Customs Committee Agenda for 4/5/07 Meeting - ncbfaa
Customs Committee Agenda for 4/5/07 Meeting - ncbfaa
Customs Committee Agenda for 4/5/07 Meeting - ncbfaa
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>07</strong>0222 v.1.0<br />
08:30 – Call to order<br />
08:30 – Opening Remarks and Introductions<br />
Welcoming remarks, housekeeping notes and introductions will be made. Note taking<br />
responsibilities will be assigned. A sign-in sheet will be circulated.<br />
08:40 – The Security Filing<br />
At its February 2 nd meeting with Debbie Spero, Jayson Ahern, Michael Mullen, and Sam<br />
Banks, Debbie Spero agreed to provide NCBFAA with the legal basis <strong>for</strong> CBP’s determination<br />
that activities necessary <strong>for</strong> the security filing do not involve conducting customs business. The<br />
<strong>Customs</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> is anxious to receive this in<strong>for</strong>mation. NCBFAA has carefully studied this<br />
issue, and as reflected in its comments (see Attachment “A”) on the strawman proposal and<br />
NPRM recommendations, has come to the conclusion that the activities integral to the<br />
construction and transmittal of the security filing inescapably involve the filer in conducting<br />
customs business. The <strong>Customs</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> believes it is in the interests of both CBP and<br />
NCBFAA to have an open discussion on this issue and is requesting the participation in this<br />
discussion of the OR&R attorney principally responsible <strong>for</strong> CBP’s determination in this matter.<br />
Of equal importance to the <strong>Customs</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> in this matter are the practical realities of<br />
organizing such a dramatic change of international business practice, and the daunting challenge<br />
of doing so with the least disruption possible of the supply chain and competitive environment.<br />
The <strong>Customs</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> would like to devote the balance of time allotted to this agenda item to<br />
explore pitfalls and possible solutions with regard to the data elements, filer qualification,<br />
transmission channels, timing issues, less-than-container-load shipments, corrections,<br />
confidentiality, and consequences.<br />
10:10 – Break<br />
10:30 – 1641 Penalties<br />
Prior to enactment of legislation authorizing <strong>Customs</strong> to en<strong>for</strong>ce monetary penalties against<br />
customs brokers, codified in 19 U.S.C. 1641(d), <strong>Customs</strong> and representatives of NCBFAA<br />
collaborated to construct a provision that would provide <strong>Customs</strong> with a necessary adjunct to<br />
their en<strong>for</strong>cement powers. In reaching agreement on the new monetary penalty provision<br />
NCBFAA’s principal concern was that the small family businesses that comprised the majority<br />
of its members not face financial ruin by reason of a penalty provision that was intended to be<br />
less momentous than suspension or revocation of the customs broker’s license. There is no<br />
doubt among those who participated in that collaboration that an agreement was reached, and<br />
that the $30,000 limitation was to be the sum total monetary penalty that might be assessed <strong>for</strong><br />
all violations prior to notice of penalty.<br />
The good faith that has been the hallmark of collaborations between <strong>Customs</strong> and the<br />
NCBFAA is a critical element <strong>for</strong> success as we meet the manifold challenges ahead. CBP’s<br />
current prosecution of multiple $30,000 monetary penalties against an NCBFAA member <strong>for</strong><br />
violations all occurring prior to the first notice of penalty has reverberated through our<br />
association. The <strong>Customs</strong> <strong>Committee</strong> would like to discuss this matter as a policy issue.<br />
Members of the NCBFAA Large Broker & Forwarder <strong>Committee</strong> have opened discussions<br />
with Vera Adams on the larger issue of broker compliance and monetary penalties. The theme<br />
of that ef<strong>for</strong>t has been to explore means by which the purpose of penalties, i.e., to bring about<br />
better compliance, might be more effectively achieved, in a more efficient regime. It is<br />
Page 2 of 17