CBP in Early Stages of Answering Questions Around Section 321 Clearance

NEW ORLEANS -- Section 321 clearance via the Automated Broker Interface is likely years away, but CBP and the trade community are actively considering a multitude of issues surrounding e-commerce and low value shipments, according to trade industry and government officials during a panel discussion at the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America annual conference on April 5. Though short-term solutions for filers and CBP are likely to come earlier, CBP and the trade community need to avoid having those fixes becoming the norm and put the resources into an automated solution that gives customs brokers the same capabilities as others in the supply chain, said Vince Iacopella of Alba Wheels Up.

CBP recently held a “tabletop exercise” on the topic March 21-22 to consider different scenarios and discuss issues surrounding e-commerce and Section 321 with industry, said Randy Mitchell, director of CBP’s Commercial Operations, Revenue and Entry Division. Major questions that came out of the meeting include who are the responsible parties to e-commerce transactions, what is the role of facilitators like Amazon and other e-commerce platforms, and how does one “resolve” the requirement that only one Section 321 shipment is allowed per day per importer, Mitchell said. CBP is also discussing data collection, and in particular who should file, how they should file and what data the agency will require.

A major question is whether Section 321 filing should be considered customs business and limited to customs brokers. “In my mind it’s customs business,” said Alan Klestadt of Grunfeld Desiderio. “It’s entering a good into the United States,” he said. Though Section 321 has been around for a long time, a key difference in today’s electronic clearance off the manifest is that the CBP officer no longer sees the invoice, said Amy Magnus of A.N. Deringer. On the Northern border, Canadian truckers are often preparing the manifest and making determinations about the shipment’s value, whether it meets the one shipment per day requirement, and whether it is subject to antidumping and countervailing duties or partner government agency (PGA) requirements. “I have concerns about that,” Magnus said.

In the near term CBP will continue to rely on Section 321 filing via manifest, then “look toward” a data set for ABI, Mitchell said. How soon that happens depends on funding and how CBP prioritizes Section 321 among the many other capabilities desired in ACE. Putting Section 321 in ABI won’t need a lot of funding, but will need some, CBP officials have said (see 1704050038).