The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service issued a proposed overhaul of its regulations on forfeiture procedures for plants and plant products under the Endangered Species Act and Lacey Act. The proposed rule would increase the threshold for referral to federal court to $15,000, and would provide for recovery of costs related to APHIS storage of seized merchandise. The rule would also conform the regulations to the requirements of the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000. Comments on the proposed rule are due by July 22.
Fiddling with 2008 amendments to the Lacey Act was characterized as both a danger -- weakening sound environmental policy that has benefited the U.S. hardwood industry -- and a necessity, to reduce the extensive time and financial burdens on business and governments, a group of industry representatives told a House Natural Resources Subcommittee May 16. All of the witnesses at the second half of the hearing said they recognized the crucial mission and honorable intentions of the Lacey amendments (see 13051625 for more on the first half of the hearing, which featured testimony from federal officials). And a majority argued for changes to the act, mostly to protect legitimate wood importers.
More resources are needed for federal agencies to fully implement the 2008 amendments to the Lacey Act, though agencies have already focused on educating importers about the new declaration requirements, crafting exclusions, and an creating online database for importers, representatives from Animal Plant and Health Inspection Services and U.S. Fish and Wildlife told a House Subcommittee May 16.
Trade associations spent relatively little on lobbying in the first quarter of 2013, according to public records. Groups like the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association, the American Association of Exporters and Importers and the U.S. Association of Textiles and Apparels Importers spent less than $5,000 each. Customs reauthorization, the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill and potential trade agreements were some of the biggest issues trade groups lobbied on in Q1, the records show.
Regulatory protections are often outright protectionist policies used to promote domestic industry at the expense of international trade obligations and the U.S. economy, according to a recent policy analysis from the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute.
The 11th Circuit Appeals Court’s Decision in U.S. v. Izurieta is representative of the trend toward criminalization of customs violations, and federal criminal prosecutions in general, said several lawyers. The decision won’t have much effect on the ability of the government to prosecute criminal cases for customs violations, they said. But the government’s case suffered from a flawed indictment, and the Justice Department may be more careful in the future when drafting indictments for customs violations, the lawyers said.
The Food and Drug Administration debarred Adrian Vela from importing food or offering food for importation into the U.S. for five years. Vela was convicted in November 2011 in Southern Florida District Court for conspiracy to falsely label and misbrand food, one count of false labeling of seafood under the Lacey Act, and one count of misbranding food, FDA said. In 2008 and 2009, Vela imported shrimp from Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, but directed a Tampa facility to repack and relabel the shrimp as a product of Panama in order to make it more readily marketable. The relabeled shrimp were then sold to a wholesaler in Keene, N.H., which in turn sold the shrimp to a supermarket chain headquartered in Landover, Md., FDA said (presumably the mid-Atlantic chain Giant Foods).
The Food and Drug Administration is debarring Richard Stowell from importing food or offering food for importation into the U.S. in connection with his conviction for mislabeling shrimp imports. Stowell, who was president of Florida-based seafood wholesaler United Seafood Imports, pleaded guilty in 2011 to one count of conspiracy to falsely label and misbrand seafood, one count of false labeling of seafood under the Lacey Act, and one count of misbranding food.
Trade associations focused on customs and other importer issues spent relatively little in Q4 of 2012, according to public lobbying records. Several groups that are heavily involved in policy-making for customs issues don't spend nearly as much as some of the major companies that are involved in the issues, the records show. For instance, the American Association for Exporters and Importers (AAEI) and the U.S. Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel (USA-ITA) combined spent less than $10,000 for lobbying in Q4, the records show. Lobbying toward improved enforcement for antidumping/countervailing duties (AD/CVD) was among the issues that gained in attention, the filings show.
CBP posted documents on changes to the Customs and Trade Interface Requirements (CATAIR) Appendix T, which provides codes and qualifiers for the PGA Message Set. Changes include the removal of codes for the Fish and Wildlife Service and changes to codes for the Food Safety and Inspection Service. CBP also posted a list of changes to the IG PGA Message Set, including the removal of much Lacey Act-specific language, to make the text more generic.