52928 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection 

19 CFR Parts 113 and 191 

[USCBP–2009–0021] 

RIN 1505–AC18 

Drawback of Internal Revenue Excise 

Tax 

AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, 

Department of Homeland Security; 

Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document proposes to 

amend title 19 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations to preclude situations 

where imported merchandise subject to 

Federal excise tax is allowed into the 

United States, in effect, 99 percent free 

of that tax through application of a 

drawback claim. Specifically, the 

proposed amendments would preclude 

the filing of a substitution drawback 

claim for internal revenue excise tax 

paid on imported merchandise in 

situations where no excise tax was paid 

upon the substituted merchandise or 

where the substituted merchandise is 

the subject of a different claim for 

refund or drawback of tax under any 

provision of the Internal Revenue Code. 

This document also proposes to amend 

title 19 by adding a basic importation 

and entry bond condition to foster 

compliance with the amended drawback 

provision. These proposed amendments 

are necessary to protect the revenue by 

clarifying the relationship between 

drawback claims and Federal excise tax 

liability. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 16, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by USCBP docket number, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

via docket number USCBP–2009–0021. 

• Mail: Trade and Commercial 

Regulations Branch, Regulations and 

Rulings, Office of International Trade, 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 

799 9th Street, NW. (Mint Annex), 

Washington, DC 20229–1179. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

USCBP docket number for this proposed 

rulemaking. All comments received will 

be posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submitted 

comments may also be inspected during 

regular business days between the hours 

of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and 

Commercial Regulations Branch, 

Regulations and Rulings, Office of 

International Trade, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., 

5th Floor, Washington, DC 

Arrangements to inspect submitted 

comments should be made in advance 

by calling Joseph Clark at (202) 325– 

0118. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Rosoff, Entry Process and Duty 

Refunds, Regulations and Rulings, 

Office of International Trade, (202) 325– 

0047. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written data, views, or 

arguments on all aspects of the 

proposed rule. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) also invites comments 

that relate to the economic, 

environmental, or federalism effects that 

might result from this proposed rule. If 

appropriate to a specific comment, the 

commenter should reference the specific 

portion of the proposed rule, explain the 

reason for any recommended change, 

and include data, information, or 

authority that support such 

recommended change. 

Background 

This document proposes amendments 

to title 19 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (19 CFR) that would 

preclude the filing of a substitution 

drawback claim for internal revenue 

excise tax paid on imported 

merchandise in situations where no 

excise tax was paid upon the substituted 

merchandise or where the substituted 

merchandise is the subject of a different 

claim for refund or drawback of excise 

tax under any provision of the Internal 

Revenue Code. 

The statutory and regulatory 

framework giving rise to this situation is 

explained below. 

I. Excise Taxation Under the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986 

The Internal Revenue Code (IRC) of 

1986, as amended (IRC), codified as title 

26 of the United States Code (26 U.S.C.), 

is the main body of domestic statutory 

tax law of the United States and 

includes, inter alia, laws covering 

Federal excise taxes. Federal excise 

taxes are imposed on the manufacture 

and distribution of certain non-essential 

consumer goods, such as distilled 

spirits, wines, beer, tobacco products, 

imported taxable fuel and petroleum 

products. 

Distilled Spirits, Wines, and Beer: 

Imposition of Federal Excise Tax and 

Exemptions 

Chapter 51 of the IRC sets forth excise 

tax collection and related provisions 

applicable to distilled spirits, wines, 

and beer. In general, this chapter 

provides that a Federal excise tax is 

imposed on all wines, distilled spirits, 

and beer produced in or imported into 

the United States. 26 U.S.C. 5041, 5001, 

and 5051. 

Statutory exceptions to the imposition 

of Federal excise tax exist; for example, 

domestically produced wine, distilled 

spirits, and beer are exempt from the tax 

if removed from bonded premises for 

export. 26 U.S.C. 5362(c), 5214(a), 5053. 

