U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recently announced its plan to conduct a National Customs Automation Program (NCAP) test concerning Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) entry capability. According to CBP’s General Notice, the new trial will test entry filing via a process known as Simplified Entry, which will be filed in lieu of filing a Form 3461 or its electronic equivalent.
Simplified Entry is intended to simplify the entry process by allowing participants to submit twelve (12) required and three (3) optional data elements to CBP at any time before the imported goods arrive, as follows:
Required Data Elements
1. Importer of Record
2. Buyer name and address
3. Buyer Employer Identification Number (consignee number)
4. Seller name and address
5. Manufacturer/supplier name and address
6. HTS 10-digit number
7. Country of origin
8. Bill of lading/house air waybill number
9. Bill of lading issuer code
10. Entry number
11. Entry type
12. Estimated shipment value
Optional Data Elements
1. Ship to party name and address
2. Consolidator name and address
3. Container stuffing location
The Simplified Entry may not be filed in lieu of an entry summary, which still must be made in ACE. CBP has limited this initial phase to entries that are not under the admissibility jurisdiction of Other Government Agencies (OGAs). It also will limit to air shipments.
CBP has chosen the following nine brokers to participate in the pilot program, which is expected to begin at the end of 2011/beginning of 2012:
1. A.N. Deringer Inc.
2. Expeditors
3. FedEx Trade Networks
4. FH Kaysing
5. Janel Group of New York
6. Kuehne + Nagel Inc.
7. Livingston International
8. Page & Jones Inc.
9. UPS.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Customs Announces ACE Simplified Entry Pilot Program
Posted by
BoskageStaff
at
10:34 AM
0
comments
Follow us on Twitter!
Links to this post
Labels:
ACE,
Brokers,
CBP,
Form 3461,
NCAP,
OGA,
Simplified Entry
Monday, October 17, 2011
CBP Posts Answer Key to October 2011 Broker Exam
U.S. Customs and Border Protection posted the answer key to the October 2011 customs broker exam. We will review and determine whether any questions are protestable. Exam key can be found at http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/trade_programs/broker/broker_exam/exam_and_key_downloads/oct_11_answer_key.ctt/oct_11_answer_key.pdf
Posted by
BoskageStaff
at
4:00 PM
18
comments
Follow us on Twitter!
Links to this post
Labels:
CBP Customs Broker Exam
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
ABI Notice regarding the Classification of Sets
On Oct. 6, 2011, U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a notice through the Automated Broker Interface regarding sets classified in accordance with GRI 3(b) or 3(c). Specifically, CBP reminded ABI users to report in column 30 the HTSUS number of the part of the set that provides the duty rate for the set when the set is classified pursuant to GRI 3(b) or 3(c). Users should precede this HTSUS number with a SPI of “X.”
However, the set classification does not stop there. Each article included in the set needs to be classified separately and reported on a separate line, as though it was not part of a set. Those articles of the set that do not provide the duty rate for the set as a whole should be preceded with a SPI of “V.” Brokers will also need to report the quantity and value attributed to each article with the “V” SPI.
Here is where you can find this message on the Cargo Systems Messaging Service on CBP’s website: http://apps.cbp.gov/csms/viewmssg.asp?Recid=18488&page=1&srch_argv=&srchtype=&btype=abi&sortby=&sby=
However, the set classification does not stop there. Each article included in the set needs to be classified separately and reported on a separate line, as though it was not part of a set. Those articles of the set that do not provide the duty rate for the set as a whole should be preceded with a SPI of “V.” Brokers will also need to report the quantity and value attributed to each article with the “V” SPI.
Here is where you can find this message on the Cargo Systems Messaging Service on CBP’s website: http://apps.cbp.gov/csms/viewmssg.asp?Recid=18488&page=1&srch_argv=&srchtype=&btype=abi&sortby=&sby=
Posted by
BoskageStaff
at
11:52 AM
0
comments
Follow us on Twitter!
Links to this post
Labels:
ABI,
GRI 3(b),
GRI 3(c),
HTSUS,
sets
Monday, October 10, 2011
More “Free” Trade Anyone?
Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee approved the bills sponsored by Representative Eric Cantor and a co-sponsor that is the first step in implementing the U.S. Free Trade Agreements with South Korea, Panama and Colombia. The entire House of Representatives and the Senate are expected to vote on the bills the week of October 10.
