TSA’s New Air Cargo Screening Rules Have A Serious Flaw

On September 16, 2009, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) issued new air cargo screening rules.   The rules are generally well thought out, except for one glaring problem.

Some background first.  After the tragic, terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the U.S. Congress convened a Commission to investigate how it happened and how it could be prevented from happening again. A primary result was the “Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (“9/11 Act”).  The amended law at 49 U.S.C. section 44901(g)(1) required all airlines to screen 50% of the cargo on passenger aircraft by February 3, 2009.  The law also required 100% of the air cargo to be screened by August 3, 2010.  The challenge was that with 12 million pounds of cargo that is now transported on passenger aircraft daily, the TSA concluded that airlines by themselves could not achieve the 100% screening requirement.

Hence, the September 16, 2009 Air Cargo Screening Interim Final Rule, effective November 16, 2009, created the certified cargo screening program (CCSP) so that companies other than airlines could be approved by TSA to screen cargo before it was delivered to an airline at the airport to be put in the belly of a passenger plane.  The companies that would screen the cargo would be known as certified cargo screening facilities (CCSF).

The term “screening” is defined as a “physical examination or non-intrusive method of assessing whether cargo poses a threat to transportation security.  Methods include x-ray systems, explosive detection, explosives detection canine teams, […]

By |2015-11-30T19:39:07-05:00October 5, 2009|TSA|0 Comments

Be There or Be Square — OWIT-South Florida IBWOY Awards

Save the Date!
Please save November 12, 2009, for the Organization of Women in International Trades (OWIT) annual International Business Women of the Year (IBWOY) awards luncheon, honoring exemplary women in the South Florida international trade community. While the details are being fine tuned, I can say that we are doing something different this year. Typically, we raise money for a scholarship for a university student. However, this year, so many of us have been touched by cancer. We recently lost Bunny Schreiber, a beacon in the South Florida trade community, and one of our own Board members is currently fighting cancer. Therefore, this year we would like to raise money for breast cancer awareness and will donate proceeds of our silent auction to the Susan G. Komen foundation. If you have any items you’d like to include in the auction, or are interested in sponsorship, please contact me.
I have to say, I personally have truly enjoyed being a Board member of OWIT for the past four years, and hope you too will get involved! We will elect a new board this December for 2010, please express your interest. We’d love your feedback for future events, and would appreciate new faces on our committees!

By |2009-10-05T13:00:00-04:00October 5, 2009|OWIT-South Florida|0 Comments

A Nightmare for an Importer: Being Accused of Fraud by U.S. Customs

It is common for an importer to receive a CBP Form 28 (Request for Information) and then a CBP Form 29 (Notice of Action) for incorrectly classifying merchandise.  It is also relatively common for an importer to receive a Pre-Penalty Notice from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) alleging negligence, gross negligence, or fraud, and demanding tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary penalties and additional duties.  Don’t panic.

When a CBP 28 or CBP 29 is issued by an Import Specialist of Customs to an importer, it may ultimately result in the issuance of a fraud penalty in violation of 19 U.S.C. 1592.  If Customs alleges fraud, then the penalty will be equal to the total invoiced value of the shipments affected.  For example, if a shipment of clothing valued at $100,000 was misdescribed or misdeclared in some way to Customs, and a fraud penalty is issued, the penalty will $100,000.  If the penalty is not paid, the case is referred by Customs to the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue litigation against the importer.  Sometimes, Customs seeks to collect money by personally naming the officers, shareholders, and/or managers of the company as well.  That means joint and several liability, so even if the company is no longer in business or does not have the money to pay, the U.S. Department of Justice will seek the payment of the penalty from the persons involved.

Whenever a CBP 28 or 29 indicates that the importer is under “formal […]

Trademark Infringement

How often do you think U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials have heard an importer say, “. . . but I didn’t tell the manufacturer to put that trademark on there”? Ignorance may be bliss, but CBP will not accept that excuse as an acceptable reason to allow counterfeit merchandise to enter into the United States, or even allow it to move in-transit through the United States. This, however, is the often heard explanation when an importer does not do its due diligence.

There are a few steps every importer should take prior to doing business with a new manufacturer or importing into the United States a new product.

A reputable manufacturer should, and ultimately will, provide a sample. Inspect the sample thoroughly. If it is an electronic item, you may want to go as far as taking it apart to make sure that the inner workings do not contain any trademarks or logos or copyrights which either you did not request or the manufacturer is not licensed to produce. If your sample is different than the merchandise shipped, then you can at least say to CBP, “This is not what I ordered. I have a sample of what I was supposed to receive,” and the correspondence with the manufacturer to support your claim. Even if you do not  get your merchandise back from CBP, it is important to understand that you may use your due diligence as a mitigating factor if and when you are fined […]

Customs Wants to Know What’s in Your Laptop

Whenever you cross the border of the United States, you are subject to a border search. Borders include international airports and seaports, in addition to land crossings with Mexico and Canada.  U.S. Customs has authority to search persons and things that cross the border  – your car, your private yacht, your private jet, your luggage, and yes, even your mobile phone, laptop, and iPod.     In an August 27, 2009 press release, United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano set forth some guidelines to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)and to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) about searching electronic media devices.

The new guidelines are considered vital to DHS’s mission in “detecting information that poses a serious harm to the United States, including terrorist plans… or possession of child pornography and trademark or copyright infringement.”  Interestingly, the press release stated: “Between October 1, 2008 and August 11, 2009, CBP encountered more than 221 million travelers at U.S. ports of entry.  Approximately 1,000 laptop searches were performed in these instances – of those, just 46 were in-depth.”  The DHS website provides examples of when the searches of electronic media devices resulted in arrests of individuals transporting the devices.

Civil libertarians have long been concerned about U.S. Customs’ authority to search electronic media, considering it a possible invasion of privacy.  As one commentor publicly said to Secretary Napolitano “You and your government are paranoid!”  Sen. Feingold (D-WI) stated during 2008 Congressional hearings on this issue: “When the Government looks through the contents of your laptop, is that just like […]

Go to Top