Customs Legislation Would Add 'Heavy-Handed' Broker Requirements, Says NCBFAA

Customs reauthorization legislation now being considered in Congress includes provisions with "little regard to the practical effectiveness of these measures or their impact on trade flows," the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America told the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees in a June 18 letter (here). "As conference discussions begin on H.R. 644, NCBFAA urges you to revisit these critical issues and address the need for balance between facilitation and enforcement so that this is a bill we can all stand behind," said the association. It's still unclear when conference negotiations to resolve differences between the House and Senate customs bills will begin (see 1506220012).

Specifically, the NCBFAA is worried about language adding new requirements for customs brokers to collect and verify information on the identity of importers," it said. While the bill doesn't define the records to be collected, there's an "inappropriate" $10,000 penalty for each violation as well as a suspended or revoked broker license, it said. "We disagree with the heavy-handed approach taken by the House bill, which moves far away from the collaborative spirit that has proven so effective in leveraging the role of the customs broker," said the group.

The legislation would also require nonresident importers to designate a registered agent to post a bond, said the NCBFAA. Such an agent "would be undertaking a significant, unlimited and unknown risk," the group said. It remains unclear exactly who would be the designated agent, it said. "We cannot be the financial guarantors to the U.S. government for the hundreds of thousands of entries we process. No customs broker will assume that risk." The committees didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Congress should also correct the statutory language on liquidations, said the trade association. "Language is needed to ensure that the triggering event that starts the time period for administrative review of liquidation by CBP is the date of liquidation, rather than the date the notice of liquidation is issued," it said. "CBP has used this technical oversight to upset deemed liquidations. This frustrates the statutory scheme for ensuring the finality of liquidations." The controversial liquidation language is the subject of recent administrative rulings (see 14080712) and litigation (see 14092328). The NCBFAA said it supports the updates to the drawback process included in the bill (see 1506020019), though there are "several small but important language fixes that are still needed."