3048 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive: 

Siam Hiller Holdings, Inc.: Docket No. FAA– 

2024–2555; Project Identifier AD–2024– 

00214–R. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) by February 28, 

2025. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD Applies to Siam Hiller Holdings, 

Inc., Model UH–12E (Army OH–23G and H– 

23F) and UH–12E–L helicopters, certificated 

in any category, with a main rotor (M/R) 

transmission drive shaft (drive shaft) having 

part number (P/N) 23600, installed. 

Note 1 to paragraph (c): Hiller Aircraft 

Corporation material refers to an M/R drive 

shaft as a transmission M/R mast and M/R 

drive shaft, interchangeably. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) 

Code 6230, Main Rotor Mast/Swashplate. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of cracks 

in the M/R drive shaft. The FAA is issuing 

this AD to address non-conforming parts and 

the use of improper paint stripper; and detect 

cracking of the M/R drive shaft. The unsafe 

condition, if not addressed, could result in 

separation of the M/R drive shaft and M/R 

blades from the helicopter and subsequent 

loss of control of the helicopter. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Required Actions 

For an M/R drive shaft that has 

accumulated 1,200 or more total hours timein-service (TIS) or 4 or more years since new, 

or at the next overhaul of the M/R 

transmission assembly after the effective date 

of this AD, whichever occurs first, with the 

M/R drive shaft removed, inspect the M/R 

drive shaft by accomplishing the actions 

required by paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of 

this AD. 

(1) Remove all coatings from all surfaces of 

the M/R drive shaft by using paint stripper 

TT–R–248B or TT–R–2918A Type I. 

(2) Hydrogen embrittlement relief bake the 

M/R drive shaft for 24 hours minimum at 

375 °F ± 25 °F. 

(3) Magnetic particle inspect all surfaces of 

the M/R drive shaft for a crack. This magnetic 

particle inspection must be accomplished by 

a Level II or Level III inspector certified in 

the FAA-acceptable standards for 

nondestructive inspection personnel. If there 

is a crack, before further flight, remove the 

M/R drive shaft from service and install an 

airworthy M/R drive shaft. 

Note 2 to paragraph (g)(3): Advisory 

Circular 65–31B contains examples of FAAacceptable Level II and Level III qualification 

standards criteria for inspection personnel 

doing nondestructive test inspections. 

Note 3 to paragraph (g): Hiller Aircraft 

Corporation Main Rotor Transmission 

Assembly Overhaul Manual, Manual 63–20, 

for UH–12E Series Helicopters, accepted May 

6, 2015, contains additional information 

pertaining to inspecting the M/R drive shaft. 

(h) Parts Installation Limitations 

(1) As of the effective date of this AD, do 

not install an M/R drive shaft having P/N 

23600 on any helicopter unless the actions 

required by paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of 

this AD have been accomplished. 

(2) As of the effective date of this AD, do 

not use any other paint stripper other than 

TT–R–248B or TT–R–2918A Type I to 

remove coatings from all areas of the M/R 

drive shaft. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, West Certification 

Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In 

accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the West Certification 

Branch, send it to the attention of the person 

identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: AMOC@

faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(j) Additional Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Calvin L. Hang, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, FAA, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712; phone: (562) 627– 

5254; email: Calvin.L.Hang@faa.gov. 

(2) For Hiller Aircraft Corporation material 

identified in this AD that is not incorporated 

by reference, contact Hiller Aircraft 

Corporation, 925 M Street, Firebaugh, CA 

93622; phone: (559) 659–5959; or website: 

hilleraircraftcorporation.com/. 

(3) For advisory circular material identified 

in this AD that is not incorporated by 

reference, go to faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/ 

document.information/documentID/1023552. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

None. 

Issued on December 9, 2024. 

Victor Wicklund, 

Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00588 Filed 1–13–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

19 CFR Parts 10, 101, 128, 143, 145 

[USCBP–2025–0002] 

RIN 1685–AA01 (Formerly RIN 1515–AE84) 

Entry of Low-Value Shipments 

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, Department of Homeland 

Security; Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document proposes 

amendments to the U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) regulations 

pertaining to the entry of certain lowvalue shipments not exceeding $800 

that are eligible for an administrative 

exemption from duty and tax. 

Specifically, CBP proposes to create a 

new process for entering low-value 

shipments, allowing CBP to target highrisk shipments more effectively, 

including those containing synthetic 

opioids such as illicit fentanyl. This 

document also proposes to revise the 

current process for entering low-value 

shipments to require additional data 

elements that would assist CBP in 

verifying eligibility for duty- and taxfree entry of low-value shipments and 

bona-fide gifts. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

March 17, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, 

identified by docket number, by the 

following method: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

via docket number USCBP–2025–0002. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

Comments must be submitted in 

English, or an English translation must 

be provided. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3049 

1 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2). 

