[House Report 108-598]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Rept. 108-598
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
CUSTOMS BORDER SECURITY AND TRADE AGENCIES AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2004
_______
July 13, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Thomas, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4418]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 4418) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years
2005 and 2006 for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the
Department of Homeland Security, for the Office of the United
States Trade Representative, for the United States
International Trade Commission, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction.....................................................9
A. Purpose and Summary................................. 9
B. Background.......................................... 9
C. Legislative History................................. 12
II. Section by Section Summary......................................12
III. Votes of the Committee..........................................20
A. Motion to Report the Bill........................... 20
B. Votes on Amendments................................. 20
IV. Budget Effects of the Bill......................................21
A. Committee Estimates of Budgetary Effects............ 21
B. Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures............... 21
C. Cost Estimate Prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office............................................. 21
V. Other Matters to be Discussed under the Rules of the House......23
A. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations.... 23
B. Statement of General Performance Goals and
Objectives......................................... 23
C. Constitutional Authority Statement.................. 23
D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates........... 23
VI. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........24
VII. Committee Correspondence........................................38
VIII.View............................................................40
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Customs Border
Security and Trade Agencies Authorization Act of 2004''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION AND BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of appropriations; related provisions
Sec. 101. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 102. Establishment and implementation of cost accounting system;
reports.
Sec. 103. Study and report relating to customs user fees.
Sec. 104. Report relating to One Face at the Border Initiative.
Subtitle B--Technical amendments relating to entry and protest
Sec. 111. Entry of merchandise.
Sec. 112. Limitation on liquidations.
Sec. 113. Protests.
Sec. 114. Review of protests.
Sec. 115. Refunds and errors.
Sec. 116. Definitions and miscellaneous provisions.
Sec. 117. Voluntary reliquidations.
Sec. 118. Effective date.
Subtitle C--Miscellaneous provisions
Sec. 121. Designation of San Antonio International Airport for Customs
processing of certain private aircraft arriving in the United States.
Sec. 122. Authority for the establishment of Integrated Border
Inspection Areas at the United States-Canada border.
Sec. 123. Designation of foreign law enforcement officers.
Sec. 124. Customs services.
Sec. 125. Sense of Congress on interpretation of textile and apparel
provisions.
Sec. 126. Technical amendments.
TITLE II--OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE III--UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Sec. 301. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE I--BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION AND BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations; Related Provisions
SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 301 of the Customs
Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 2075) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), to read as follows:
``(1) For the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2004, and each fiscal
year thereafter, there are authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Homeland Security for the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement only
such sums as may hereafter be authorized by law.'';
(2) by striking paragraph (2);
(3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2); and
(4) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated)--
(A) by inserting ``and the Assistant Secretary for
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
respectively,'' after ``Commissioner of Customs''; and
(B) by striking ``Customs Service'' and inserting
``Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and the
Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement''.
(b) Salaries and Expenses.--Subsection (b) of such section is amended
to read as follows:
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) Bureau of customs and border protection.--
``(A) There are authorized to be appropriated for the
salaries and expenses of the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection not to exceed the following:
``(i) $6,203,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
``(ii) $6,469,729,000 for fiscal year 2006.
``(B)(i) The monies authorized to be appropriated
under subparagraph (A) with respect to customs revenue
functions for any fiscal year, except for such sums as
may be necessary for the salaries and expenses of the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection that are
incurred in connection with the processing of
merchandise that is exempt from the fees imposed under
paragraphs (9) and (10) of section 13031(a) of the
Consolidated OmnibusBudget Reconciliation Act of 1985
(19 U.S.C. 58c(a)), shall be appropriated from the Customs User Fee
Account.
``(ii) In clause (i), the term `customs revenue
function' means the following:
``(I) Assessing and collecting customs duties
(including antidumping and countervailing
duties and duties imposed under safeguard
provisions), excise taxes, fees, and penalties
due on imported merchandise, including
classifying and valuing merchandise for the
purposes of such assessment.
``(II) Processing and denial of entry of
persons, baggage, cargo, and mail, with respect
to the assessment and collection of import
duties.
``(III) Detecting and apprehending persons
engaged in fraudulent practices designed to
circumvent the customs laws of the United
States.
``(IV) Enforcing section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930 and provisions relating to import
quotas and the marking of imported merchandise,
and providing Customs Recordations for
copyrights, patents, and trademarks.
``(V) Collecting accurate import data for
compilation of international trade statistics.
``(VI) Enforcing reciprocal trade agreements.
``(VII) Functions performed by the following
personnel, and associated support staff, of the
United States Customs Service prior to the
establishment of the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection: Import Specialists, Entry
Specialists, Drawback Specialists, National
Import Specialists, Fines and Penalties
Specialists, attorneys of the Office of
Regulations and Rulings, Customs Auditors,
International Trade Specialists, and Financial
System Specialists.
``(VIII) Functions performed by the following
offices, with respect to any function described
in any of subclauses (I) through (VII), and
associated support staff, of the United States
Customs Service prior to the establishment of
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection:
the Office of Information and Technology, the
Office of Laboratory Services, the Office of
the Chief Counsel, the Office of Congressional
Affairs, the Office of International Affairs,
and the Office of Training and Development.
``(2) Bureau of immigration and customs enforcement.--There
are authorized to be appropriated for the salaries and expenses
of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement not to
exceed the following:
``(A) $4,011,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
``(B) $4,335,891,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.
SEC. 102. ESTABLISHMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEM;
REPORTS.
Section 334 of the Customs and Border Security Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C.
2082 note) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 334. ESTABLISHMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEM;
REPORTS.
``(a) Establishment and Implementation; Customs and Border
Protection.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2005, the
Commissioner of Customs shall, in accordance with the audit of
the Customs Service's fiscal years 2000 and 1999 financial
statements (as contained in the report of the Office of
Inspector General of the Department of the Treasury issued on
February 23, 2001), establish and implement a cost accounting
system--
``(A) for expenses incurred in both commercial and
noncommercial operations of the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection of the Department of Homeland
Security, which system should specifically identify and
distinguish expenses incurred in commercial operations
and expenses incurred in noncommercial operations; and
``(B) for expenses incurred both in administering and
enforcing the customs laws of the United States and the
Federal immigration laws, which system should
specifically identify and distinguish expenses incurred
in administering and enforcing the customs laws of the
United States and the expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the Federal immigration
laws.
``(2) Additional requirement.--The cost accounting system
described in paragraph (1) shall provide for an identification
of expenses based on the type of operation, the port at which
the operation took place, the amount of time spent on the
operation by personnel of the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection, and an identification of expenses based on any
other appropriate classification necessary to provide for an
accurate and complete accounting of expenses.
``(b) Establishment and Implementation; Immigration and Customs
Enforcement.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2005, the
Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement shall, in accordance with the audit of the Customs
Service's fiscal years 2000 and 1999 financial statements (as
contained in the report of the Office of Inspector General of
the Department of the Treasury issued on February 23, 2001),
establish and implement a cost accounting system--
``(A) for expenses incurred in both commercial and
noncommercial operations of the Bureau of Immigration
and Customs Enforcement of the Department of Homeland
Security, which system should specifically identify and
distinguish expenses incurred in commercial operations
and expenses incurred in noncommercial operations;
``(B) for expenses incurred both in administering and
enforcing the customs laws of the United States and the
Federal immigration laws, which system should
specifically identify and distinguish expenses incurred
in administering and enforcing the customs laws of the
United States and the expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the Federal immigration
laws.
``(2) Additional requirement.--The cost accounting system
described in paragraph (1) shall provide for an identification
of expenses based on the type of operation, the amount of time
spent on the operation by personnel of the Bureau of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and an identification of
expenses based on any other appropriate classification
necessary to provide for an accurate and complete accounting of
expenses.
``(c) Reports.--
``(1) Development of the cost accounting systems.--Beginning
on the date of the enactment of the Customs Border Security and
Trade Agencies Authorization Act of 2004 and ending on the date
on which the cost accounting systems described in subsections
(a) and (b) are fully implemented, the Commissioner of Customs
and the Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, respectively, shall prepare and submit to
Congress on a quarterly basis a report on the progress of
implementing the cost accounting systems pursuant to
subsections (a) and (b).
``(2) Annual reports.--Beginning one year after the date on
which the cost accounting systems described in subsections (a)
and (b) are fully implemented, the Commissioner of Customs and
the Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, respectively, shall prepare and submit to
Congress on an annual basis a report itemizing the expenses
identified in subsections (a) and (b).
``(3) Office of the inspector general.--Not later than March
31, 2006, the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland
Security shall prepare and submit to Congress a report
analyzing the level of compliance with this section and
detailing any additional steps that should be taken to improve
compliance with this section.''.
SEC. 103. STUDY AND REPORT RELATING TO CUSTOMS USER FEES.
(a) Study.--Beginning 180 days after the date on which the cost
accounting systems described in section 334 of the Customs and Border
Security Act of 2002 (as amended by section 102 of this Act) are fully
implemented, the Comptroller General shall conduct a study on the
extent to which the amount of each customs user fee imposed under
section 13031(a) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act
of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(a)) approximates the cost of services provided
by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection of the Department of
Homeland Security relating to the fee so imposed. The study shall
include an analysis of the use of each such customs user fee by the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date on which the cost
accounting systems described in section 334 of the Customs and Border
Security Act of 2002 are fully implemented, the Comptroller General
shall submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a report in
classified form containing--
(1) the results of the study conducted under subsection (a);
and
(2) recommendations for the appropriate amount of the customs
user fees if such results indicate that the fees are not
commensurate with the level of services provided by the Bureau
of Customs and Border Protection.
SEC. 104. REPORT RELATING TO ONE FACE AT THE BORDER INITIATIVE.
Not later than September 30 of each of the calendar years 2005 and
2006, the Commissioner of Customs shall prepare and submit to Congress
a report--
(1) analyzing the effectiveness of the One Face at the Border
Initiative at enhancing security and facilitating trade;
(2) providing a breakdown of the number of personnel of the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection that were personnel of
the United States Customs Service prior to the establishment of
the Department of Homeland Security, that were personnel of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service prior to the
establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, and that
were hired after the establishment of the Department of
Homeland Security;
(3) describing the training time provided to each employee on
an annual basis for the various training components of the One
Face at the Border Initiative; and
(4) outlining the steps taken by the Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection to ensure that expertise is retained with
respect to customs, immigration, and agriculture inspection
functions under the One Face at the Border Initiative.
Subtitle B--Technical Amendments Relating to Entry and Protest
SEC. 111. ENTRY OF MERCHANDISE.
(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 484 of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1484) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B), by inserting after ``entry'' the
following: ``, or substitute 1 or more reconfigured entries on
an import activity summary statement,''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(A)--
(A) in the second sentence, by inserting after
``statements,'' the following: ``and permit the filing
of reconfigured entries,''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: ``Entries
filed under paragraph (1)(A) shall not be liquidated if
covered by an import activity summary statement, but
instead each reconfigured entry in the import activity
summary statement shall be subject to liquidation or
reliquidation pursuant to section 500, 501, or 504.''.
