COAC Survey Finds Trade Seeing Few Financial Benefits from ACE
The Automation Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on Commercial Operations of Customs and Border Protection (COAC) has issued the results of its survey of trade community views of the financial benefits of the current release and functionality of the Automated Commercial Environment.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The Automation Subcommittee found that its survey indicates that more outreach, similar to the outreach for the Importer Security Filing (ISF, 10+2), may be needed to communicate the benefits of ACE.
The anonymous survey was open from March 11 -- March 31, 2010. The number of trade professionals that completed the survey was 390, with the top three groups being importers (44%), truck carriers (22%), and brokers/forwarders (19%).
(Links to the online survey were disseminated via trade associations and other trade groups. The target audience was importers, brokers/forwarders, FTZ/bonded cargo facilities, sureties, air carriers, truck carriers, ocean/NVOCC carriers, and rail carriers.)
Survey results for brokers, importers, truck carriers, and sureties include the following:
73 Brokers
About 73 brokers participated in the survey, with 53 of them identifying themselves as medium to small-sized companies. Of those surveyed, 54 stated they participated in ACE, but had not yet realized any cost savings. 66 had not begun to implement ACE in their entry process, and 43 had stated that they do not know when nor have plans to implement ACE in their import design. Only 27 of those surveyed thought that ebonds would result in a positive financial impact.
171 Importers
About 171 importers participated in the survey, representing large, medium, and small companies. The majority of importers stated that they do not use ACE for entry and do not know when they will begin to do so. The majority also do not think that ACE will generate savings. COAC noted that there might be a lack of understanding on this issue, as over 120 did not report any savings using the periodic monthly statement (PMS).
86 Truck Carriers
About 86 truck carriers participated in the survey; 47 were truckload carriers, and 21 were less-than-truckload. Contrary to the other groups, 53 truck carriers (more than a majority) said ACE improved their companies work processes; however only 18 said that ACE had reduced their company’s cost of doing business. In addition, 69 did not find that ACE resulted in a reduction or reallocation of staff. Only 22 indicated that they used the Reports Portal.
8 Sureties, eBond
Only a handful of surety companies or agents write the majority of customs bonds on file with CBP, therefore only 8 companies participated in the survey. Six currently participate in the ACE surety portal; however none believe it has reduced the cost of doing business. Seven believed that eBonds would provide cost and process time savings, and supported a fully functioning eBond system.
Of the 73 brokers participating in the survey, 66 supported eBond. Of the 171 importers participating in the survey, 63 supported eBonds. 75 importers were not sure they supported eBonds, while 32 opposed eBonds.
(See report for survey results from FTZ/bonded warehouse facilities (11), NVOCCs (9) ocean carriers (21), air carriers, and rail carriers.)
Survey Results Indicate “Lack of Understanding” of Benefits of ACE
The Automation Subcommittee states that the results of this survey indicate that there may be a disconnect or lack of communication to the trade groups around the country about ACE and the benefits this new system provides. It is critical that CBP reach beyond just the immediate circle of Trade Associations with their messages of ACE and begin to explore new methods of digital communications to keep the trade members informed and up to date with ACE development.
One of the important messages that CBP needs to understand is that they might have the right technology for the right processes already in place or planned, yet each sector has responded that they clearly are not sure of the impact (dollars and efficiencies) that ACE will bring to them.
How individual companies will handle their ACE implementation still remains unclear at this time.
Going forward, the Subcommittee would like to recommend that an additional review of ACE development be conducted over the next several years, as this survey was only meant to capture the current time period. It might be beneficial for CBP to consider additional outreach not unlike ISF recently provided. Like other fundamentals in today’s business world, it will take expertise to manage the weight of ever-expanding demands of trade and security requirements, balanced with the need to meet the most efficient productive system applications to keep moving forward.
(See ITT”s Online Archives or 03/05/10 news, 10030505, for BP summary of CBP’s FY 2011 budget request which indicates that ACE will be moving into an operation and maintenance steady state.
See ITT’s Online Archives or 05/21/10 news, 10052180, for BP summary of CBP Commissioner’s testimony on trade facilitation, ACE, etc.)
Survey results (dated May 2010), available by emailing documents@brokerpower.com