Congressional action on these agreements has been a long time coming. The parties entered into the U.S.- Korea Free Trade Agreement on June 30, 2007 The U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement was entered into on November 22, 2006, as amended by both governments on June 28, 2007 (Colombia TPA). The parties entered into the U.S.- Panama Trade Promotion Act on June 28, 2007 (Panama TPA).
Both the House and the Senate are expected to pass the three bills, referred to as the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, the United States- Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act and the United States- Panama Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act. Although President Obama is expected to sign the bills into law rather quickly, each Agreement will not take effect until the United States is satisfied that each country will be in compliance with the terms of the Agreements, respectively. For example, there is some concern that labor rights issues could delay the effect date of the Colombia Agreement. It is unlikely that any terms of the agreements will change between now and the enactment date. However, it is doubtful that the Korea FTA, Colombia TPA or the Panama TPA will take effect before the beginning of 2012. It could take up to several months for the President to certify that the countries are in compliance.
Korea FTA H.R. 3080
Colombia TPA H.R. 3078
Panama TPA H.R. 3079
Congressional action on these agreements has been a long time coming. The parties entered into the U.S.- Korea Free Trade Agreement on June 30, 2007 The U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement was entered into on November 22, 2006, as amended by both governments on June 28, 2007 (Colombia TPA). The parties entered into the U.S.- Panama Trade Promotion Act on June 28, 2007 (Panama TPA).
Both the House and the Senate are expected to pass the three bills, referred to as the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, the United States- Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act and the United States- Panama Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act. Although President Obama is expected to sign the bills into law rather quickly, each Agreement will not take effect until the United States is satisfied that each country will be in compliance with the terms of the Agreements, respectively. For example, there is some concern that labor rights issues could delay the effect date of the Colombia Agreement. It is unlikely that any terms of the agreements will change between now and the enactment date. However, it is doubtful that the Korea FTA, Colombia TPA or the Panama TPA will take effect before the beginning of 2012. It could take up to several months for the President to certify that the countries are in compliance.
Korea FTA H.R. 3080
Colombia TPA H.R. 3078
Panama TPA H.R. 3079
Friday, October 7, 2011
October 2011 Broker Exam - Preliminary Answers
Determining potential answers for the broker's exam questions after the
test is different in a few key ways from taking the test, but none is
more key than the fact that we have more than four hours. That means
that we can take the time to research as much as we need to in order to
get the most accurate (though still unofficial) document possible to all
of you.
Click here to get our preliminary unofficial exam answers as a free download from our online checkout system.
As always, remember that these answers represent only our opinion. The official answers will come from Customs and Border Protection in a few weeks and will be posted on their site. In other words, we probably answered the majority of the questions correctly, but these answers do not guarantee whether or not you've passed; it merely is presented as a helpful tool for broker students who are (quite understandably) eager to have any idea of where they stand.
If you would like to share your answers, explanations and comments, we invite you to post them as comments to this blog; however, we ask that comments be professional and to the point. We cannot respond to all of the comments, but this forum will provide you an opportunity to converse with each other.
Happy browsing!
Click here to get our preliminary unofficial exam answers as a free download from our online checkout system.
As always, remember that these answers represent only our opinion. The official answers will come from Customs and Border Protection in a few weeks and will be posted on their site. In other words, we probably answered the majority of the questions correctly, but these answers do not guarantee whether or not you've passed; it merely is presented as a helpful tool for broker students who are (quite understandably) eager to have any idea of where they stand.
If you would like to share your answers, explanations and comments, we invite you to post them as comments to this blog; however, we ask that comments be professional and to the point. We cannot respond to all of the comments, but this forum will provide you an opportunity to converse with each other.
Happy browsing!
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Announcement: October 2011 CBP Broker Exam Answers
One common question we're receiving is "Are you/when are you going to post answers to the October Exam?"
Have no fear! We have begun researching and answering questions, and are planning on releasing a preliminary set of answers on Friday.
Have no fear! We have begun researching and answering questions, and are planning on releasing a preliminary set of answers on Friday.
Posted by
Boskage Staff
at
7:16 PM
0
comments
Follow us on Twitter!
