-proposed antidumping and countervailing duty enforcement language and streamlined drawback provisions in the final bill, according to a paper distributed by the NCBFAA to its members going to the Hill. Congress is still in the process of putting together a Customs Reauthorization conference to resolve differences between customs reauthorization legislation passed by each chamber (see 1507070066).
CBP’s recent delay of some mandatory use dates for the Automated Commercial Environment elicited a sigh of relief from the trade community, but much work remains to ensure a smooth transition, said customs brokers and software developers in recent interviews. The new staged approach, with deadlines in February and July 2016, gives the trade the time it needs to successfully migrate to ACE. However, familiar problems with quota-related entry types and still-unreleased software requirements by CBP and other agencies will remain hurdles to be overcome as ACE implementation continues over the coming year.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Aug. 3-7 in case they were missed.
CBP will no longer require an original signature or certified export invoice as proof for drawback claims, the agency said in a notice (here). The agency is making the change in consideration that ink signatures for original documentation or certified copies are sometimes tough to acquire, it said. The change becomes effective on Aug. 7.