2These shipments are also commonly referred to 

as ‘‘de minimis’’ shipments. 

3Customs Administrative Act of 1938, Public 

Law 75–721, 52 Stat. 1077, 1081 (1938). 

4Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification 

Act of 1978, Public Law 95–410, 205(b)(3), 92 Stat. 

888, 900 (1978) (raising the value to $5); North 

American Free Trade Agreement Implementation 

Act, Public Law 103–182, 107 Stat. 2057, 2209 

(1993) (raising the value to $200 and also removing 

the specific authorization to the Secretary of the 

Treasury to diminish the dollar amount of the 

administrative exemption); Trade Facilitation and 

Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, Public Law 114– 

125, 130 Stat. 122 (2016) (raising the value to $800). 

5 60 FR 18983 (Apr. 14, 1995). 

6Section 901 did not change the administrative 

exemptions for bona-fide gifts and personal or 

household articles accompanying travelers under 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(A) and (B), respectively. 

7 81 FR 58831 (Aug. 26, 2016). In the interim final 

rule, CBP solicited comments regarding the 

collection of data on behalf of partner government 

agencies for shipments valued at $800 or less. CBP 

received eight public comments and intends to 

respond to the comments at the final rule stage of 

this rulemaking. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

www.regulations.gov. In accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of 

this rulemaking may also be found at 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Mabelitini, Director, 

Intellectual Property Rights & ECommerce Division, Office of Trade, 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 

202–325–6915, ecommerce@

cbp.dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Public Participation 

II. Background and Purpose 

III. Statutory Authority 

IV. Current Regulatory Procedures for Entry 

of Qualifying Low-Value Shipments 

A. Release From Manifest Process 

B. Partner Government Agency 

Requirements 

C. Challenges of the Release From Manifest 

Process 

V. Section 321 Data Pilot and Entry Type 86 

Test 

VI. Discussion of Proposed Amendments 

A. Part 10 

B. Part 101 

C. Part 128 

D. Part 143 

E. Part 145 

VII. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

B. Additional Requirements for Regulatory 

Analysis 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

F. National Environmental Policy Act 

I. Public Participation 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written data, views, or 

arguments on all aspects of this notice 

of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

also invites comments that relate to the 

economic, environmental, or federalism 

effects that might result from this 

proposed rule. Comments that will 

provide the most assistance to CBP will 

reference a specific portion of the 

NPRM, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include data, 

information, argument, or authority that 

supports such recommended change. 

CBP is also specifically seeking 

comments regarding the ‘‘product 

identifier’’ and ‘‘security screening 

report number’’ data elements discussed 

in section VI.D. In addition, CBP 

requests comment on the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS) waiver process discussed in 

section VI.D and its potential for 

lowering the costs of the rule. 

II. Background and Purpose 

Section 321(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)), as amended 

by the Trade Facilitation and Trade 

Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTEA), 

section 901, Public Law 114–125, 130 

Stat. 122, authorizes administrative 

exemptions from duty and tax for three 

categories of articles. These categories 

include: bona-fide gifts valued at $100 

or less ($200, if the gift is from certain 

island possessions) sent from persons in 

foreign countries to persons in the 

United States; certain personal or 

household articles valued at $200 or less 

accompanying persons arriving in the 

United States; and other articles when 

the value of the article is $800 or less.1

These exemptions are subject to the 

condition that the aggregate fair retail 

value in the country of shipment of 

articles imported by one person on one 

day and exempted from duty cannot 

exceed the authorized amounts. Also, 

these exemptions are not to be granted 

if merchandise covered by a single order 

or contract is forwarded in separate lots 

to obtain the benefit of duty- and taxfree entry. 

This proposed rulemaking primarily 

concerns shipments covered by the 

administrative exemption in 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(C), i.e., shipments of 

merchandise (other than bona-fide gifts 

and certain personal and household 

goods accompanying travelers arriving 

from abroad) imported by one person on 

one day and having an aggregate fair 

retail value in the country of shipment 

of not more than $800. For simplicity, 

all references to ‘‘the administrative 

exemption’’ in this document will be to 

the administrative exemption found in 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C). References 

made to the other administrative 

exemptions in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2) will 

be specified as appropriate. In addition, 

this document refers to shipments not 

exceeding $800 as ‘‘low-value 

shipments.’’ 2 Low-value shipments that 

qualify for the administrative exemption 

in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) are referred to 

as ‘‘qualifying low-value shipments.’’ 