(b) Reconciliation.--Subsection (b)(1) of such section is amended in
the fourth sentence by striking ``15 months'' and inserting ``21
months''.
SEC. 112. LIMITATION ON LIQUIDATIONS.
Section 504 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1504) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``filed;'' and
inserting ``filed, whichever is earlier; or''; and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) if a reconfigured entry is filed under an import
activity summary statement, the date the import activity
summary statement is filed or should have been filed, whichever
is earlier;''; and
(2) by striking ``at the time of entry'' each place it
appears.
SEC. 113. PROTESTS.
Section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by
striking ``(relating to refunds and errors) of this
Act'' and inserting ``(relating to refunds), any
clerical error, mistake of fact, or other inadvertence,
whether or not resulting from or contained in an
electronic transmission, adverse to the importer, in
any entry, liquidation, or reliquidation, and'';
(B) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``, including the
liquidation of an entry, pursuant to either section 500
or section 504'' after ``thereof''; and
(C) in paragraph (7), by striking ``(c) or''; and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), in the sixth sentence, by
striking ``A protest may be amended,'' and inserting
``Unless a request for accelerated disposition is filed
under section 515(b), a protest may be amended,''; and
(B) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A),
by striking ``ninety days'' and inserting ``180
days'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking
``notice of'' and inserting ``date of''; and
(iii) in the second sentence, by striking
``90 days'' and inserting ``180 days''.
SEC. 114. REVIEW OF PROTESTS.
Section 515(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1515(b)) is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``after ninety days'' and
inserting ``concurrent with or''.
SEC. 115. REFUNDS AND ERRORS.
Section 520(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1520(c)) is
repealed.
SEC. 116. DEFINITIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
Section 401 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(t) Reconfigured Entry.--The term `reconfigured entry' means an
entry filed on an import activity summary statement which substitutes
for all or part of 1 or more entries filed under section 484(a)(1)(A)
or filed on a reconciliation entry that aggregates the entry elements
to be reconciled under section 484(b) for purposes of liquidation,
reliquidation, or protest.''.
SEC. 117. VOLUNTARY RELIQUIDATIONS.
Section 501 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1501) is amended in
the first sentence by inserting ``or 504'' after ``section 500''.
SEC. 118. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this subtitle shall apply to merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the
15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Provisions
SEC. 121. DESIGNATION OF SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FOR CUSTOMS
PROCESSING OF CERTAIN PRIVATE AIRCRAFT ARRIVING IN
THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General.--Section 1453(a) of the Tariff Suspension and Trade
Act of 2000 is amended by striking ``2-year period'' and inserting ``6-
year period''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall be
effective as of November 9, 2002.
SEC. 122. AUTHORITY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INTEGRATED BORDER
INSPECTION AREAS AT THE UNITED STATES-CANADA
BORDER.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The increased security and safety concerns that developed
in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in the United States
on September 11, 2001, need to be addressed.
(2) One concern that has come to light is the vulnerability
of the international bridges and tunnels along the United
States borders.
(3) It is necessary to ensure that potentially dangerous
vehicles are inspected prior to crossing these bridges and
tunnels; however, currently these vehicles are not inspected
until after they have crossed into the United States.
(4) Establishing Integrated Border Inspection Areas (IBIAs)
would address these concerns by inspecting vehicles before they
gained access to the infrastructure of international bridges
and tunnels joining the United States and Canada.
(b) Creation of Integrated Border Inspection Areas.--
(1) In general.--The Commissioner of the Customs Service, in
consultation with the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency
(CCRA), shall seek to establish Integrated Border Inspection
Areas (IBIAs), such as areas on either side of the United
States-Canada border, in which United States Customs officers
can inspect vehicles entering the United States from Canada
before they enter the United States, or Canadian Customs
officers can inspect vehicles entering Canada from the United
States before they enter Canada. Such inspections may include,
where appropriate, employment of reverse inspection techniques.
(2) Additional requirement.--The Commissioner of Customs, in
consultation with the Administrator of the General Services
Administration when appropriate, shall seek to carry out
paragraph (1) in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on the
surrounding community.
(3) Elements of the program.--Using the authority granted by
this section and under section 629 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
the Commissioner of Customs, in consultation with the Canadian
Customs and Revenue Agency, shall seek to--
(A) locate Integrated Border Inspection Areas in
areas with bridges or tunnels with high traffic volume,
significant commercial activity, and that have
experienced backups and delays since September 11,
2001;
(B) ensure that United States Customs officers
stationed in any such IBIA on the Canadian side of the
border are vested with the maximum authority to carry
out their duties and enforce United States law;
(C) ensure that United States Customs officers
stationed in any such IBIA on the Canadian side of the
border shall possess the same immunity that they would
possess if they were stationed in the United States;
and
(D) encourage appropriate officials of the United
States to enter into an agreement with Canada
permitting Canadian Customs officers stationed in any
such IBIA on the United States side of the border to
enjoy such immunities as permitted in Canada.
SEC. 123. DESIGNATION OF FOREIGN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
(a) Miscellaneous Provisions.--Section 401(i) of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1401(i)) is amended by inserting ``, including foreign
law enforcement officers,'' after ``or other person''.
(b) Inspections and Preclearance in Foreign Countries.--Section 629
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1629) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, or subsequent to
their exit from,'' after ``prior to their arrival in'';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by inserting ``or exportation'' after ``relating
to the importation''; and
(B) by inserting ``or exit'' after ``port of entry'';
(3) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
``(e) Stationing of Foreign Customs and Agriculture Inspection
Officers in the United States.--The Secretary of State, in coordination
with the Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture, may enter into
agreements with any foreign country authorizing the stationing in the
United States of customs and agriculture inspection officials of that
country (if similar privileges are extended by that country to United
States officials) for the purpose of insuring that persons and
merchandise going directly to that country from the United States, or
that have gone directly from that country to the United States, comply
with the customs and other laws of that country governing the
importation or exportation of merchandise. Any foreign customs or
agriculture inspection official stationed in the United States under
this subsection may exercise such functions, perform such duties, and
enjoy such privileges and immunities as United States officials may be
authorized to perform or are afforded in that foreign country by
treaty, agreement, or law.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Privileges and Immunities.--Any person designated to perform
the duties of an officer of the Customs Service pursuant to section
401(i) of this Act shall be entitled to the same privileges and
immunities as an officer of the Customs Service with respect to any
actions taken by the designated person in the performance of such
duties.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 127 of the Treasury Department
Appropriations Act, 2003, is hereby repealed.
(d) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made by this
section, take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 124. CUSTOMS SERVICES.
Section 13031(e)(1) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(e)(1) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(1) Notwithstanding section 451 of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1451) or any other provision of
law (other than paragraph (2)),'' and inserting:
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Scheduled flights.--Notwithstanding section 451
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1451) or any other
provision of law (other than subparagraph (B) and
paragraph (2)),''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Charter flights.--If a charter air carrier (as
defined in section 40102(13) of title 49, United States
Code) specifically requests that customs border patrol
services for passengers and their baggage be provided
for a charter flight arriving after normal operating
hours at a customs border patrol serviced airport and
overtime funds for those services are not available,
the appropriate customs border patrol officer may
assign sufficient customs employees (if available) to
perform any such services, which could lawfully be
performed during regular hours of operation, and any
overtime fees incurred in connection with such service
shall be paid by the charter air carrier.''.
SEC. 125. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON INTERPRETATION OF TEXTILE AND APPAREL
PROVISIONS.
It is the sense of Congress that the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection of the Department of Homeland Security should interpret,
implement, and enforce the provisions of section 112 of the African
Growth and Opportunity Act (19 U.S.C. 3721), section 204 of the Andean
Trade Preference Act (19 U.S.C. 3203), and section 213 of the Caribbean
Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2703), relating to preferential
treatment of textile and apparel articles, broadly in order to expand
trade by maximizing opportunities for imports of such articles from
eligible beneficiary countries.
SEC. 126. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
(a) Tariff Act of 1930.--Section 505(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 is
amended--
(1) in the first sentence--
(A) by inserting ``referred to in this subsection''
after ``periodic payment''; and
(B) by striking ``10 working days'' and inserting
``12 working days''; and
(2) in the second sentence, by striking ``a participating''
and all that follows through the end of the sentence and
inserting the following: ``the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations, after testing the module, permitting a
participating importer of record to deposit estimated duties
and fees for entries of merchandise, other than merchandise
entered for warehouse, transportation, or under bond, no later
than the 15 working days following the month in which the
merchandise is entered or released, whichever comes first.''.
(b) Customs User Fees.--(1) Section 13031(b)(9)(A) of the
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C.
58c(b)(9)(A)) is amended by striking ``less than $2,000'' and inserting
``$2,000 or less''.
(2) Section 13031(b)(9)(A)(ii) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(b)(9)(A)(ii)) is amended to
read as follows:
``(ii) Notwithstanding subsection (e)(6) and subject to the
provisions of subparagraph (B), in the case of an express
consignment carrier facility or centralized hub facility--
``(I) $.66 per individual airway bill or bill of
lading; and
``(II) if the merchandise is formally entered, the
fee provided for in subsection (a)(9), if
applicable.''.
(3) Section 13031(b)(9)(B) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(b)(9)(B)) is amended--
(A) by moving the margins for subparagraph (B) 4 ems to the
left; and
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``subparagraph (A)(ii)'' and
inserting ``subparagraph (A)(ii) (I) or (II)''.
(4) Section 13031(f)(1)(B) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(f)(1)(B)) is amended by
moving the subparagraph 2 ems to the left.
TITLE II--OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--Section 141(g)(1)(A) of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171(g)(1)(A)) is amended by striking clauses
(i) and (ii) and inserting the following:
``(i) $39,552,000 for fiscal year 2005.
``(ii) $39,552,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.
(2) Rule of construction.--The amendment made by paragraph
(1) shall not be construed to affect the availability of funds
appropriated pursuant to section 141(g)(1)(A) of the Trade Act
of 1974 before the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations for the Office of the General
Counsel and the Office of Monitoring and Enforcement.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Office of the United States Trade
Representative for the appointment of additional staff in the Office of
the General Counsel and the Office of Monitoring and Enforcement--
(1) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
(2) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.
TITLE III--UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
SEC. 301. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 330(e)(2)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1330(e)(2)(A)) is amended by striking
clauses (i) and (ii) and inserting the following:
``(i) $61,700,000 for fiscal year 2005.
``(ii) $65,278,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.
(b) Rule of Construction.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall
not be construed to affect the availability of funds appropriated
pursuant to section 330(e)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 before the
date of the enactment of this Act.
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Summary
H.R. 4418 would authorize funding for U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE), the Office of the United States Trade
Representative (USTR), and the United States International
Trade Commission (ITC).
B. Background
1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
The Committee on Ways and Means has adopted a two-year
authorization process to provide CBP, ICE, USTR, and the ITC
with guidance as they plan their budgets and to provide
Committee guidance in the appropriations process. In preparing
H.R. 4418, the Committee considered the President's budget for
FY 2005 and relied upon estimates of increases consistent with
past practice as a guide for FY 2006. Funding for the former
U.S. Customs Service, USTR, and the ITC was authorized through
FY 2004 in the Trade Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-210).