Links to this post
Labels:
CBE Answers,
October 2011 Customs Broker Exam
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Proposed Bill Provides Customs Brokers with New Obligation
Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri introduced a bill entitled the “Fighting for American Industry’s Right to Enforcement Against Duty Evasion Act,” otherwise known as the “FAIR Enforcement Against Duty Evasion Act of 2011,” with the intention of ending duty evasion by foreign companies. The bill addresses two issues: (1) the lack of information collected on importers making it difficult for officials to identify those companies evading antidumping duty and (2) the ability of foreign companies who have not previously shipped to the U.S. to post a bond to cover estimated duties rather than pay cash.
Broker Obligation
The bill obligates customs brokers to use a good faith effort to obtain the identity of the customer importing into the U.S. and “maintain[ ] records of the information used to substantiate a person’s identify, including name, address, and other identifying information.” SAFE Enforcement Against Duty Evasion Act of 2011, sec. 3(a)(i)(2)(C), amending section 641(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930. With this additional burden on brokers comes new significant penalty exposure. A broker who fails to obtain the required identifying information is potentially liable for a penalty of up to $10,000 for each violation and a possible revocation or suspension of the broker’s license. http://mccaskill.senate.gov/files/documents/pdf/McCaskill_FAIR_Enforcement_Against%20Duty_Evasion_Act.pdf
Senator McCaskill indicated in her press release that collection of the identifying data would assist law enforcement during an investigation by “increasing the likelihood the lawbreakers can be identified and brought to justice.” http://mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1337. The bill also creates what she referred to as a “safe harbor” to prevent brokers from penalties when they made reasonable efforts to comply with the new law. To this end, within 60 days from the date the bill is enacted, CBP must publish a Federal Register notice, in which it solicits proposals for examples of conduct that should not trigger the penalty provision. After the public comment period closes, CBP will issue its final regulation specifying such practices.
In addition, the bill requires CBP and other regulators to submit a report to Congress, (1) recommending the best way to require foreign nations to provide brokers with the required identifying information and (2) establishing a system for brokers to review identifying information maintained by the government.
New Shippers
In addition to the added broker obligations, the bill also removes the “bonding-in-lieu” provision for new shippers to the U.S. Instead, the bill requires shippers to pay in cash up front, thereby eliminating the possibility of posting a bond for estimated duties. This requirement is intended to prevent foreign companies from vanishing before making a duty payment in full. Under the bill, estimated duties are paid on imported goods at the beginning of the import process, rather than after the goods are in the U.S.
Broker Obligation
The bill obligates customs brokers to use a good faith effort to obtain the identity of the customer importing into the U.S. and “maintain[ ] records of the information used to substantiate a person’s identify, including name, address, and other identifying information.” SAFE Enforcement Against Duty Evasion Act of 2011, sec. 3(a)(i)(2)(C), amending section 641(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930. With this additional burden on brokers comes new significant penalty exposure. A broker who fails to obtain the required identifying information is potentially liable for a penalty of up to $10,000 for each violation and a possible revocation or suspension of the broker’s license. http://mccaskill.senate.gov/files/documents/pdf/McCaskill_FAIR_Enforcement_Against%20Duty_Evasion_Act.pdf
Senator McCaskill indicated in her press release that collection of the identifying data would assist law enforcement during an investigation by “increasing the likelihood the lawbreakers can be identified and brought to justice.” http://mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1337. The bill also creates what she referred to as a “safe harbor” to prevent brokers from penalties when they made reasonable efforts to comply with the new law. To this end, within 60 days from the date the bill is enacted, CBP must publish a Federal Register notice, in which it solicits proposals for examples of conduct that should not trigger the penalty provision. After the public comment period closes, CBP will issue its final regulation specifying such practices.
In addition, the bill requires CBP and other regulators to submit a report to Congress, (1) recommending the best way to require foreign nations to provide brokers with the required identifying information and (2) establishing a system for brokers to review identifying information maintained by the government.
New Shippers
In addition to the added broker obligations, the bill also removes the “bonding-in-lieu” provision for new shippers to the U.S. Instead, the bill requires shippers to pay in cash up front, thereby eliminating the possibility of posting a bond for estimated duties. This requirement is intended to prevent foreign companies from vanishing before making a duty payment in full. Under the bill, estimated duties are paid on imported goods at the beginning of the import process, rather than after the goods are in the U.S.
Posted by
BoskageStaff
at
2:17 PM
1 comments
Follow us on Twitter!
Links to this post
Labels:
Brokers,
CBP,
FAIR Enforcement Against Duty Evasion Act,
McCaskill,
new shipper
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)