In addition, upon the exportation of 

domestically-produced wine, distilled 

spirits, or beer removed from bonded 

premises with payment of tax, drawback 

is allowed in an amount equal to the tax 

paid. 26 U.S.C. 5062, 5055. 

Tobacco: Imposition of Federal Excise 

Tax and Exemptions 

Under Chapter 52, a Federal excise 

tax is imposed on all tobacco products 

and cigarette papers and tubes 

manufactured in or imported into the 

United States. 26 U.S.C. 5701. The tax 

on domestically-produced tobacco 

products and cigarette papers and tubes 

is imposed at the time that the product 

comes into existence, that is, when a 

product meets one of the definitions 

under the IRC. The Federal excise tax on 

imported and domestically-produced 

tobacco products and cigarette papers 

and tubes is generally not paid or 

determined until the products are 

released from customs custody or 

removed from bonded premises. 26 

U.S.C. 5702, 5703. Tobacco products 

and cigarette papers and tubes may be 

removed from bonded premises, 

without the payment of Federal excise 

tax, for export. 26 U.S.C. 5704. In 

addition, upon exportation of tobacco 

products and cigarette papers and tubes 

upon which the tax has been paid, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 52929 

drawback of the tax paid is allowed. 26 

U.S.C. 5706. 

Other Excise Taxes 

Chapter 32 of the IRC imposes various 

manufacturers excise taxes, including 

taxes on gasoline, diesel fuel, and 

kerosene (taxable fuel). The tax on 

imported taxable fuel is imposed on 

entry into the United States for 

consumption, use, or warehousing. If 

taxable fuel is exported, the IRC 

provides that the tax paid on the fuel 

may be refunded to the taxpayer or an 

amount equal to the tax paid on the fuel 

may be paid to the person exporting the 

fuel. Chapter 38 of the IRC also imposes 

various environmental taxes, including 

a tax on petroleum products entered 

into the United States for consumption, 

use, or warehousing. 

Implementing Excise Tax Regulations 

Regulations implementing the 

provisions of chapters 51 and 52 of the 

IRC are contained in chapter 1 of title 

27 of the CFR (27 CFR chapter 1). The 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau (TTB) within the Department of 

the Treasury is responsible for the 

administration of chapter 51 and the 

regulations promulgated thereunder. 

Regulations implementing the 

provisions of chapters 32 and 38 are 

contained in title 26 of the CFR and are 

administered by the Internal Revenue 

Service. 

II. Drawback Under the Tariff Act of 

1930 

Section 313 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended, (19 U.S.C. 1313), concerns 

drawback and refunds. Drawback is a 

refund of certain duties, taxes and fees 

paid by the importer of record and 

granted to a drawback claimant upon 

the exportation, or destruction under 

CBP supervision, of eligible articles 

under specified conditions. The purpose 

of drawback is to place U.S. exporters 

on equal footing with foreign 

competitors by refunding most of the 

duties paid on imports used in domestic 

manufactures intended for export. 

There are several types of drawback. 

Within section 313, paragraph (j) 

provides for ‘‘unused merchandise 

drawback,’’ which is intended to permit 

drawback to be claimed on imported 

merchandise on which was paid any 

duty, tax, or fee imposed under Federal 

law upon entry or importation if such 

merchandise was exported or was 

destroyed under CBP supervision, and 

was not used within the United States 

before such exportation or destruction, 

within the 3-years from the date of 

importation. 

Substitution Drawback (19 U.S.C. 

1313(j)(2)) 

Section 313(j)(2) (19 U.S.C. 

1313(j)(2)), hereafter referred to in this 

document as ‘‘(j)(2) substitution 

drawback,’’ is a type of drawback that 

permits other merchandise to be 

substituted for the imported 

merchandise for purposes of satisfying 

the exportation or destruction 

requirement. Specifically, 19 U.S.C. 