2. REORGANIZATION OF THE U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY
On November 25, 2002, the President signed into law
legislation (P.L. 107-296) creating a new Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). This law transferred the U.S. Customs
Service to the Department of Homeland Security under the
authority of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation
Security. Authority for customs revenue functions is retained
by the Secretary of the Treasury, administered by the
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection under the
terms of a delegation of authority order.
On March 1, 2003, the former U.S. Customs Service was
divided into two new agencies within DHS. Customs inspectors,
canine enforcement officers, and import specialists were merged
with immigration inspectors, border patrol agents, and
agriculture inspectors to create CBP. Customs investigators and
personnel in the air and marine operations were merged with
immigration investigators, Federal air marshals, and members of
the Federal protective service to create ICE.
The legislation transferring the U.S. Customs Service to
DHS prohibits DHS from taking actions to ``consolidate,
discontinue, or diminish'' customs revenue functions, ``reduce
the staffing level, or reduce the resources attributable to
such functions.'' In the July 12, 2002 letter from the
Committee on Ways and Means transmitting the views and
recommendations of the Committee on the legislation
establishing the new Department, the Committee noted, ``It is
also important to ensure that revenue continues to be collected
and that goods keep moving across the border with little delay
in order to maintain delicately balanced commercial schedules
and operations.''
3. CUSTOMS MODERNIZATION
The current customs automation system, the Automated
Commercial System (ACS), is an aging system that has
experienced several ``brownouts.'' In August 2001, the systems
integration contractor began work on the Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE), a single integrated system that will replace
ACS. Unlike ACS, ACE will use modern standards, processes,
techniques, and language, and will be compatible with
commercial software.
The first ACE participants were 41 initial importer
accounts representing 17% of the total value of imports. CBP
predicts that by the end of 2004, the number of ACE users will
reach 20,000 and the number of ACE accounts will reach 1,100.
While ACE is designed to be rolled out in eight phases over a
period ending in September 2007, the program has faced both
schedule and cost challenges.
In addition, CBP is in the process of integrating the
International Trade Data System (ITDS) with ACE. ITDS was
chartered in 1995 to facilitate information processing for
businesses by accommodating the many federal agencies that need
access to international trade data. Currently, traders are
required to provide this information to each individual agency
using a variety of different automated systems, a multitude of
paper forms, or a combination of systems and forms. With ITDS,
traders will submit standard electronic data for imports or
exports only once to ITDS. ITDS will distribute this standard
data to the pertinent Federal agencies that have an interest in
the transaction for their selectivity and risk assessment. ITDS
will provide only that data necessary to an agency's mission.
Agency participation in ITDS is voluntary, and many agencies
have not yet chosen to participate, including the U.S. Coast
Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, and the
Office of Foreign Assets Control.
4. CUSTOMS USER FEES AND COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS
The Trade Act of 2002 requires the U.S. Customs Service to
develop a cost accounting system to explain its expenditures
effectively. Such a system would put customs operations in
compliance with the core financial system requirements of the
Joint Financial Management Improvement Program (JFMIP), a joint
and cooperative undertaking of the U.S. Department of the
Treasury, the General Accounting Office, theOffice of
Management and Budget, and the Office of Personnel Management to
improve financial management practices in government. Prior to the
imposition of this requirement, the Committee noted in its report to
accompany H.R. 3129, the Customs Border Security Act of 2001, that
``the Customs Service is currently unable to answer fundamental
questions about how it spends money.''
An effective cost accounting system is important to ensure
that fees collected under the authority of paragraphs (1)
through (8) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1985 are used only for their intended purpose. Section
413 of the legislation establishing DHS prohibits the use of
these funds by any other agency or office of the Department.
These fees are paid by commercial interests in return for
specific commercial services. In the letter from the Committee
on Ways and Means transmitting the views and recommendations of
the Committee on the legislation establishing the new
Department, the Committee noted, ``It would be inappropriate
and potentially inconsistent with the United States trade
obligation for importers to pay fees that subsidize non-
commercial functions of the new Department of Homeland
Security. For these reasons, the Committee believes that fees
should continue to be spent only on activities already defined
in 19 U.S.C. 58c.''
5. REQUIREMENTS TO POST BOND FOR IMPORTERS SUBJECT TO ANTIDUMPING
DUTIES
Recently CBP indicated that it had been unable to collect
over $100 million in antidumping duties owed on imports.
Members of the Committee on Ways and Means expressed concerns
about this inability to collect duties at the hearing, the mark
up of the Subcommittee on Trade, and the Committee mark up.
CBP has recently provided the Committee with detailed
information on the reforms that CBP will undertake to ensure
that it will be able to collect duties owed in the future.
First, CBP will rigorously enforce the requirement to post
single entry bonds for each entry of goods subject to
antidumping duties. Second, CBP will enhancing monitoring by
requiring all bonds to be filed at one central location, which
will improve the ability of CBP to ensure that importers are
complying with their obligations to pay. Third, CBP will amend
its guidelines to raise the level of coverage of continuous
bonds for importers of agriculture and aquaculture products
subject to antidumping or countervailing duty cases so that
exposure is minimized.
CBP also notes that the Commerce Department is increasingly
requiring new shippers to post bonds at the higher ``all
others'' rate faced by most importers rather than a zero rate.
Finally, CBP notes that approximately half of the $100 million
shortfall is due to the bankruptcy of a single large surety--
representing an anomaly, not a systemic problem.
The Committee believes these steps are positive and, if
implemented as promised, should enhance protection of the
revenue. The Committee will continue to monitor this issue
closely and actively.
C. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
On May 20, 2004, Congressman Philip M. Crane, (R-IL),
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways
and Means, introduced H.R. 4418, the ``Customs Border Security
Act of 2004,'' a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 2005 and 2006 for CBP, ICE, USTR, and the ITC, and for
other purposes. Congressmen Rangel (D-NY), Shaw (R-FL), Levin
(D-MI), and Ramstad (R-MN) cosponsored the legislation. On June
17, 2004, the Subcommittee on Trade held a public hearing on
Customs budget authorizations and other customs issues. On June
22, 2004, Chairman Crane sent a letter to Commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection Robert Bonner submitting
questions for response and inclusion in the Subcommittee
record, requesting responses by July 6, 2004. The Subcommittee
has not received responses to these questions. On June 24,
2004, the Subcommittee on Trade held a formal mark up session
and ordered favorably reported to the full committee H.R. 4418,
the ``Customs Border Security and Trade Agencies Authorization
Act of 2004,'' as amended, by voice vote. On July 8, 2004, the
Committee on Ways and Means held a formal mark up session on
H.R. 4418, as amended by the Subcommittee. Chairman Thomas
offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which was
agreed to by voice vote. The Committee then ordered favorably
reported H.R. 4418, as amended, by a roll call vote of 33 ayes
to 0 nays.
II. SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY
Sec. 1. Short title
Current law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 1 provides that the act may be cited as the
``Customs Border Security and Trade Agencies Authorization Act
of 2004.''
Reason for change
The section identifies the short title for the bill.
TITLE I--BUREAU OF CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION AND BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations; Related Provisions
Sec. 101. Authorization of appropriations
Current law
Section 301(b)(1) of the Customs Procedural and
Simplification Act of 1978 (19 U.S.C. 2075(b)) provides the
statutory basis for authorization of appropriations of the
former U.S. Customs Service. The most recent authorization of
appropriations for the U.S. Customs Service (under section 311
of the Trade Act of 2002) provided $1,365,456,000 for
noncommercial operations, $1,642,602,000 for commercial
operations, and $170,829,000 for air and marine interdiction
for FY 2003, and $1,399,592,400 for noncommercial operations,
$1,683,667,050 for commercial operations, and $175,099,725 for
air and marine interdiction for FY 2004.
Explanation of provision
Section 101(a) would amend section 301 of the Customs
Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 to make
technical and conforming changes reflecting the division of the
former U.S. Customs Service into CBP and ICE and its
incorporation into DHS.
Section 101(b) would amend section 301 of the Customs
Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978 to authorize
appropriations for salaries and expenses of CBP for fiscal year
2005 of $6,203,000,000 and for fiscal year 2006 of
$6,469,729,000. It would require funds authorized for CBP with
respect to customs revenue functions to be appropriated from
the Customs User Fee Account. It would further authorize
appropriations for salaries and expenses of ICE for fiscal year
2005 of $4,011,000,000 and for fiscal year 2006 of
$4,335,891,000.
Reason for change
The incorporation of the former U.S. Customs Service into
DHS and the subsequent division of the former U.S. Customs
Service into CBP and ICE necessitated changes to the underlying
statutory framework to reflect the new structure. The Committee
notes that the information regarding the split between
noncommercial and commercial operations provided in the past by
the former U.S. Customs Service was not meaningful. The
information was not the result of the collection of cost data
on a continual basis. Rather, the Customs Service apportioned
its budget through this artificial division based upon an
outdated ad hoc survey performed years ago. The survey
estimated a certain percentage of the Customs Service's
activities that were commercial-related. Based upon that
conclusion, the Customs Service merely multiplied its overall
budget by that static percentage to arrive at its estimation
from year to year. The Committee believes that this methodology
is woefully inadequate because actual costs for various
functions change from year to year. For this reason, the
Committee required the Customs Service to develop an adequate
cost accounting system in section 334 of the Trade Act of 2002
(P.L. 107-210). However, the Committee has received conflicting
and inadequate information on whether the successor agencies,
CBP and ICE, have implemented such a cost accounting system.
Accordingly, the Committee has addressed this issue again in
section 102 of the legislation.
Funding authorized by this section is equal to the
President's budget request for FY 2005 and provides an increase
for FY 2006 that is equal to the percentage increase requested
in FY 2005. These funding levels would provide adequate and
appropriate resources for CBP and ICE to play their important
security roles while still maintaining sufficient resources to
support their critical trade facilitation functions.
Sec. 102. Establishment and implementation of cost accounting system;
reports.
Current law
Section 334 of the Trade Act of 2002 required the former
U.S. Customs Service to establish and implement a cost
accounting system for expenses incurred in both commercial and
noncommercial operations of the Customs Service, including an
identification of expenses based on the type of operation, the
port at which the operation took place, the amount of time
spent on the operation by personnel of the Customs Service, and
any other appropriate classification necessary to provide for
an accurate and complete accounting of the expenses by
September 30, 2003.
Explanation of provision
Section 102 would amend the requirement in section 334 of
the Trade Act of 2002 to require CBP and ICE to establish by
September 30, 2005, cost accounting systems that can
distinguish between commercial and noncommercial operations,
and expenses incurred in administering and enforcing the
customs laws of the United States and the federal immigration
laws. The section would further require the accounting systems
to identify expenses based on the type of operation and the
amount of time spent on the operation by personnel of the
relevant agency. The section would also require reports: (1) by
the Commissioner of Customs and the Assistant Secretary for
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement on a
quarterly basis on the progress of implementing the cost
accounting systems and on an annual basis itemizing the
expensesonce the accounting systems are in place; and (2) by
the Inspector General of DHS not later than March 31, 2006, on the
level of compliance with this section.
Reason for change
As discussed above, the previous methodology used by the
Customs Service to estimate costs for commercial versus
noncommercial operation has been unsatisfactory and inadequate.
