NCBFAA Supports Removing Section 301 Goods From de Minimis Eligibility
The National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America, in a conference session preparing its members for a day lobbying on Capitol Hill, said that the NCBFAA is not arguing for or against a de minimis restriction proposal from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. The proposal would require all goods entering in de minimis to be classified with a 10-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule code and would bar apparel, footwear and other "import-sensitive" goods from eligibility.
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.
Ned Steiner, a former Democratic Hill staffer, now senior director, international trade and governmental relations, for Sandler Travis, told an audience Sept. 23 that the NCBFAA has been providing input to House and Senate staffers drafting legislation to restrict de minimis so that the laws still facilitate trade. "We are focused on ensuring that the information being requested is reasonable, and reflects what Congress intends, but that the same dataset for all entry types -- with no waivers -- should be required," he said.
The NCBFAA has been arguing that allowing waivers for express shippers, but requiring other importers to provide HTS codes, is unfair (see 2408090035).
The House bill to restrict de minimis, which passed the Ways and Means Committee, would remove goods subject to Section 301 (and safeguards and Section 232 tariffs) from de minimis eligibility. The administration said it also intends to promulgate a rule to remove goods subject to Section 301 tariffs from de minimis, if Congress doesn't pass a law doing so first (see 2409130004).
Steiner said NCBFAA supports excluding goods with special tariffs from de minimis eligibility.
Both the House bill and the Senate proposal would impose a $5,000 fine for a first violation if an exporter claimed a package was eligible for de minimis, but it was not (see 240802003 and 2404160029).
An audience member asked who was going to be subject to that fine.
Steiner said that was a good question, because it gets at how the law would operate. The buyer of the good might not be aware of what rules apply, he said.
Sandler Travis managing partner Lenny Feldman interjected: "It goes against the people in this room." He said the companies that hire brokers and carriers are outside the U.S., and so the U.S. does not have jurisdiction to levy these fines.
The panelists gave a sense of the challenge of lobbying on these bills. Steiner said that when NCBFAA raises questions about how the changes would work in practice, "Their response is: So you want fentanyl to come across the border? You want goods made with forced Chinese labor?"
He said the group replies, "No, we want this to work," and points out that they are the ones who actually submit the data the bills are talking about.