CBP’s April 2022 customs broker license exam had a 39.6% pass rate, which is “relatively high compared to past examinations,” according to a document posted by CBP for the June 29 Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee meeting. Despite having offered the exam remotely for its April and October 2021 exams, the April 2022 exam was only offered at on-site testing centers, the document said. CBP is “committed to bringing back the remote exam option,” and is currently looking at lessons from its two previous exams for future implementation, Brandon Lord, CBP deputy executive director-trade policy & programs, said at the meeting.
The Treasury Department published its fall 2022 regulatory agenda for CBP. The only new mention of any regulations is a return to the agenda for a final rule that would "create a procedure for the disclosure of information otherwise protected by the Trade Secrets Act to a trademark owner when merchandise bearing suspected counterfeit trademarks has been voluntarily abandoned." CBP issued the underlying proposal in 2019 (see 1908260040), and the final rule had been on Treasury's regulatory agenda for 2020 and spring of 2021 before moving to the long-term actions category in the most recent agenda.
DHS published its fall 2022 regulatory agenda for CBP. There were no new trade-related rulemakings included, though upcoming regulations on continuing education requirements for customs brokers is now listed at the final rule stage.
CBP provided more details on the transition to national permits once its final rule amending its Part 111 customs broker regulations takes effect, in a fact sheet released June 23. The fact sheet, which details the Part 111 changes proposed in June 2020 (see 2006040037), says that about 400 brokers currently are still operating without a national permit, despite the likely elimination of district permits in the upcoming final rule. CBP will “transition this pool of brokers to a national permit” between publication of the final rule and its effective date, with district permits remaining active until the final rule takes effect and ACE national permit programming is in place, the fact sheet said.
A Federal Maritime Commission proposal that would require container documentation to include the names of all non-vessel operating common carriers in a shipping transaction would create too large of a burden on industry, two logistics companies said in comments this month. One company said it wouldn’t be able to comply with the change, forcing it to regularly violate the regulation.
CBP posted multiple documents ahead of the June 29 Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) meeting:
CBP reasonably denied customs broker test taker Shuzhen Zhong credit for two questions on the customs broker license exam, the U.S. argued in a June 17 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. In the brief, DOJ discussed the two questions at issue, defending CBP's rulings on the classification of glazed ceramic mosaic cubes and how to obtain relief from CBP's detention of a shipment of 1,000 handbags bearing a mark that copies but is not identical to a registered and recorded mark (Shuzhen Zhong v. United States, CIT #22-00041).
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit held in a June 16 opinion that window covering manufacturer Springs Window Fashions did not illegally fire customs broker Jennifer Lam-Quang-Vinh over her position that the company had to pay Section 301 China tariffs. Judges Diane Sykes, Michael Brennan and Michael Scudder said that the record evidence does not support Lam's position that she was fired in retaliation (Jennifer Lam-Quang-Vinh v. Springs Window Fashions, 7th Cir. #21-2665).
A Federal Maritime Commission proposal that would require container documentation to include the names of all non-vessel operating common carriers in a shipping transaction would create too large of a burden on industry, two logistics companies said in comments this month. One company said it wouldn’t be able to comply with the change, forcing it to regularly violate the regulation.