While current law required the Customs Service to establish and
implement an adequate cost accounting system, the Committee is
disappointed that it has received conflicting and inadequate
information on whether CBP and ICE have in place a functioning
cost accounting system that can provide the information
required by law. Section 102 would reiterate the requirement
originally imposed in the Trade Act of 2002, clarify that this
requirement applies to both CBP and ICE, and require reports by
the Inspector General to monitor compliance by these agencies
with the requirements of this section. The Committee intends to
monitor progress closely.
Sec. 103. Study and report relating to customs user fees
Current law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 103(a) would require the Comptroller General to
conduct a study on the extent to which the amount of the
customs user fees approximates the cost of services provided,
beginning 180 days after the date on which the cost accounting
systems described in Section 102 are fully implemented.
Section 103(b) would require the Comptroller General to
report to the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on
Finance within one year of the implementation of the cost
accounting systems described in Section 102 on the results of
the study required in Section 103(a) and any recommendations
for the appropriate amount of customs user fees.
Reason for change
Section 336 of the Trade Act of 2002 required the
Comptroller General to conduct a study on the extent to which
the amount of the customs user fees approximates the cost of
services provided. The Comptroller General released the
required report in which he concluded that it was impossible to
determine whether the amount of the fees approximated the costs
of services provided because the Customs Service did not have
an adequate cost accounting system in place to determine the
costs of services provided. As noted above, the Committee is
very concerned about the lack of such an accounting system.
This section would require a follow-up report by the
Comptroller General once the cost accounting system required by
Section 102 is implemented.
Sec. 104. Report relating to One Face at the Border Initiative
Current law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
This section would require the Commissioner of Customs no
later than September 30 of each of the calendar years 2005 and
2006 to submit a report to Congress analyzing the effectiveness
of the One Face at the Border Initiative at enhancing security
and facilitating trade, describing the training time provided
to each employee under the Initiative, and outlining the steps
taken by CBP to ensure that expertise is retained with respect
to customs, immigration, and agriculture inspection functions.
Reason for change
Prior to the creation of CBP, customs, immigration, and
agriculture inspections functions were performed by separate
personnel from the U.S. Customs Service, the Immigration and
Naturalization Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
CBP has created a single officer, the CBP Officer, to perform
all of these functions. The first new CBP Officers were hired
in late 2003, and legacy customs, immigration, and agriculture
inspections officers are being cross-trained and converted to
new CBP Officer positions. This provision would provide the
Committee with information to determine whether sufficient
training is provided in all three aspects to ensure that CBP
Officers have the necessary expertise.
Subtitle B--Technical amendments relating to entry and protest
Sections 111-118
Current law
In the past, importers paid duties on each entry as the
entry was processed. Under the recently implemented periodic
payment system, CBP allows participating importers to pay off
duties on a monthly basis.
Explanation of provision
Sections 111 through 118 are technical amendments dealing
with reconfigured entries. The reconfigured entry process would
allow importers to separate individual shipments from a larger
entry if there are disputes about the individual shipments.
Reason for change
Allowing individual shipments to be separated from a larger
entry paid on a periodic basis would facilitate trade by
allowing undisputed shipments to be processed expeditiously.
Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Provisions
Sec. 121. Designation of San Antonio International Airport for customs
processing of certain private aircraft arriving in the United
States
Current law
Section 1453(a) of the Tariff Suspension and Trade Act of
2000 required the Commissioner of the Customs Service to
designate the San Antonio International Airport as an airport
in which private aircraft can land for processing by the
Customs Service for a period of two years beginning with the
date of enactment of that Act (November 9, 2000).
Explanation of provision
Section 121 would extend the designation of San Antonio
International Airport for customs processing of private
aircraft arriving in the United States for four years effective
November 9, 2002.
Reason for change
The designation of the San Antonio International Airport
lapsed on November 9, 2002, and this provision would extend
that designation through November 9, 2006.
Sec. 122. Authority for the establishment of Integrated Border
Inspection Areas at the United States-Canada border
Current law
Section 127 of the Treasury Department Appropriations Act
of 2003 (P.L. 108-7) contains this provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 122 would require the Commissioner of Customs to
seek to establish Integrated Border Inspection Areas on either
side of the United States-Canada border in which U.S. Customs
officers can inspect vehicles entering the United States from
Canada before they enter the United States, or Canadian Customs
officers can inspect vehicles entering Canada from the United
States before they enter Canada.
Reason for change
The inclusion of this provision in the Treasury
Appropriations Act of 2003 was a stopgap measure to authorize
an important security program at a time when an appropriate
authorizing bill was not available. This section would include
this program in the appropriate authorizing legislation.
Sec. 123. Designation of foreign law enforcement officers
Current law
Section 127 of the Treasury Department Appropriations Act
of 2003 (P.L. 108-7) contains this provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 123 would amend Section 401(i) of the Tariff Act of
1930 to provide for inspections and preclearance in foreign
countries and to authorize the Secretary of State to enter into
agreements with foreign countries for the stationing of foreign
customs and agriculture inspection officers in the United
States.
Reason for change
The inclusion of this provision in the Treasury
Appropriations Act of 2003 was a stopgap measure to authorize
an important security program at a time when an appropriate
authorizing bill was not available. This section includes this
program in the appropriate authorizing legislation.
Sec. 124. Customs services
Current law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 124 amends section 13031(e)(1) of the Consolidated
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 to permit CBP to
provide services for charter air carriers for flights arriving
after normal operating hours upon their request and at their
expense.
Reason for change
Under current law, CBP is not authorized to provide
services for charter air carriers for flights arriving under
normal operating hours. This provision would permit CBP at its
discretion to provide these services if appropriate and charge
the cost of the provision of the services to the charter air
carriers.
Sec. 125. Sense of Congress on interpretation of textile and apparel
provisions
Current law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Section 125 expresses the sense of Congress that CBP should
interpret provisions of the African Growth and Opportunity Act
(AGOA), the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), and the
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) relating to
preferential treatment of textile and apparel articles broadly
in order to expand trade by maximizing opportunities for
imports of such articles from eligible beneficiary countries.
Reason for change
The Committee has noted the frequent frustration of
Congressional intent by CBP decisions implementing AGOA, ATPA,
and CBERA. Congress has been forced to revisit many issues in
the original AGOA legislation and reverse decisions by the
Executive Branch that have denied benefits to imports that
Congress fully intended to cover. This provision admonishes CBP
to recognize the importance of interpreting the AGOA, ATPA, and
CBERA laws in a trade-liberalizing manner.
Sec. 126. Technical amendments
Current law
Section 505(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 requires importers
to deposit estimated duties and fees on entries of merchandise
within 10 working days of entry or release. Section
13031(b)(9)(A) of the Consolidated Budget Omnibus
Reconciliation Act of 1985 restricts the ability to collect
fees under the section to imports valued at ``less than
$2000.'' Section 13031(b)(9)(A)(ii) requires an express
consignment carrier facility or centralized hub facility to
reimburse the Customs Service for the cost of services provided
by the Customs Service for the facility during the fiscal year.
Explanation of provision
Section 126(a) would amend section 505(a) of the Tariff Act
of 1930 to increase the time period for importers to make
periodic payments from 10 working days to 12 working days and
would permit participating importers to deposit estimated
duties and fees for entries of merchandise no later than 15
working days following the month in which the merchandise is
entered or released, whichever comes first.
Section 126(b) would amend section 13031(b)(9)(A) of the
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 to
change the threshold for the merchandise processing fee from
``less than $2,000'' to ``$2,000 or less'' and to create a user
fee for express courier facilities.
Reason for change
Both importers and CBP have requested the change from 10
working days to 12 working days as necessary for
administrability of the periodic payment system. The change
from ``less than $2000'' to ``$2000 or less'' is at the request
of CBP to facilitate the administrability of the fee. The
creation of the user fee for entries at express courier
facilities makes the treatment of entries at those facilities
more consistent with the treatment at other ports of entry.
TITLE II--OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations
Current law
The statutory authority for budget authorization for USTR
is section 141(g)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2171(g)(1)). The most recent authorization of appropriations
for USTR was under section 361 of the Trade Act of 2002 (P.L.
107-210). Under 19 U.S.C. 2171, Congress has adopted a two-year
authorization process to provideUSTR with guidance as it plans
its budget and to provide Committee guidance in the appropriation
process.
Explanation of provision
This section would authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 2005 and 2006 for the Office of the United States Trade
Representative (USTR) of $39,552,000 per year. It would
authorize an additional $2 million per year for the appointment
of additional staff in the Office of the General Counsel and
the Office of Monitoring and Enforcement of USTR.
Reason for change
The legislation would authorize the full amount of the
President's budget request for USTR. It would further authorize
an earmark of $2 million per year for the specific purpose of
additional staff for the Office of General Counsel and the
Office of Monitoring and Enforcement of USTR in light of the
vital functions performed by these offices and their
corresponding need for additional staff. The Committee believes
that this earmark would provide sufficient funding for USTR to
address a variety of needs that will best enable U.S.
companies, farmers, and workers to benefit from the trade
agreements to which the United States is party.
TITLE III--UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Sec. 301. Authorization of appropriations
Current law
The statutory authority for budget authorization for the
ITC is section 330(e)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1330(e)(2)(A)). The most recent authorization of
appropriations for the ITC was under section 371 of the Trade
Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-210). Under 19 U.S.C. 1330, Congress has
adopted a two-year authorization process to provide the ITC
with guidance as it plans its budget and to provide Committee
guidance in the appropriation process.
Explanation of provision
The provision would authorize appropriations for the ITC of
$61,700,000 for fiscal year 2005 and $65,278,000 for fiscal
year 2006.
Reason for change
The legislation authorizes the full amount of the ITC's
budget request for fiscal year 2005. The Committee notes in
particular that the ITC provides valuable advice as to the
probable economic effects of U.S. trade agreements and
miscellaneous tariff legislation considered by Congress.
III. VOTES OF THE COMMITTEE
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the following statements are made
concerning the votes of the Committee on Ways and Means, in its
consideration of the bill, H.R. 4418.
A. Motion To Report the Bill
The bill, H.R. 4418, as amended, was ordered favorably
reported by a rollcall vote of 33 yeas to 0 nays (with a quorum
being present). The vote was as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives Yea Nay Present Representative Yea Nay Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thomas..................... X ........ ......... Mr. Rangel....... X ........ .........
Mr. Crane...................... X ........ ......... Mr. Stark........ ........ ........ .........
Mr. Shaw....................... X ........ ......... Mr. Matsui....... ........ ........ .........
Mrs. Johnson................... X ........ ......... Mr. Levin........ X ........ .........
Mr. Houghton................... X ........ ......... Mr. Cardin....... X ........ .........
Mr. Herger..................... X ........ ......... Mr. McDermott.... ........ ........ .........
Mr. McCrery.................... X ........ ......... Mr. Kleczka...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. Camp....................... X ........ ......... Mr. Lewis (GA)... X ........ .........
Mr. Ramstad.................... X ........ ......... Mr. Neal......... X ........ .........
Mr. Nussle..................... X ........ ......... Mr. McNulty...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. Johnson.................... X ........ ......... Mr. Jefferson.... X ........ .........