1313(j)(2) provides for the payment of 

drawback, not to exceed 99 percent of 

the duties, taxes, and fees paid on the 

imported merchandise, based on the 

exportation or destruction of ‘‘any other 

merchandise (whether imported or 

domestic)’’ that is: (1) Commercially 

interchangeable with the imported 

merchandise on which duties, taxes, 

and fees were paid; (2) exported or 

destroyed within 3 years of the date of 

importation of the imported 

merchandise; and (3) not used within 

the United States before such 

exportation or destruction and is in the 

possession of the party claiming 

drawback. 

Implementing CBP Drawback 

Regulations 

Regulations implementing 19 U.S.C. 

1313 are set forth in part 191 of title 19 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 

CFR part 191). Within part 191, subpart 

C sets forth the regulations pertaining to 

unused merchandise drawback and 

includes, in § 191.32, standards 

applicable to (j)(2) drawback claims. 

III. Reasons for Regulatory Change 

Integrity of Federal Excise Tax System 

at Risk 

In recent years, CBP has received and 

approved a number of (j)(2) substitution 

drawback claims involving imported 

bottled and bulk wine and domesticallyproduced wine. A hypothetical example 

of this type of transaction follows: 

A domestic winery imports 100 cases of 

bottled wine, pays Federal excise tax on the 

wine, and sells the imported wine in the 

United States. The domestic winery then 

exports 100 cases of its domestic wine 

without payment of Federal excise tax. The 

domestic winery files a (j)(2) drawback claim 

with CBP on the basis that the 100 cases of 

domestically-produced wine are 

commercially interchangeable with the 100 

cases of imported wine. The domestic winery 

receives a refund of 99 percent of the Federal 

excise taxes that it paid on the 100 cases of 

imported wine. 

In the above hypothetical, imported 

wine is introduced into the U.S. market, 

in effect, free of 99 percent of Federal 

excise tax. As a result, the U.S. Treasury 

ultimately receives only 1 percent of the 

Federal excise tax on the imported 

wine. 

Diverse Commodities Potentially 

Impacted 

In addition to the claims processed by 

CBP involving (j)(2) substitution 

drawback on wine, given the present 

statutory and regulatory structure 

within which these claims are 

administered, other products that are 

subject to excise tax under the IRC may 

also be the subject of such drawback 

claims where the excise taxes on the 

good have been refunded, remitted, or 

not paid (e.g., distilled spirits and beer 

(IRC chapters 51 and 52; 26 U.S.C. 5001; 

5051); tobacco products and cigarette 

papers and tubes (IRC chapter 52; 26 

U.S.C. 5701); imported taxable fuel (IRC 

chapter 32; 26 U.S.C. 4081); petroleum 

products (IRC chapter 38; 26 U.S.C. 

4611)). 

Congressional Intent 

The allowance of (j)(2) substitution 

drawback claims in circumstances in 

which internal revenue taxes have not 

been paid on the substituted domestic 

product is incompatible with Congress’ 

intent to levy excise taxes under the IRC 

and circumvents the intended 

administration of drawback under the 

comprehensive framework of section 

313. 

As part of Congress’ extensive review 

of the drawback statute, effected by the 

Customs Modernization and Informed 

Compliance Act (Mod Act), Public Law 

No. 103–182, 632, 107 Stat. 2057 (1993) 

(enacted as Title VI of the North 

American Free Trade Agreement 

Implementation Act), a provision was 

added to section 313(v) that provides 

that, ‘‘[m]erchandise that is exported or 

destroyed to satisfy any claim for 

drawback shall not be the basis of any 

other claim for drawback; except that 

appropriate credit and deductions for 

claims covering components or 

ingredients of such merchandise shall 

be made in computing drawback 

payments.’’ Based on the foregoing 

statutory prohibition against multiple 

drawback claims, 19 U.S.C. 1313(v) 

precludes the use of merchandise on 

which there has been a remission of 

duties, taxes, and fees from being used 

to claim drawback of duties, taxes, and 

fees paid on other merchandise upon its 

exportation or destruction. 