The administrative exemption is 

implemented in part 10 of title 19 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 

part 10) at 19 CFR 10.151 and 10.153, 

and is also referenced in 19 CFR parts 

128, 143, and 145. 

The Customs Administrative Act of 

1938 amended the Tariff Act of 1930 by 

adding section 321 and establishing the 

administrative exemption at $1 in order 

to limit the ‘‘expense and 

inconvenience’’ of collecting duty when 

‘‘disproportionate to the amount of such 

duty.’’ 3 The value of these shipments 

was deemed to be so minimal that they 

were not subject to the same formal 

customs entry procedures and extensive 

data requirements as higher-value 

shipments entering the United States. 

Congress has since raised the value of 

the administrative exemption to $5 in 

1978, $200 in 1993, and most recently, 

to $800 in 2016.4

The framework for the current version 

of the regulations pertaining to the 

administrative exemption was 

promulgated through a final rule in 

1995, which, among other things, 

amended the customs regulations to 

implement the legislative increase of the 

exemption to $200, specify the special 

informal entry procedures applicable to 

qualifying low-value shipments, set 

forth the parties qualified to make entry, 

and define the word ‘‘shipment.’’ 5

In 2016, section 901(d) of TFTEA 

amended 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) by 

increasing the daily value limit for the 

administrative exemption from $200 to 

$800.6 CBP published an interim final 

rule amending the regulations to 

implement the new statutory amount 

and to specify certain goods excluded 

from the administrative exemption.7

Otherwise, CBP has not made any 

significant changes to the regulatory 

requirements by which such shipments 

are entered since 1995. In the nearly 

three decades since, however, there 

have been significant changes in the 

trade environment and supply chains, 

substantial increases in the volume of 

shipments, and advancements to CBP’s 

capabilities that necessitate the 

modernization of these regulations to 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3050 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

8Although the administrative exemption is not 

limited to only e-commerce shipments, the reality 

is that e-commerce shipments comprise a 

significant portion of low-value shipments. 

9Commercial Customs Advisory Committee 

Holds Final Public Meeting of 2023, December 20, 

2023, https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/nationalmedia-release/commercial-customs-advisorycommittee-holds-final-public-meeting (last accessed 

Jan. 31, 2024). 

10 Email correspondence with the Office of Trade 

on Feb. 2, 2024. 

11Section 321 Data Pilot, 84 FR 35405 (July 23, 

2019); Test Concerning Entry of Section 321 LowValued Shipments Through Automated Commercial 

Environment (ACE), 84 FR 40079 (Aug. 13, 2019). 

12CBP Releases November 2023 Monthly Update, 

December 22, 2023, https://www.cbp.gov/ 

newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releasesnovember-2023-monthly-update (last accessed Jan. 

31, 2024). 

better serve both CBP and the trade 

community. 

Firstly, e-commerce is a growing 

segment of the U.S. economy and has 

been increasing significantly for the past 

several years.8 Consumer habits are 

changing as the internet empowers 

individuals to make purchases online. 

These advances in economic activity 

have led to increasing volumes of 

imports of low-value shipments, 

creating inspection challenges for CBP. 

Low-value e-commerce shipments pose 

the same health, safety, and economic 

security risks as higher-value 

shipments. Transnational criminal 

organizations and other bad actors 

perceive low-value shipments as less 

likely to be interdicted because these 

types of shipments are not subject to the 

more extensive formal entry procedures. 

This has resulted in attempts to enter 

illicit goods, such as illicit fentanyl, into 

the country through these types of 

shipments. As noted below, the 

information requirements for low-value 

shipments are less rigorous than those 

required for other entry types, and often 

do not provide sufficient detail for CBP 

to accurately identify the merchandise 

in the shipment and the parties 

involved in its sale and purchase. 

Furthermore, novel and complex ecommerce business models have 

complicated and added to the 

traditional array of parties involved in 

the import transaction. New or 

infrequent importers often possess less 

familiarity with U.S. customs laws and 

regulations, which can lead to the 

attempted importation of non-compliant 

goods. This rulemaking proposes data 

requirements that are tailored to capture 

the key parties in these modern trade 

transactions (e.g., the seller, purchaser, 

final deliver-to party, and marketplace), 

thus strengthening CBP’s enforcement 

posture. 

Secondly, the volume of low-value 

shipments has increased dramatically in 

recent years. The boom in e-commerce, 

coupled with the statutory increase in 

the daily value limit for the 

administrative exemption from $200 to 

$800 in 2016, greatly increased the 

number of shipments qualifying for the 

exemption, resulted in new types of 

products becoming eligible for the 

exemption, and revived the trade 

community’s interest in the exemption. 