Ms. Dunn....................... X ........ ......... Mr. Tanner....... X ........ .........
Mr. Collins.................... ........ ........ ......... Mr. Becerra...... X ........ .........
Mr. Portman.................... X ........ ......... Mr. Doggett...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. English.................... X ........ ......... Mr. Pomeroy...... X ........ .........
Mr. Hayworth................... X ........ ......... Mr. Sandlin...... X ........ .........
Mr. Weller..................... X ........ ......... Ms. Tubbs Jones.. X ........ .........
Mr. Hulshof.................... ........ ........ .........
Mr. McInnis.................... X ........ .........
Mr. Lewis (KY)................. X ........ .........
Mr. Foley...................... X ........ .........
Mr. Brady...................... X ........ .........
Mr. Ryan....................... X ........ .........
Mr. Cantor..................... X ........ .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Votes on Amendments
A rollcall vote was conducted on the following amendment to
the Chairman's amendment in the nature of a substitute.
An amendment by Mr. Levin, which would have provided that
the responsibilities of the additional USTR staff appointed in
the Chairman's amendment in the nature of a substitute shall
include investigating, prosecuting, and defending cases before
the World Trade Organization and trade agreements,
administering U.S. trade laws, and monitoring compliance with
the Uruguay Round Agreements and other trade agreements,
particularly by China, was defeated by a rollcall vote of 11
yeas to 21 nays. The vote was as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representatives Yea Nay Present Representative Yea Nay Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Thomas..................... ........ X ......... Mr. Rangel....... X ........ .........
Mr. Crane...................... ........ X ......... Mr. Stark........ ........ ........ .........
Mr. Shaw....................... ........ X ......... Mr. Matsui....... ........ ........ .........
Mrs. Johnson................... ........ X ......... Mr. Levin........ X ........ .........
Mr. Houghton................... ........ X ......... Mr. Cardin....... X ........ .........
Mr. Herger..................... ........ X ......... Mr. McDermott.... ........ ........ .........
Mr. McCrery.................... ........ X ......... Mr. Kleczka...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. Camp....................... ........ X ......... Mr. Lewis (GA)... X ........ .........
Mr. Ramstad.................... ........ X ......... Mr. Neal......... X ........ .........
Mr. Nussle..................... ........ X ......... Mr. McNulty...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. Johnson.................... ........ X ......... Mr. Jefferson.... X ........ .........
Ms. Dunn....................... ........ X ......... Mr. Tanner....... X ........ .........
Mr. Collins.................... ........ ........ ......... Mr. Becerra...... X ........ .........
Mr. Portman.................... ........ X ......... Mr. Doggett...... ........ ........ .........
Mr. English.................... ........ X ......... Mr. Pomeroy...... X ........ .........
Mr. Hayworth................... ........ X ......... Mr. Sandlin...... X ........ .........
Mr. Weller..................... ........ X ......... Ms. Tubbs Jones.. X ........ .........
Mr. Hulshof.................... ........ ........ .........
Mr. McInnis.................... ........ X .........
Mr. Lewis (KY)................. ........ X .........
Mr. Foley...................... ........ X .........
Mr. Brady...................... ........ X .........
Mr. Ryan....................... ........ X .........
Mr. Cantor..................... ........ ........ .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. BUDGET EFFECTS OF THE BILL
A. Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects
In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the following statement is
made concerning the effects on the budget of this bill, H.R.
4418 as amended and reported: The Committee agrees with the
estimate prepared by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO),
which is included below.
B. Statement Regarding New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that H.R.
4418 does not include any new budget authority or tax
expenditures.
C. Cost Estimate Prepared by the Congressional Budget Office
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, requiring a cost estimate
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, the following
report by CBO is provided.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 12, 2004.
Hon. William ``Bill'' M. Thomas,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4418, the Customs
Border Security and Trade Agencies Authorization Act of 2004.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
Douglas Holtz-Eakin,
Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 4418--Customs Border Security and Trade Agencies Authorization Act
of 2004
Summary: H.R. 4418 would authorize appropriations for 2005
and 2006 for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP),
the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and the International
Trade Commission. The bill also would make many minor changes
to the current laws relating to the entry of persons and goods
into the United States.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4418 would cost about
$21 billion over the 2005-2009 period, assuming appropriation
of the authorized amounts. All but $200 million of this total
would be spending for CBP and ICE. Enacting the bill would have
a very small effect on direct spending.
The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 4418 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 150
(international affairs), 750 (administration of justice), and
800 (general government). For this estimate, CBO assumes that
the amounts authorized by the bill will be appropriated by the
start of each fiscal year. We expect that CBP and ICE would
spend those funds somewhat more slowly than the historical
rates for these agencies because the bill would authorize
substantial increases in funding over the amounts appropriated
for 2004.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority\1\............................. 7,360 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 6,786 1,387 698 16 0 0
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level............................. 0 10,317 10,912 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 0 7,244 9,712 3,191 1,081 0
Spending Under H.R. 4418:
Authorization Level............................. 7,360 10,317 10,912 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 6,786 8,631 10,410 3,207 1,081 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2004 level is the amount appropriated for that year for CBP, ICE, the Office of the United States Trade
Representative, and the International Trade Commission.
H.R. 4418 would renew the designation of San Antonio
International Airport as a site for customs processing of
private aircraft. That provision could have a very small effect
on collections of customs fees.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 4418
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Spending: Mark Grabowicz;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa
Merrell; and Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
V. OTHER MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED UNDER THE RULES OF THE HOUSE
A. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives (relating to oversight findings),
the Committee, based on public hearing testimony and
information from the Administration, conclude that it is
appropriate and timely to consider the bill as reported.
B. Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
Administration has in place program goals and objectives, which
have been reviewed by the Committee. H.R. 4418 addresses
several items by way of studies and reports for the purposes of
evaluating with CBP and ICE are meeting their goals and
objectives.
C. Constitutional Authority Statement
With respect to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, relating to Constitutional
Authority, the Committee states that the Committee's action in
reporting the bill is derived from Article I of the
Constitution, Section 8 (``The Congress shall have power to lay
and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the
debts and to provide for * * * the general Welfare of the
United States.'')
D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates
This information is provided in accordance with Section 423
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4).
The Committee has determined that the bill does not impose
a Federal intergovernmental mandate on State, local, or tribal
governments. The Committee has determined that the bill does
not contain Federal mandates on the private sector.
VI. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 301 OF THE CUSTOMS PROCEDURAL REFORM AND SIMPLIFICATION ACT OF
1978
Sec. 301. (a)[(1) For the fiscal year beginning October 1,
1979, and each fiscal year thereafter, there are authorized to
be appropriated to the Department of the Treasury for the
United States Customs Service only such sums as may hereafter
be authorized by law.
[(2) The authorization of the appropriations for the United
States Customs Service for each fiscal year after fiscal year
1987 shall specify--
[(A) the amount authorized for the fiscal year for
the salaries and expenses of the Service in conducting
commercial operations; and
[(B) the amount authorized for the fiscal year for
the salaries and expenses of the Service for other than
commercial operations.]
(1) For the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2004, and each
fiscal year thereafter, there are authorized to be appropriated
to the Department of Homeland Security for the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection and the Bureau of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement only such sums as may hereafter be
authorized by law.
[(3)] (2) By not later than the date on which the President
submits to Congress the budget of the United States Government
for a fiscal year, the Commissioner of Customs and the
Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, respectively, shall submit to the Committee on
Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Finance of the Senate the projected amount of
funds for the succeeding fiscal year that will be necessary for
the operations of the [Customs Service] Bureau of Customs and
Border Protection and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement as provided for in subsection (b).
[(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
[(1) For noncommercial operations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated for the salaries and
expenses of the Customs Service that are incurred in
noncommercial operations not to exceed the following:
[(A) $1,365,456,000 for fiscal year 2003.
[(B) $1,399,592,400 for fiscal year 2004.
[(2) For commercial operations.--(A) There are
authorized to be appropriated for the salaries and
expenses of the Customs Service that are incurred in
commercial operations not less than the following:
[(i) $1,642,602,000 for fiscal year 2003.
[(ii) $1,683,667,050 for fiscal year 2004.
[(B) The monies authorized to be appropriated under
subparagraph (A) for any fiscal year, except for such
sums as may be necessary for the salaries and expenses
of the Customs Service that are incurred in connection
with the processing of merchandise that is exempt from
the fees imposed under section 13031(a) (9) and (10) of
the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1985, shall be appropriated from the Customs User Fee
Account.
[(3) For air interdiction.--There are authorized to
be appropriated for the operation (including salaries
and expenses) and maintenance of the air interdiction
program of the Customs Service not to exceed the
following:
[(A) $170,829,000 for fiscal year 2003.
[(B) $175,099,725 for fiscal year 2004.]
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Bureau of customs and border protection.--
(A) There are authorized to be appropriated
for the salaries and expenses of the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection not to exceed the
following:
(i) $6,203,000,000 for fiscal year
2005.
(ii) $6,469,729,000 for fiscal year
2006.
(B)(i) The monies authorized to be
appropriated under subparagraph (A) with
respect to customs revenue functions for any
fiscal year, except for such sums as may be
necessary for the salaries and expenses of the
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection that
are incurred in connection with the processing
of merchandise that is exempt from the fees
imposed under paragraphs (9) and (10) of
section 13031(a) of the Consolidated Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C.
58c(a)), shall be appropriated from the Customs
User Fee Account.
(ii) In clause (i), the term ``customs
revenue function'' means the following:
(I) Assessing and collecting customs
duties (including antidumping and
countervailing duties and duties
imposed under safeguard provisions),
excise taxes, fees, and penalties due
on imported merchandise, including
classifying and valuing merchandise for
the purposes of such assessment.
(II) Processing and denial of entry
of persons, baggage, cargo, and mail,
with respect to the assessment and
collection of import duties.
(III) Detecting and apprehending
persons engaged in fraudulent practices
designed to circumvent the customs laws
of the United States.
(IV) Enforcing section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930 and provisions
relating to import quotas and the
marking of imported merchandise, and
providing Customs Recordations for
copyrights, patents, and trademarks.
(V) Collecting accurate import data
for compilation of international trade
statistics.
(VI) Enforcing reciprocal trade
agreements.
(VII) Functions performed by the
following personnel, and associated
support staff, of the United States
Customs Service prior to the
establishment of the Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection: Import
Specialists, Entry Specialists,
Drawback Specialists, National Import
Specialists, Fines and Penalties
Specialists, attorneys of the Office of
Regulations and Rulings, Customs
Auditors, International Trade
Specialists, and Financial System
Specialists.
(VIII) Functions performed by the
following offices, with respect to any
function described in any of subclauses
(I) through (VII), and associated
support staff, of the United States
Customs Service prior to the
establishment of the Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection: the Office of
Information and Technology, the Office
of Laboratory Services, the Office of
the Chief Counsel, the Office of
Congressional Affairs, the Office of
International Affairs, and the Office
of Training and Development.
