Comment Submitted by Katie Schmidt, University of Washington

Document ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0007
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Customs And Border Protection Bureau
Received Date: December 05 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: December 6 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: October 27 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: December 27 2010, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80baf6ba
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

Based on the comments posted for this proposed rule so far, both brokers and large importers tend to oppose it, brokers because they have worked out a system for making operations efficient already and importers because they do not think it does enough to protect their information. The entity that we have not heard from here is the U.S. Customs Service, which licenses customs brokers to help importers meet federal entry requirements. This rule could have a positive effect for the CBP because it would provide a clear framework for actions that customs brokers are allowed to engage in and those that they are not. This is important because the comment submitted by JAS Forwarding suggests that efficiencies have been achieved as the system now stands in such a way that this rule would require brokers to obtain written permission from clients for the kinds of activities they already perform, adding costs for the broker. However, if client information is already being distributed without written permission, this could pose problems for the CBP as it tries to oversee the customs broker network. This rule would provide a framework for enforcing uniform requirements across the customs broker industry and would shift the burden of responsibility onto customs brokers if a client felt that its information had not been protected. In the case of this rule, the CBP has made a conscious effort to address the interests of both the companies importing goods into the United States and the customs brokers that contract with those companies. It has done so through the requirement of a written release by the companies and the opportunity it gives the customs brokers to find ways to make their operations more efficient upon receipt of this written release. Furthermore, this shifts the burden for ensuring that information is protected and imports clear customs quickly and efficiently to the two parties that profit from importing goods into the U.S. (brokers and importers) while potentia

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 17
Comment Submitted by Joseph A. Murray, Honeywell International Inc.
Public Submission    Posted: 11/12/2010     ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0003

Dec 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment Submitted by Anthony Barone, Pfizer
Public Submission    Posted: 11/15/2010     ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0004

Dec 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment Submitted by Calindy Heather Green
Public Submission    Posted: 11/17/2010     ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0005

Dec 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment Submitted by Quinn David Wright, Allegheny College
Public Submission    Posted: 12/03/2010     ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0006

Dec 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment Submitted by Katie Schmidt, University of Washington
Public Submission    Posted: 12/06/2010     ID: USCBP-2010-0038-0007

Dec 27,2010 11:59 PM ET