The legislative history of this 

provision indicates that Congress did 

not intend to allow multiple drawback 

claims on the exportation or destruction 

of goods. As noted in the House Report 

accompanying the legislation, section 

632(a)(7) provides that under the 

amended statute, ‘‘only one drawback 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
52930 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

claim per exportation or destruction of 

goods would be allowed.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 

103–361(l), at 130, reprinted in 1993 

United States Code Congressional and 

Administrative News (U.S.C.C.A.N.) 

2552, 2680. 

In the context of amending 19 U.S.C. 

1313 as part of the Mod Act, Congress 

also added language to subsection (u) of 

section 313 which restricted eligibility 

for drawback to imported merchandise 

that had been regularly entered or 

withdrawn for consumption. This 

limiting language was added, as 

described in the legislative history, 

because it codified ‘‘current Customs 

practice against piggybacking other duty 

exemption benefits (foreign-trade zones, 

bonded warehouses and duty-free 

temporary importation) onto the 

drawback benefits.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 103– 

361(I) at 130, reprinted in 1993 

U.S.C.C.A.N. at 2680. The addition of 

this limiting language ensured that 

companies could not claim drawback on 

the ‘‘importation’’ of goods which had 

never actually been entered for 

consumption in the United States, but 

rather had been physically located in a 

foreign trade zone and then exported 

without the payment of duties. The 

ability to obtain substitution drawback 

under 19 U.S.C. 1313(j)(2), thus 

introducing imported wine into the U.S. 

market nearly free of Federal excise tax, 

is an example of ‘‘piggybacking’’ a 

previously existing Federal excise tax 

exemption benefit (exporting 

domestically-produced wine without 

payment of excise tax) onto the 

drawback benefits. 

The IRC is quite specific regarding the 

circumstances in which internal 

revenue taxes are, and are not, required 

to be paid on domestic and imported 

merchandise. See chapters 32, 38, 51, 

and 52 of the IRC. The fact that a party 

would be able to avoid the payment of 

internal revenue taxes on both imported 

and domestically-produced 

merchandise by relying on the 

provisions of two discrete statutory 

programs administered by different 

agencies for different purposes is 

contrary to Congressional intent, as 

discussed above. 

Congress is cognizant of the 

possibility that the interplay of tariff 

provisions could lead to a situation 

where collection of internal revenue tax 

might be at risk in an import 

transaction. For example, Congress 

structured U.S. note 1(b) to subchapter 

I of Chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

to avoid this outcome. The subchapter 

I provisions allow duty-free or reducedduty treatment for articles exported and 

returned that were not advanced in 

value or improved in condition by any 

process of manufacture or other means 

while abroad. U.S. note 1(b) was 

structured to ensure collection of the tax 

by stating that the provisions of the 

subchapter (with certain exceptions not 

relevant here) do not apply to any 

article ‘‘[o]f a kind with respect to the 

importation of which an internalrevenue tax is imposed at the time such 

article is entered, unless such article 

was subject to an internal-revenue tax 

imposed upon production or 

importation at the time of its 

exportation from the United States and 

it shall be proved that such tax was paid 

before exportation and was not 

refunded.’’ The net effect of U.S. note 

1(b) to subchapter I of chapter 98, 

HTSUS, is to ensure that internal 

revenue tax is imposed on merchandise 

that is entered for consumption in the 

United States. Section 10.3 of title 19 of 

the CFR (19 CFR 10.3) implements the 

provisions of U.S. note 1(b) to 

subchapter I of chapter 98, HTSUS. The 

amendments proposed in this document 

would similarly ensure that internal 

revenue taxes will be paid in cases 

involving (j)(2) substitution drawback. 

