AAEI, NCBFAA Voice Concern Over Proposed New User Fee on Imported Consumer Products
More than 40 industry associations voiced concern with a proposal from the Consumer Product Safety Commission to set a new user fee on imports to cover the costs of expanding its risk-based import surveillance activities, in a letter to the agency and several congressmen dated May 7. Groups including the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America (NCBFAA), American Association of Exporters and Importers (AAEI), and U.S. Chamber of Commerce told CPSC that a new user fee on imports, alongside the proposed expansion of product safety certificate requirements, could become a heavy new burden that restricts trade. They urged CPSC to closely consult with industry to make sure any new requirements are as effective as possible without burdening industry.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
A provision from CPSC’s fiscal year 2015 budget request had said the agency intends to expand its Risk Assessment Methdology (RAM) import surveillance initiative to a full-scale national program in FY 2015 (see 14030519). The agency proposed “that an import surveillance user fee be enacted in FY 2015 with collections beginning by FY 2015 to offset costs of the program.”
The letter didn’t outright oppose any new fees, but it said the fee’s cost could outweigh its utility. “While we support efforts to keep potentially violative products out of the marketplace, we are concerned about the impact this new fee and program expansion would have on commerce and believe that engagement with the regulated community will result in more effective targeting, more efficient regulations and fewer delays for compliant products,” said the letter.
CPSC’s budget request raises a “number of serious questions,” including whether the agency can legally impose the user fees, how big a burden the fees will be on industry, and whether the fees will cause delays at the ports for imported consumer products. Many user fees imposed on industry in the past haven’t been used for their stated purpose, said the trade groups. And previous attempts by other agencies to institute risk-based methodology without consulting the trade “resulted in major delays at the ports,” they said.
Combined with CPSC’s current plans to require Part 1110 product safety certificates as part of the entry process, the user fees could end up being a serious burden on trade, said the letter. “The implementation of a user fee in addition to the pending requirements under the proposed ‘1110 rule’ could seriously impede international commerce and the availability of compliant and safe consumer products,” it said. “Moving forward with a new import user fee, certificate filing mandate or other import entry conditions without a thorough exploration of the supply chain impact of these proposals with industry stakeholders could cause significant problems for both the industry as well as the agency,” said the letter.