CBP, Canada and Mexico to Push for Global Unique Facility Identifier at WCO Meeting in July
AUSTIN, Texas -- CBP Acting Commissioner Kevin McAleenan will raise the need for a worldwide unique facility identifier when he travels to Brussels in early July for a meeting of the World Customs Organization policy council, Valerie Neuhart, acting director of CBP’s Office of Trade Relations, said on June 21. McAleenan will be joined in the effort by representatives from Canada and Mexico, who have also been in discussions with CBP about harmonizing unique facility identifiers, she said, speaking during a panel discussion of upcoming ACE priorities at the American Association of Exporters and Importers annual conference.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
As much as the current manufacturer ID (MID) may plague industry, “it plagues us as well,” Neuhart said. The oft-pilloried data element makes it difficult for CBP to establish mutual recognition arrangements and international trusted trader programs when customs authorities aren’t talking about the same entity from government to government, “much less within our own government,” she said. “So we have some kind of challenge here.”
In the medium term, the Border Interagency Executive Council is developing “an approach -- not saying a solution -- an approach or concept” that CBP can then pilot to test it out, Neuhart said. The BIEC isn’t looking for a quick replacement, but “something that could get us there,” she said. More immediately, the BIEC is preparing U.S. leaders, Mexico and Canada with an “idea of what road we can take.” CBP recognizes “the issues around MID. And we recognize there many entities that are being requested of our industry at this point in time, and that there is a need for a unique identifier so we can all talk the same language, Neuhart said. The issue is not just a U.S. government challenge, but something the U.S. needs to come to terms with in cooperation with its international partners, she said.
Meanwhile, discussing another ACE priority during the same panel, National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America Vice President Amy Magnus said the NCBFAA has been having some difficulty making headway in efforts to ascertain what different partner government agencies require for Section 321 entries. The trade group has been going to each agency with PGA requirements and asking if they still want the data for entries under the new $800 de minimis limit. One agency that has been forthcoming is the Food and Drug Administration, which referred the NCBFAA to a 1994 CSMS message (here) that outlines what types of shipments don’t require PGA data on Section 321 entries.
That message could serve as a model to other agencies, Neuhart said. Clarifying PGA Section 321 requirements is “the type of challenge that the BIEC is primed for” and “have been initiated,” she said. The de minimis rule applies specifically to duties and taxes, and doesn’t mean importers get a waiver for health and safety issues or PGA requirements, said Neuhart, who chairs the BIEC external engagement committee.