Explanation of Proposed Amendments 

For the reasons outlined above, this 

document proposes to amend § 191.32 

of title 19 of the CFR (19 CFR 191.32) 

by adding a new paragraph (b)(4) to 

preclude drawback of internal revenue 

tax imposed under the IRC in 

connection with a (j)(2) substitution 

drawback claim if no excise tax was 

paid on the substituted exported 

merchandise or if that merchandise was 

subject to a claim for refund or 

drawback of tax under any provision of 

the IRC. In addition, this document 

proposes to amend § 113.62 of title 19 

of the CFR (19 CFR 113.62), which sets 

forth basic importation and entry bond 

conditions, to add a new condition 

under which the principal agrees not to 

file, or transfer the right to file, a 

substitution drawback claim that would 

be inconsistent with the terms of new 

§ 191.32(b)(4). The consequences of 

default specified in newly re-designated 

paragraph (n) of § 113.62 would apply 

in the case of a breach of this bond 

condition. 

Conforming regulatory texts are also 

being published by TTB in this edition 

of the Federal Register. 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule is not considered 

to be a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866 because it 

will not have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million and does not 

raise novel policy concerns. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed this regulatory evaluation 

under that Order. 

Regarding the impact of the proposed 

rule on small entities as required by the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

604), as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness 

Act of 1996, a small entity may be a 

small business (defined as any 

independently owned and operated 

business not dominant in its field that 

qualifies as a small business per the 

Small Business Act); a small not-forprofit organization; or a small 

governmental jurisdiction (locality with 

fewer than 50,000 people). 

As stated above, these changes are 

intended to preclude the filing of (j)(2) 

substitution drawback claims in 

circumstances in which internal 

revenue taxes have not been paid on the 

substituted domestic product, or where 

that merchandise is subject to a different 

claim for refund or drawback of IRC 

taxes. The proposed amendments still 

allow for the return of 99 percent of the 

duties, taxes, and fees paid on the 

imported merchandise upon export, or 

when IRC taxes have been paid on 

substituted domestic product and the 

substituted merchandise is not the 

subject of a separate claim for refund or 

drawback of such taxes. 

To the extent that small entities have 

filed (j)(2) substitution drawback claims 

that would no longer be permitted, this 

regulation, if finalized as proposed, 

could have an economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

However, this proposed rule does not 

restrict import and export activities for 

any entities, regardless of size; these 

proposed amendments merely reflect 

Congress’ intent regarding statutory 

prohibitions against multiple drawback 

claims and serve to clarify the 

application of existing statutory 

provisions. Thus, the impacts of this 

rule would not rise to the level that 

would be considered economically 

significant. 

CBP welcomes comments on this 

assumption. The most helpful 

comments are those that can give us 

specific information or examples of a 

direct impact on small entities. If we do 

not receive comments that demonstrate 

that the rule causes small entities to 

incur significant direct costs, we may, 

during the process of drafting the final 

rule, certify that this action does not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

As there are no new collections of 

information proposed in this document, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 52931 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507) 

are inapplicable. 

Signing Authority 

The amendments contained in this 

document are being issued by CBP in 

accordance with § 0.1(a)(1) of title 19 of 

the CFR (19 CFR 0.1(a)(1)), pertaining to 

the authority of the Secretary of the 

Treasury (or his/her delegate) to 

approve regulations related to certain 

CBP revenue functions. 

List of Subjects 

19 CFR Part 113 

Bonds, Customs duties and 

inspection, Exports, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

19 CFR Part 191 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Bonds, Claims, Commerce, 

Customs duties and inspection, 

Drawback, Exports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Proposed Amendments to the 

Regulations 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, CBP and the Treasury 

Department propose to amend 19 CFR 

parts 113 and 191 as set forth below: 

PART 113—CUSTOMS BONDS 

1. The general authority citation for 

part 113 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1623, 1624. 

2. Section 113.62 is amended by 

redesignating paragraph (m) as 

paragraph (n) and adding a new 

paragraph (m) to read as follows: 

§ 113.62 Basic importation and entry bond 

conditions. 

