[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 146 (Saturday, October 8, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                 U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE MISINTERPRETS LAW

                                 ______


                         HON. E. CLAY SHAW, JR.

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 7, 1994

  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to point out an error that has 
been made by the U.S. Customs Service in regard to its interpretation 
of a law which was passed by this body last year.
  Included in the North American Free-Trade Agreement Implementation 
Act, Public Law 103-182, amended 19 U.S.C. 58c(a)(5), Congress imposed 
increased customs user fees on commercial vessels and commercial 
aircraft to account for lost revenue which resulted from the 
elimination of certain tariffs and duties. I strongly opposed this 
increase last year. Now I understand that the U.S. Customs Service has 
interpreted the changes to this statute in a way that is not consistent 
with the intent of Congress. The Customs Service has used the changes 
made to section 58c(a)(5) as a basis for claiming authority to collect 
multiple fees for the same voyage. Customs is attempting to collect a 
separate tax from passengers who are on voyages which stop at more than 
one U.S. port and sail outside the customs territory of the United 
States between those U.S. ports. It was never the intention of Congress 
for the customs user fee to be imposed more than once per voyage.
  The intent of the language change made last year under NAFTA was to 
apply the custom user fee to passengers on so called ``cruises to 
nowhere.'' These cruises are not traditional voyages with multiport 
itineraries. They simply leave a U.S. port, go outside the customs 
territory of the United States, and then return to the same port with 
no stops at any intervening ports. Again, the purpose of the statutory 
change made last year was to apply the fee to these ``cruises to 
nowhere'' passengers and not to enable the Customs Service to assess 
the fee multiple times during the same cruise voyage.
  Indeed, my colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Ways and 
Means Committee, has indicated that he too is concerned with this 
unfair interpretation. I believe, as he does, that since it was not the 
intent of Congress to impose the fee multiple times, no new law should 
be required. However, if the Customs Service should attempt to collect 
this fee multiple times, I plan to work with Mr. Gibbons to enact 
clarifying legislation during the next session.

                          ____________________