The agency also has been taking a “really strong look” at forced labor used for imported goods.
As U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is “dusting off” its expertise in collecting multifaceted tariff revenues after a period of fewer trade remedies, the agency also is formulating a proposal for Congress to grant it additional authority for managing risks associated with e-commerce, Brenda Smith, executive assistant commissioner for CBP’s Office of Trade, said Wednesday.
Speaking during the American Apparel and Footwear Association (AAFA) 2018 Sourcing Conference in Washington, D.C., Smith noted that Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked her “yes or no” at a March 6 committee hearing on counterfeits whether CBP had enough authority to address such risks.
“Well, I wasn’t going to say, ‘Yes,’ so I said, ‘No, sir, we could use more,’” Smith said.
Wyden had asked CBP to submit more details of additional needed enforcement authorities related to e-commerce-related risks, including counterfeits, by May 5.
The proposal includes considerations for ensuring CBP shares sufficient information with rights holders and works appropriately with parties to the transaction, “because in the e-commerce world, those parties are different than the traditional supply chains that we worked with in the past and that most of our authorities are linked to,” Smith said.
CBP is “trying to get our arms around what that ecosystem looks like and how we can respond, both to enforce the laws that we are expected to enforce, but also to facilitate a very vibrant sector of the economy that is driving a lot of growth and prosperity,” she said.
Smith and a senior Department of Homeland Security official recently visited the White House to talk about implementation of steel and aluminum tariffs.
“We haven’t done a lot of trade remedies in the last 10 years, so we’re sort of dusting off that expertise,” she said.
While CBP doesn’t create trade policy, it provides its expertise and capabilities on aspects of trade implementation, including on the Automated Commercial Environment and related technology and what should happen to shipments in foreign-trade zones under a trade remedy “so that the legal framework is clear,” Smith said.
Smith also noted CBP has been taking a “really strong look” at forced labor in the context of imports, and pointed to an April 13 letter that the U.S. Council for International Business and AAFA sent to her and other DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.
Focusing on March 30 DHS guidance on North Korea sanctions, the letter asked whether the U.S. government can create a consolidated list of locations where North Korean citizens are likely to be working, citing inadequate existing research resources as well as whether the existence of an importer’s supply chain due diligence program could help mitigate government responses, among other things.
CBP is developing a rule-making process that will allow the agency to communicate its expectations with the private sector regarding forced labor imports, Smith said.
“I hope to recognize where an effort has been made, to then provide predictability and transparency and time frames around the detention and seizure process and exclusion process,” she said. “I think that will help.”
An interagency group dedicated to forced labor policy enforcement continues to meet monthly, Smith said, apparently referring to the Forced Labor Interagency Work Group. The group consists of officials from CBP and the State and Labor departments, among other agencies.
“It’s been a very educational conversation between us, as we’ve learned what information people have, what their policy goals are, and what some of the real-life issues are, that we have to address to be successful,” Smith said.
Customs wants more e-comm enforcement power