* * * * * 

(m) Agreement to comply with CBP 

regulations applicable to substitution 

drawback claims. In the case of 

imported merchandise that is subject to 

internal revenue tax imposed under the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 

amended (IRC), the principal agrees not 

to file, or to transfer to a successor the 

right to file, a substitution drawback 

claim involving such tax if the 

substituted merchandise has been, or 

will be, the subject of a removal from 

bonded premises without payment of 

tax, or the subject of a claim for refund 

or drawback of tax, under any provision 

of the IRC. 

* * * * * 

PART 191—DRAWBACK 

3. The general authority citation for 

part 191 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 66, 

1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States), 1313, 1624; 

* * * * * 

4. Section 191.32 is amended: 

a. At the end of paragraph (b)(2), by 

removing the word ‘‘and’’; 

b. At the end of paragraph (b)(3), by 

removing the period and adding, in its 

place, ‘‘; and’’; and 

c. By adding a new paragraph (b)(4) to 

read as follows: 

§ 191.32 Substitution drawback. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) For purposes of drawback of 

internal revenue tax imposed under 

Chapters 32, 38, 51, and 52 of the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 

amended (IRC), drawback granted on 

the export or destruction of substituted 

merchandise will be limited to the 

amount of taxes paid (and not returned 

by refund, credit, or drawback) on the 

substitute merchandise. 

* * * * * 

Approved: October 8, 2009. 

Jayson P. Ahern, 

Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection. 

Timothy E. Skud, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. 

[FR Doc. E9–24789 Filed 10–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

24 CFR Parts 5 and 908 

[Docket No. FR–5351–P–01] 

RIN 2501–AD48 

Refinement of Income and Rent 

Determination Requirements in Public 

and Assisted Housing Programs: 

Implementation of Enterprise Income 

Verification 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On January 27, 2009, HUD 

issued a final rule that revised the 

regulations for HUD’s public and 

assisted housing programs to require the 

use of HUD’s Enterprise Income 

Verification system by public housing 

agencies and multifamily housing 

owners and management agents when 

verifying the employment and income 

of program participants. Consistent with 

Administration policy to review rules 

issued during the transition from one 

Administration to another, HUD reopened the January 27, 2009, final rule 

for public comment, and specifically 

solicited public comment on extending 

the effective date of the rule. While 

HUD remains committed to full 

implementation of the Enterprise 

Income Verification system, the public 

comments submitted on the January 27, 

2009, final rule highlighted for HUD 

certain regulatory provisions that 

require further clarification, and ones 

that were extraneous to the purpose of 

the rule, which is full implementation 

of the Enterprise Income Verification 

system. 

By final rule published on August 28, 

2009, HUD delayed the effective date of 

the January 27, 2009, final rule to 

January 31, 2010. During this period 

before the final rule takes effect, HUD 

submits for public comment, through 

this proposed rule, regulatory revisions 

designed to make certain provisions in 

the January 27, 2009, final rule more 

clear, and return other regulatory 

provisions to their pre-January 2009 

final rule content. 

DATES: Comment Due Date: 

November 16, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit comments regarding 

this proposed rule to the Regulations 

Division, Office of General Counsel, 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., 

Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410– 

0500. Communications must refer to the 

above docket number and title. There 

are two methods for submitting public 

comments. All submissions must refer 

to the above docket number and title. 

1. Submission of Comments by Mail. 

Comments may be submitted by mail to 

the Regulations Division, Office of 

General Counsel, Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, 451 

Seventh Street, SW., Room 10276, 

Washington, DC 20410–0500. 

2. Electronic Submission of 

Comments. Interested persons may 

submit comments electronically through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly 

encourages commenters to submit 

comments electronically. Electronic 

submission of comments allows the 

commenter maximum time to prepare 

and submit a comment, ensures timely 

receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to 

make them immediately available to the 

public. Comments submitted 

electronically through the 

www.regulations.gov Web site can be 

viewed by other commenters and 

interested members of the public. 

Commenters should follow the 

instructions provided on that site to 

submit comments electronically. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1