(2) Bureau of immigration and customs enforcement.--
There are authorized to be appropriated for the
salaries and expenses of the Bureau of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement not to exceed the following:
(A) $4,011,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
(B) $4,335,891,000 for fiscal year 2006.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 334 OF THE CUSTOMS AND BORDER SECURITY ACT OF 2002
[SEC. 334. ESTABLISHMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEM;
REPORTS.
[(a) Establishment and Implementation.--
[(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2003,
the Commissioner of Customs shall, in accordance with
the audit of the Customs Service's fiscal years 2000
and 1999 financial statements (as contained in the
report of the Office of the Inspector General of the
Department of the Treasury issued on February 23,
2001), establish and implement a cost accounting system
for expenses incurred in both commercial and
noncommercial operations of the Customs Service.
[(2) Additional requirement.--The cost accounting
system described in paragraph (1) shall provide for an
identification of expenses based on the type of
operation, the port at which the operation took place,
the amount of time spent on the operation by personnel
of the Customs Service, and an identification of
expenses based on any other appropriate classification
necessary to provide for an accurate and complete
accounting of the expenses.
[(b) Reports.--Beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act and ending on the date on which the cost accounting system
described in subsection (a) is fully implemented, the
Commissioner of Customs shall prepare and submit to Congress on
a quarterly basis a report on the progress of implementing the
cost accounting system pursuant to subsection (a).]
SEC. 334. ESTABLISHMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEM;
REPORTS.
(a) Establishment and Implementation; Customs and Border
Protection.--
(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2005,
the Commissioner of Customs shall, in accordance with
the audit of the Customs Service's fiscal years 2000
and 1999 financial statements (as contained in the
report of the Office of Inspector General of the
Department of the Treasury issued on February 23,
2001), establish and implement a cost accounting
system--
(A) for expenses incurred in both commercial
and noncommercial operations of the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection of the Department
of Homeland Security, which system should
specifically identify and distinguish expenses
incurred in commercial operations and expenses
incurred in noncommercial operations; and
(B) for expenses incurred both in
administering and enforcing the customs laws of
the United States and the Federal immigration
laws, which system should specifically identify
and distinguish expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the customs laws of
the United States and the expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the Federal
immigration laws.
(2) Additional requirement.--The cost accounting
system described in paragraph (1) shall provide for an
identification of expenses based on the type of
operation, the port at which the operation took place,
the amount of time spent on the operation by personnel
of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, and an
identification of expenses based on any other
appropriate classification necessary to provide for an
accurate and complete accounting of expenses.
(b) Establishment and Implementation; Immigration and Customs
Enforcement.--
(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2005,
the Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration
and Customs Enforcement shall, in accordance with the
audit of the Customs Service's fiscal years 2000 and
1999 financial statements (as contained in the report
of the Office of Inspector General of the Department of
the Treasury issued on February 23, 2001), establish
and implement a cost accounting system--
(A) for expenses incurred in both commercial
and noncommercial operations of the Bureau of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the
Department of Homeland Security, which system
should specifically identify and distinguish
expenses incurred in commercial operations and
expenses incurred in noncommercial operations;
(B) for expenses incurred both in
administering and enforcing the customs laws of
the United States and the Federal immigration
laws, which system should specifically identify
and distinguish expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the customs laws of
the United States and the expenses incurred in
administering and enforcing the Federal
immigration laws.
(2) Additional requirement.--The cost accounting
system described in paragraph (1) shall provide for an
identification of expenses based on the type of
operation, the amount of time spent on the operation by
personnel of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, and an identification of expenses based on
any other appropriate classification necessary to
provide for an accurate and complete accounting of
expenses.
(c) Reports.--
(1) Development of the cost accounting systems.--
Beginning on the date of the enactment of the Customs
Border Security and Trade Agencies Authorization Act of
2004 and ending on the date on which the cost
accounting systems described in subsections (a) and (b)
are fully implemented, the Commissioner of Customs and
the Assistant Secretary for United States Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, respectively, shall prepare
and submit to Congress on a quarterly basis a report on
the progress of implementing the cost accounting
systems pursuant to subsections (a) and (b).
(2) Annual reports.--Beginning one year after the
date on which the cost accounting systems described in
subsections (a) and (b) are fully implemented, the
Commissioner of Customs and the Assistant Secretary for
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
respectively, shall prepare and submit to Congress on
an annual basis a report itemizing the expenses
identified in subsections (a) and (b).
(3) Office of the inspector general.--Not later than
March 31, 2006, the Inspector General of the Department
of Homeland Security shall prepare and submit to
Congress a report analyzing the level of compliance
with this section and detailing any additional steps
that should be taken to improve compliance with this
section.
----------
TARIFF ACT OF 1930
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--SPECIAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Part II--United States Tariff Commission
SEC. 330. ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMISSION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--(1) * * *
(2)(A) There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Commission for necessary expenses (including the rental of
conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere) not
to exceed the following:
[(i) $54,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
[(ii) $57,240,000 for fiscal year 2004.]
(i) $61,700,000 for fiscal year 2005.
(ii) $65,278,000 for fiscal year 2006.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
PART I--DEFINITIONS AND NATIONAL CUSTOMS AUTOMATION PROGRAM
Subpart A--Definitions
SEC. 401. MISCELLANEOUS.
When used in this title or in Part I of Title III--
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Officer of the Customs: Customs Officer.--The terms
``officer of the customs'' and ``customs officer'' mean any
officer of the Bureau of Customs of the Treasury Department
(also hereinafter referred to as the ``Customs Service'') or
any commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the Coast Guard,
or any agent or other person, including foreign law enforcement
officers, authorized by law or designated by the Secretary of
the Treasury to perform any duties of an officer of the Customs
Service.
* * * * * * *
(t) Reconfigured Entry.--The term ``reconfigured entry''
means an entry filed on an import activity summary statement
which substitutes for all or part of 1 or more entries filed
under section 484(a)(1)(A) or filed on a reconciliation entry
that aggregates the entry elements to be reconciled under
section 484(b) for purposes of liquidation, reliquidation, or
protest.
* * * * * * *
Part III--Ascertainment, Collection, and Recovery of Duties
* * * * * * *
SEC. 484. ENTRY OF MERCHANDISE.
(a) Requirement and Time.--
(1) Except as provided in sections 490, 498, 552, and
553, one of the parties qualifying as ``importer of
record'' under paragraph (2)(B), either in person or by
an agent authorized by the party in writing, shall,
using reasonable care--
(A) * * *
(B) complete the entry, or substitute 1 or
more reconfigured entries on an import activity
summary statement, by filing with the Customs
Service the declared value, classification and
rate of duty applicable to the merchandise, and
such other documentation or, pursuant to an
electronic data interchange system, such other
information as is necessary to enable the
Customs Service to--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(2)(A) The documentation or information required
under paragraph (1) with respect to any imported
merchandise shall be filed or transmitted in such
manner and within such time periods as the Secretary
shall by regulation prescribe. Such regulations shall
provide for the filing of import activity summary
statements, and permit the filing of reconfigured
entries, covering entries or warehouse withdrawals made
during a calendar month, within such time period as is
prescribed in regulations but not to exceed the 20th
day following such calendar month. Entries filed under
paragraph (1)(A) shall not be liquidated if covered by
an import activity summary statement, but instead each
reconfigured entry in the import activity summary
statement shall be subject to liquidation or
reliquidation pursuant to section 500, 501, or 504.
* * * * * * *
(b) Reconciliation.--
(1) In general.--A party may elect to file a
reconciliation with regard to such entry elements as
are identified by the party pursuant to regulations
prescribed by the Secretary. If the party so elects,
the party shall declare that a reconciliation will be
filed. The declaration shall be made in such manner as
the Secretary shall prescribe and at the time the
documentation or information required by subsection
(a)(1)(B) or the import activity summary statement is
filed with, or transmitted to, the Customs Service, or
at such later time as the Customs Service may, in its
discretion, permit. The reconciliation shall be filed
by the importer of record at such time and in such
manner as the Secretary prescribes but not later than
[15 months] 21 months after the date the importer
declares his intent to file the reconciliation. In the
case of reconciling issues relating to the assessment
of antidumping and countervailing duties, the
reconciliation shall be filed not later than 90 days
after the date the Customs Service advises the importer
that the period of review for antidumping or
countervailing duty purposes has been completed. Before
filing a reconciliation, an importer of record shall
post bond or other security pursuant to such
regulations as the Secretary may prescribe.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 501. VOLUNTARY RELIQUIDATIONS BY THE CUSTOMS SERVICE.
A liquidation made in accordance with section 500 or 504 or
any reliquidation thereof made in accordance with this section
may be reliquidated in any respect by the Customs Service,
notwithstanding the filing of a protest, within ninety days
from the date on which notice of the original liquidation is
given or transmitted to the importer, his consignee or agent.
Notice of such reliquidation shall be given or transmitted in
the manner prescribed with respect to original liquidations
under section 500(e).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 504. LIMITATION ON LIQUIDATION.
(a) Liquidation.--Unless an entry is extended under
subsection (b) or suspended as required by statute or court
order, except as provided in section 751(a)(3), an entry of
merchandise not liquidated within one year from:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) the date of withdrawal from warehouse of such
merchandise for consumption where, pursuant to
regulations issued under section 505(a) of this Act,
duties may be deposited after the filing of an entry or
withdrawal from warehouse; [or]
(4) if a reconciliation is filed, or should have been
filed, the date of the filing under section 484 or the
date the reconciliation should have been [filed;]
filed, whichever is earlier; or
(5) if a reconfigured entry is filed under an import
activity summary statement, the date the import
activity summary statement is filed or should have been
filed, whichever is earlier;
shall be deemed liquidated at the rate of duty, value,
quantity, and amount of duties asserted [at the time of entry]
by the importer of record. Notwithstanding section 500(e) of
this Act, notice of liquidation need not be given of an entry
deemed liquidated.
(b) Extension.--The Secretary may extend the period in which
to liquidate an entry if--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
The Secretary shall give notice of an extension under this
subsection to the importer of record and the surety of such
importer of record. Notice shall be in such form and manner
(which may include electronic transmittal) as the Secretary
shall by regulation prescribe. Any entry the liquidation of
which is extended under this subsection shall be treated as
having been liquidated at the rate of duty, value, quantity,
and amount of duty asserted [at the time of entry] by the
importer of record at the expiration of 4 years from the
applicable date specified in subsection (a).
* * * * * * *
(d) Removal of Suspension.--Except as provided in section
751(a)(3), when a suspension required by statute or court order
is removed, the Customs Service shall liquidate the entry,
unless liquidation is extended under subsection (b), within 6
months after receiving notice of the removal from the
Department of Commerce, other agency, or a court with
jurisdiction over the entry. Any entry (other than an entry
with respect to which liquidation has been extended under
subsection (b)) not liquidated by the Customs Service within 6
months after receiving such notice shall be treated as having
been liquidated at the rate of duty, value, quantity, and
amount of duty asserted [at the time of entry] by the importer
of record.
SEC. 505. PAYMENT OF DUTIES AND FEES.
