More Public Input Sought on Updated Customs Framework, as Exporters Call for Post-Departure Filing
CBP would like even more public feedback on how to modernize the agency's processes and regulations, CBP said in a notice. CBP said it is reopening the comment period until April 11 to allow for new input after it held a March 1 meeting to discuss a wide range of ideas for updates. The March 1 meeting included few mentions of exports, but the docket of the original request for comments includes multiple suggestions and criticisms on the export side.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee called for a post-departure filing system for U.S. exports, saying it would spur efficiency and increase profitability, according to comments dated Feb. 4 in response to CBP’s original request for input on creating a new customs framework. COAC said allowing exporters to begin exporting before logistics are finalized would help supply chains run more smoothly and improve customer satisfaction.
The committee suggested creating a pilot program for a post-departure filing system. It said the Post-Departure Filing Working Group, during the 14th COAC meeting, addressed security and compliance issues that may arise from a new system, and “methodology was proposed for CBP to perform security and compliance vetting prior to admitting new candidates to the program.” The committee added that it wants to “encourage this process to be part of the 21st (Century Customs Framework).” A CBP recently said that CBP continues to work toward a post-departure filing program, but that an electronic pre-departure export manifest system remains a necessary first step (see 1903080037).
The National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America addressed what it said is a deficiency in license determinations for parties involved in e-commerce exports, in its comments. The association said freight forwarders are “seeing an increase in sourcing product from” e-commerce platforms, and because “the name of the actual seller is protected in these circumstances, there is no U.S. party truly responsible for the classification and license determination of export products.” The NCBFAA recommended that CBP coordinate with licensing agencies from the departments of State and Commerce “to develop processes by which license determinations for exports are made by actual parties to the transactions.”
NCBFAA also said that CBP should eliminate the paper process by which it issues export penalties, adding that it leads to “inconsistency among the CBP ports.” The association recommended that CBP “automate” the export penalty process so that, among other benefits, notices can be “pushed through the (Automated Commercial Environment)” and the “status can be tracked.” The association said an automated process would solve issues of penalties going to incorrect offices and would make tracking more measurable.
In its comments, Intel asked that CBP prohibit tariffs on the exports or imports of “data flows, digital products, and any electronic data transmission.” Intel said this would help “the free movement” of safe and secure data across borders and would “prevent the deceleration of the digital economy and avoid undermining technological innovation as a critical element of customs modernization efforts globally.”
The Global Coalition for Efficient Logistics also called for more sharing of export and import data across borders, saying in comments that CBP’s overall “data sharing process and framework can be significantly improved.” The coalition suggested “digitally connecting CBP’s ACE with a Digital Economy Platform through point-to-world integration that interconnects USA as the trade hub with all its trading partners.”
Several groups -- including the Express Association of America, COAC, Airlines for America and the Trade Support Network -- suggested improving ACE as it relates to its import and export manifest systems, with EAA saying in comments there is “a lack of integration” between the two systems. The groups called for a “multi-modal manifest” system across imports and exports. Airlines for America said a new system would “provide an unbroken electronic record for every shipment and end-to-end supply-chain visibility -- for both CBP and the trade -- over a shipment’s lifespan.” The Trade Support Network agreed, saying “the promise of ACE as a full multi-modal, end-to-end system has not yet been achieved.”