(a) Deposit of Estimated Duties and Fees.--Unless the entry
is subject to a periodic payment referred to in this subsection
or the merchandise is entered for warehouse or transportation,
or under bond, the importer of record shall deposit with the
Customs Service at the time of entry, or at such later time as
the Secretary may prescribe by regulation (but not later than
[10 working days] 12 working days after entry or release) the
amount of duties and fees estimated to be payable on such
merchandise. As soon as a periodic payment module of the
Automated Commercial Environment is developed, but no later
than October 1, 2004, [a participating importer of record, or
the importer's filer, may deposit estimated duties and fees for
entries of merchandise no later than the 15th day of the month
following the month in which the merchandise is entered or
released, whichever comes first.] the Secretary shall
promulgate regulations, after testing the module, permitting a
participating importer of record to deposit estimated duties
and fees for entries of merchandise, other than merchandise
entered for warehouse, transportation, or under bond, no later
than the 15 working days following the month in which the
merchandise is entered or released, whichever comes first.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 514. PROTEST AGAINST DECISIONS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE.
(a) Finality of Decisions.--Except as provided in subsection
(b) of this section, section 501 (relating to voluntary
reliquidations), section 516 (relating to petitions by domestic
interested parties), and section 520 [(relating to refunds and
errors) of this Act] (relating to refunds), any clerical error,
mistake of fact, or other inadvertence, whether or not
resulting from or contained in an electronic transmission,
adverse to the importer, in any entry, liquidation, or
reliquidation, and, decisions of the Customs Service, including
the legality of all orders and findings entering into the same,
as to--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) the liquidation or reliquidation of an entry, or
reconciliation as to the issues contained therein, or
any modification thereof, including the liquidation of
an entry, pursuant to either section 500 or section
504;
* * * * * * *
(7) the refusal to reliquidate an entry under
subsection [(c) or] (d) of section 520 of this act;
* * * * * * *
(c) Protests.--
(1) In general.--A protest of a decision made under
subsection (a) shall be filed in writing, or
transmitted electronically pursuant to an electronic
data interchange system, in accordance with regulations
prescribed by the Secretary. A protest must set forth
distinctly and specifically--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
Only one protest may be filed for each entry of
merchandise, except that where the entry covers
merchandise of different categories, a separate protest
may be filed for each category. In addition, separate
protests may be filed for each category. In addition,
separate protests filed by different authorized persons
with respect to any one category of merchandise, or
with respect to a determination of origin under section
202 of the North American Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act, that is the subject of a protest
are deemed to be part of a single protest. [A protest
may be amended,] Unless a request for accelerated
disposition is filed under section 515(b), a protest
may be amended, under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary, to set forth objections as to a decision or
decisions described in subsection (a) which were not
the subject of the original protest, in the form and
manner prescribed for a protest, any time prior to the
expiration of the time in which such protest could have
been filed under this section. New grounds in support
of objections raised by a valid protest or amendment
thereto may be presented for consideration in
connection with the review of such protest pursuant to
section 515 of this Act at any time prior to the
disposition of the protest in accordance with that
section.
* * * * * * *
(3) Time for filing.--A protest of a decision, order,
or finding described in subsection (a) shall be filed
with the Customs Service within [ninety days] 180 days
after but not before--
(A) [notice of] date of liquidation or
reliquidation, or
(B) in circumstances where subparagraph (A)
is inapplicable, the date of the decision as to
which protest is made.
A protest by a surety which has an unsatisfied legal
claim under its bond may be filed within [90 days] 180
days from the date of mailing of notice of demand for
payment against its bond. If another party has not
filed a timely protest, the surety's protest shall
certify that it is not being filed collusively to
extend another authorized person's time to protest as
specified in this subsection.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 515. Review of Protests.--
(a) * * *
(b) Request for Accelerated Disposition of Protest.--A
request for accelerated disposition of a protest filed in
accordance with section 514 of this Act may be mailed by
certified or registered mail to the appropriate customs officer
any time [after ninety days] concurrent with or following the
filing of such protest. For purposes of section 1581 of title
28 of the United States Code, a protest which has not been
allowed or denied in whole or in part within thirty days
following the date of mailing by certified or registered mail
of a request for accelerated disposition shall be deemed denied
on the thirtieth day following mailing of such request.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 520. REFUNDS AND ERRORS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) Notwithstanding a valid protest was not filed, the
Customs Service may, in accordance with regulations prescribed
by the Secretary, reliquidate an entry or reconciliation to
correct--
[(1) a clerical error, mistake of fact, or other
inadvertence, whether or not resulting from or
contained in electronic transmission, not amounting to
an error in the construction of a law, adverse to the
importer and manifest from the record or established by
documentary evidence, in any entry, liquidation, or
other customs transaction, when the error, mistake, or
inadvertence is brought to the attention of the Customs
Service within one year after the date of liquidation
or exaction; or
[(2) any assessment of duty on household or personal
effects in respect of which an application for refund
has been filed, with such employee as the Secretary of
the Treasury shall designate, within one year after the
date of entry.]
* * * * * * *
SEC. 629. INSPECTIONS AND PRECLEARANCE IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.
(a) In General.--When authorized by treaty or executive
agreement, the Secretary may station customs officers in
foreign countries for the purpose of examining persons and
merchandise prior to their arrival in, or subsequent to their
exit from, the United States.
* * * * * * *
(c) Compliance.--The Secretary may by regulation require
compliance with the customs laws of the United States in a
foreign country and, in such a case the customs laws and other
civil and criminal laws of the United States relating to the
importation or exportation of merchandise, filing of false
statements, and the unlawful removal of merchandise from
customs custody shall apply in the same manner as if the
foreign station is a port of entry or exit within the customs
territory of the United States.
* * * * * * *
[(e) Stationing of Foreign Customs Officers in the United
States.--The Secretary of State, in coordination with the
Secretary, may enter into agreements with any foreign country
authorizing the stationing in the United States of customs
officials of that country (if similar privileges are extended
by that country to United States officials) for the purpose of
insuring that persons and merchandise going directly to that
country from the United States comply with the customs and
other laws of that country governing the importation of
merchandise. Any foreign customs official stationed in the
United States under this subsection may exercise such functions
and perform such duties as United States officials may be
authorized to perform in that foreign country under reciprocal
agreement.]
(e) Stationing of Foreign Customs and Agriculture Inspection
Officers in the United States.--The Secretary of State, in
coordination with the Secretary and the Secretary of
Agriculture, may enter into agreements with any foreign country
authorizing the stationing in the United States of customs and
agriculture inspection officials of that country (if similar
privileges are extended by that country to United States
officials) for the purpose of insuring that persons and
merchandise going directly to that country from the United
States, or that have gone directly from that countryto the
United States, comply with the customs and other laws of that country
governing the importation or exportation of merchandise. Any foreign
customs or agriculture inspection official stationed in the United
States under this subsection may exercise such functions, perform such
duties, and enjoy such privileges and immunities as United States
officials may be authorized to perform or are afforded in that foreign
country by treaty, agreement, or law.
* * * * * * *
(g) Privileges and Immunities.--Any person designated to
perform the duties of an officer of the Customs Service
pursuant to section 401(i) of this Act shall be entitled to the
same privileges and immunities as an officer of the Customs
Service with respect to any actions taken by the designated
person in the performance of such duties.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 1453 OF THE TARIFF SUSPENSION AND TRADE ACT OF 2000
SEC. 1453. DESIGNATION OF SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FOR CUSTOMS
PROCESSING OF CERTAIN PRIVATE AIRCRAFT ARRIVING IN
THE UNITED STATES.
(a) Designation.--For the [2-year period] 6-year period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Commissioner of the Customs Service shall designate the San
Antonio International Airport in San Antonio, Texas, as an
airport at which private aircraft described in subsection (b)
may land for processing by the Customs Service in accordance
with section 122.24(b) of title 19, Code of Federal
Regulations.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 127 OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003
[Sec. 127. Authority for the Creation of Integrated Border
Inspection Areas and Designation of Foreign Law Enforcement
Officers. (a) Creation of Integrated Border Inspection Areas.--
[(1) The Commissioner of Customs, in consultation
with the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA),
shall seek to establish Integrated Border Inspection
Areas (IBIAs), i.e., areas on either side of the United
States-Canada border in which the United States Customs
officers can inspect vehicles entering the United
States from Canada before they enter the United States,
or Canadian officers can inspect vehicles entering
Canada from the United States before they enter Canada.
This may include, where appropriate, employment of
reverse inspection techniques.
[(2) The Commissioner of Customs, in consultation
with the Administrator of the General Services
Administration when appropriate, shall endeavor to
carry out the IBIA program in a manner that minimizes
adverse impacts on the surrounding community.
[(b) Section 1401(i) of title 19, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``, including foreign law enforcement
officers,'' after ``or other person''.
[(c) Section 1629 of title 19, United States Code, is
amended--
[(1) in paragraph (a) by inserting ``, or subsequent
to their exit from,'' after ``prior to their arrival
in'';
[(2) in paragraph (c) by inserting ``or exportation''
after ``relating to the importation'' and by inserting
``or exit'' after ``port of entry'';
[(3) in paragraph (e), by--
[(A) inserting ``and agriculture inspection''
after ``customs'' in each instance where
reference is currently made to ``customs
officers'' or ``customs officials'' in this
subsection;
[(B) inserting ``and the Secretary of
Agriculture'' after ``in coordination with the
Secretary'';
[(C) inserting ``or that have gone directly
from that country to the United States'' after
``to that country from the United States'';
[(D) inserting ``or exportation'' after
``governing the importation'';
[(E) deleting ``and'' and inserting a comma
(``,'') after ``such functions'';
[(F) inserting ``, and enjoy such privileges
and immunities'' after ``such duties'';
[(G) inserting ``or are afforded'' after
``authorized to perform''; and
[(H) deleting ``under reciprocal agreement''
and inserting ``by treaty, agreement or law''.
[(4) by adding at the end the following:
[``(g) Persons designated to perform the duties of an officer
of the Customs Service pursuant to section 1401(i) of this
title shall be entitled to the same privileges and immunities
as an officer of the Customs Service with respect to any
actions taken by the designated person in the performance of
such duties.''.]
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 13031 OF THE CONSOLIDATED OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT OF
1985
SEC. 13031. FEES FOR CERTAIN CUSTOMS SERVICES.
(a) * * *
(b) Limitations on Fees.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(9)(A) With respect to the processing of letters, documents,
records, shipments, merchandise, or any other item that is
valued at an amount that is [less than $2,000] $2,000 or less
(or such higher amount as the Secretary of the Treasury may set
by regulation pursuant to section 498 of the Tariff Act of
1930), except such items entered for transportation and
exportation or immediate exportation at a centralized hub
facility, an express consignment carrier facility, or a small
airport or other facility, the following reimbursements and
payments are required:
(i) * * *
[(ii) Subject to the provisions of
subparagraph (B), in the case of an
express consignment carrier facility or
centralized hub facility, $.66 per
individual airway bill or bill of
lading.]
(ii) Notwithstanding subsection
(e)(6) and subject to the provisions of
subparagraph (B), in the case of an
express consignment carrier facility or
centralized hub facility--
(I) $.66 per individual
airway bill or bill of lading;
and
(II) if the merchandise is
formally entered, the fee
provided for in subsection
(a)(9), if applicable.
(B)(i) Beginning in fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of the
Treasury may adjust (not more than once per fiscal year) the
amount described in subparagraph (A)(ii) to an amount that is
not less than $.35 and not more than $1.00 per individual
airway bill or bill of lading. The Secretary shall provide
notice in the Federal Register of a proposed adjustment under
the preceding sentence and the reasons therefor and shall allow
for public comment on the proposed adjustment.
(ii) Notwithstanding section 451 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
the payment required by [subparagraph (A)(ii)] subparagraph
(A)(ii) (I) or (II) shall be the only payment required for
reimbursement of the Customs Service in connection with the
processing of an individual airway bill or bill of lading in
accordance with such subparagraph and for providing services at
express consignment carrier facilities or centralized hub
facilities, except that the Customs Service may require such
facilities to cover expenses of the Customs Service for
adequate office space, equipment, furnishings, supplies, and
security.
(iii)(I) The payment required by subparagraph (A)(ii) and
clause (ii) of this subparagraph shall be paid on a quarterly
basis by the carrier using the facility to the Customs Service
in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
the Treasury.
(II) 50 percent of the amount of payments received under
subparagraph (A)(ii) and clause (ii) of this subparagraph
shall, in accordance with section 524 of the Tariff Act of
1930, be deposited in the Customs User Fee Account and shall be
used to directly reimburse each appropriation for the amount
paid out of that appropriation for the costs incurred in
providing services to express consignment carrier facilities or
centralized hub facilities. Amounts deposited in accordance
with the preceding sentence shall be available until expended
for the provision of customs services to express consignment
carrier facilities or centralized hub facilities.
(III) Notwithstanding section 524 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
the remaining 50 percent of the amount of payments received
under subparagraph (A)(ii) and clause (ii) of this subparagraph
shall bepaid to the Secretary of the Treasury, which is in lieu
of the payment of fees under subsection (a)(10) of this section.
* * * * * * *
(e) Provision of Customs Services.--
[(1) Notwithstanding section 451 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1451) or any other provision of law (other than
paragraph (2)),]
(1) In general.--
(A) Scheduled flights.--Notwithstanding
section 451 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1451) or any other provision of law
(other than subparagraph (B) and paragraph
(2)), the customs services required to be
provided to passengers upon arrival in the
United States shall be adequately provided in
connection with scheduled airline flights at
customs serviced airports when needed and at no
cost (other than the fees imposed under
subsection (a)) to airlines and airline
passengers.
(B) Charter flights.--If a charter air
carrier (as defined in section 40102(13) of
title 49, United States Code) specifically
requests that customs border patrol services
for passengers and their baggage be provided
for a charter flight arriving after normal
operating hours at a customs border patrol
serviced airport and overtime funds for those
services are not available, the appropriate
customs border patrol officer may assign
sufficient customs employees (if available) to
perform any such services, which could lawfully
be performed during regular hours of operation,
and any overtime fees incurred in connection
with such service shall be paid by the charter
air carrier.
* * * * * * *
(f) Disposition of Fees.--(1) There is established in the
general fund of the Treasury a separate account which shall be
known as the ``Customs User Fee Account''. Notwithstanding
section 524 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1524), there
shall be deposited as offsetting receipts into the Customs User
Fee Account all fees collected under subsection (a) except--
(A) * * *
(B) amounts deposited into the Customs Commercial and
Homeland Security Automation Account under paragraph
(5).
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 141 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974
SEC. 141. OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1)(A) There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Office for the purposes of carrying out its functions the
following:
[(i) $32,300,000 for fiscal year 2003.
[(ii) $33,108,000 for fiscal year 2004.]
(i) $39,552,000 for fiscal year 2005.
(ii) $39,552,000 for fiscal year 2006.
* * * * * * *
VII. COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC, July 13, 2004.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner: Thank you for your letter
regarding H.R. 4418, the ``Customs Border Security and Trade
Agencies Authorization Act of 2004.'' The Committee on Ways and
Means ordered favorably reported, as amended, H.R. 4418 on
Thursday, July 8, 2004 by a 33-0 vote. I appreciate your
agreement to expedite the passage of this legislation although
it contains several immigration provisions that are within your
Committee's jurisdiction. I acknowledge your decision to forego
further action on the bill is based on the understanding that
it will not prejudice the Committee on the Judiciary with
request to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar
legislation.
Our committees have long collaborated on these important
initiatives, and I am very pleased we are continuing that
cooperation. Your leadership on immigration issues is critical
to the success of this bill. I appreciate your helping us to
move legislation quickly to the floor.
Finally, I will include in both the Committee report and
the Congressional Record a copy of our exchange of letters on
this matter. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation. I
look forward to working with you in the future.
Best regards,
Bill Thomas,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, July 13, 2004.
Hon. Bill Thomas,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thomas: In recognition of the desire to
expedite floor consideration of H.R. 4418, the ``Customs Border
Security Act of 2004,'' the Committee on the Judiciary hereby
waives consideration of the bill.
Certain sections of H.R. 4418 contain matters within the
Committee on the Judiciary's Rule X jurisdiction: Section 101
(insofar as it authorizes funding for immigration matters);
Section 102 (insofar as it requires cost accounting systems for
immigration matters); and Section 122 (insofar as the
Integrated Border Inspection Areas include immigration
matters). Because of the need to expedite this legislation, I
will not seek to mark up the bill under the Committee on the
Judiciary's secondary referral.
The Committee on the Judiciary takes this action with the
understanding that the Committee's jurisdiction over these
provisions is in no way diminished or altered. I would
appreciate your including this letter in your Committee's
report on H.R. 4418 and the Congressional Record during
consideration of the legislation on the House floor.
Sincerely,
F. James Sesenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman.
VIII. VIEWS
----------
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
Earlier this year, the Customs and Border Protection Agency
admitted that it had failed to collect more than $130 million
in duties owed on imports, largely from China. An investigation
showed that one reason for this $130 million problem was a
loophole applicable to so-called ``New Shippers'' of goods
subject to antidumping (AD) and contervailing (CVD) duties.
There are variations on this loophole, but basically, one
version of the loophole allows these ``New Shippers'' to post
bonds for the unfair trade duties they owe, rather than paying
the estimated amount owed. Established importers do not enjoy
this benefit of being able to post bonds for pennies on the
dollar, but must pay the estimated duties.
In what appeared to be a pattern, importers failed to pay
the full amount of duties, leaving CBP with recourse to the
bonds. To the extend that the bonds were collectible, they were
insufficient to cover the full amount of the duties owed. In
other cases, CBP was unable to collect on the bonds. This
problem contributed to CBP's failure to collect more than $130
million worth of duties owed; America's fair trade laws were
flouted and the U.S. Treasury was deprived of a substantial
amount of revenues that it was due. A large number of the
importers taking advantage of the loophole were importing
products from China; in some cases, it appears that Chinese
firms subject to AD/CVD duties set up shell companies to take
advantage of the ``New Shipper'' process. In a related problem,
it appears that CBP has been unable in a number of cases to
collect the full amount of a duty owed, even when ``New
Shippers'' were not involved and cash deposits were paid.
These failures reflect poorly on CBP. It has repeatedly,
and in a variety of contexts and circumstances, failed to
ensure that U.S. trade laws are enforced as provided by law.
These serious and repeated failures have denied American
workers, farmers and businesses benefits to which they are
entitled under U.S. law. These lapses involve failure to follow
procedures established under U.S. law and failure to utilize
due diligence in enforcing the U.S. law.
In response to Congressional inquiries and criticisms, CBP
recently proposed a series of reforms to address aspects of
these problems. We have serious concerns not only about CBP's
ability to implement the proposed reforms, but also with
whether the reforms would in fact eliminate the problems. We
believe that a more comprehensive approach involving changes to
current U.S. law is necessary. Steps that we recommend taking
include ending the special treatment allowed for ``New
Shippers.'' In particular, ``New Shippers'' should be treated
like other importers--they would have to pay estimated duties
with each entry, and would not be allowed to post bonds.
This step would be fully consistent with our international
obligations, which authorize the United States to ``request
guarantees to ensure that . . . duties can be levied
retroactively to the date of the initiation of the review.''
Clearly, the ``guarantees'' in the form of bonds have not
ensured that the duties could be levied as provided in Article
9.5 of the Antidumping Agreement of the World Trade
Organization. To do so requires collecting cash deposits. We
would be prepared to consider other alternatives, including a
more reliable bonding requirement, at some future date, were it
to be proposed by CBP, and were it to ensure the ability of the
United States to levy duties retroactively to the date of the
initiation of the review.
In addition, we believe that the requirement that importers
of goods subject to antidumping or countervailing duty actions
post continuous bonds with a higher level of coverage should be
statutorily mandated--and not left to CBP's discretion. CBP's
record in implementing laws that allow for discretion has not
always been consistent with Congress' expectations in the past,
underscoring the need for Congress to provide exact and
specific direction.
We will continue to raise this issue as the legislation
moves forward. We are supportive of the authorizations for
these agencies, and of other provisions in the legislation.
That said, the failure to enforce U.S. trade laws is a serious
one, and one that deserves action from this House.
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
Section 201 of the H.R. 4418 authorizes appropriations for
USTR for FY2005 and FY2006 at $41.5 million per year. This
amount is $2 million over the Administration's budget request.
We believe that additional direction should have been
included to ensure that some portion of this additional $2
million is used to ensure our trading partners are living up to
their international trade obligations. The current legislation
does not require this outcome. Instead, as this bill is
currently drafted, the additional $2 million can be used
entirely for free trade agreement negotiations, administering
U.S. trade preference programs (like AGOA, CBI and ATPA), and
coordinating inter-agency trade policy.
During the Full Committee markup, Congressman Levin offered
an amendment that directed USTR to use some part of the
additional $2 million for staff to, among other activities,
investigate, prosecute, and defend cases before the World Trade
Organization and under trade agreements to which the United
States is a party, and to address foreign government barriers
to United States goods and services, particularly with respect
to the People's Republic of China. The amendment was rejected
on a straight party line vote.
The decision by the Republican Members of the Committee to
reject the amendment is unfortunate. In 2003, the goods trade
deficit set a record high of $549.4 billion. We are losing
ground even areas, like advanced technology products, where the
United States has dominated. In 2003, our deficit in advanced
technology products climbed 65 percent, and total goods exports
were down $58 million from 2000. Unfortunately, the trade
deficit is on track once again this year to set a new record.
We will continue to work for inclusion of specific
direction to USTR on this issue, so that USTR starts producing
results for American workers, farmers and businesses.
Compilation of Additional Views
Democratic Members of the Committee were provided only a
half working day to respond to the Committee views, which,
without prior notice, contained comments on a number of
tangential points. Further, the Majority provided the
Democratic Members of the Committee with notice at
approximately 6:45 in the evening that this legislation would
come to the Floor the next day under the Suspensions Calendar.
As a consequence, many of the Democratic Members of the
Committee have been deprived of the opportunity to review,
consider and sign these Additional Views. We hope that in the
future more adequate notice can be provided so that the
Majority and Minority can work more collaboratively whenever
possible.
Charles B. Rangel.
Jim McDermott.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones.
Robert T. Matsui.
Sander Levin.
Xavier Becerra.
Earl Pomeroy.