This boom in e-commerce resulted from 

several factors, including the 

development of the Automated 

Commercial Environment (ACE) Entry 

Type 86 Test, the COVID–19 pandemic, 

and new e-commerce business models 

structured around low-value shipments. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2015, prior to the 

passage of TFTEA, approximately 139 

million shipments valued at $200 or less 

were imported into the United States. In 

FY 2017, after the TFTEA increase to 

$800 went into effect, low-value 

shipments numbered nearly 325 

million. By the end of FY 2022, that 

number more than doubled to 685 

million. Then in FY 2023, CBP cleared 

more than one billion low-value 

shipments.9 Currently, approximately 4 

million shipments are released each day 

free of duty and tax pursuant to the 

administrative exemption. In fact, CBP 

estimates that over 90 percent of the 

number of shipments entering the 

United States are low-value shipments 

valued at $800 or less.10 The 

information requirements for these 

shipments are less rigorous than those 

required for other entry types, e.g., 

formal entries, and no longer provide 

sufficient detail for CBP to accurately 

identify the merchandise in the 

shipment and the parties involved in its 

sale and purchase. This overwhelming 

volume of low-value shipments and lack 

of actionable data collected pursuant to 

the current regulations inhibits CBP’s 

ability to identify and interdict high-risk 

shipments that may contain illegal 

drugs such as illicit fentanyl, 

merchandise that poses a risk to public 

safety, counterfeit or pirated goods, or 

other contraband. The new enhanced 

entry process for low-value shipments 

proposed in this rulemaking would 

provide CBP with the necessary 

information regarding the contents of 

shipments to more accurately segment 

risk and determine eligibility for the 

administrative exemption in advance of 

a shipment’s arrival in the United 

States. The receipt of advance electronic 

data would also reduce the burden for 

CBP officers who process these large 

volumes of shipments because better 

data would lead to more accurate 

targeting. With more accurate targeting, 

CBP resources will be better focused on 

accurately identifying and interdicting 

violative shipments. Today, the quality 

of targeting is often impeded by the lack 

of information. 

Lastly, both CBP and the trade 

community’s technological capabilities 

have greatly advanced since 1995, and 

this proposed rule would adapt the 

regulations to current capabilities. As 

explained below in section IV, in the 

past, CBP cleared low-value shipments 

exclusively through a time-consuming 

and burdensome manual process, and 

staff at the ports of entry became unable 

to quickly and efficiently process the 

increasing volume of trade. 

Consequently, it was not unusual for 

clearance to take up to eight days. Over 

the last several years, CBP has 

collaborated with the trade community 

to obtain input regarding how to more 

accurately identify the nature, origin, 

and ultimate destination of low-value 

shipments. This effort served as the 

foundation for two pilot programs, the 

Section 321 Data Pilot and the Entry 

Type 86 Test, which were implemented 

in 2019 to test CBP’s capabilities to 

collect, and the trade community’s 

ability to provide, certain enhanced data 

through CBP-approved electronic 

systems.11 The details of the pilot 

programs, along with the results, are 

described below in section V. The 

innovations from the two pilots are 

incorporated into this proposed rule. 

As illustrated above, the existing 

regulations do not account for the 

complex supply chains surrounding ecommerce transactions, today’s volume 

of trade, or recent technological 

advancements. Consequently, this 

environment is more vulnerable to 

various challenges, including, but not 

limited to, illicit substances like 

fentanyl and other narcotics, counterfeit 

or pirated goods, and goods potentially 

made with forced labor. CBP’s 

enforcement efforts have brought to 

light violations of the right to make 

entry, mismanifesting of cargo, 

misclassification, misdelivery (e.g., 

delivery of goods prior to release from 

CBP custody), undervaluation, and 

incorrectly executed powers of attorney. 

Of particular concern is the threat posed 

by illicit fentanyl, fentanyl analogues, as 

well as precursor and other chemicals 

used in illicit drug production that are 

smuggled into the United States by 

transnational criminal organizations. In 

FY 2023, CBP seized more than 27,000 

pounds of fentanyl nationwide.12 The 

drugs are mostly smuggled though ports 

of entry at the Southwest Border via 

privately owned and commercial 

vehicles and through pedestrian lanes, 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3051 

13 Joint Written Testimony of Diane J. Sabatino, 

Deputy Executive Assistant Commissioner, Office of 

Field Operations, and James Mandryck, Deputy 

Assistant Commissioner, Office of Intelligence, 

before the U.S. Senate Committee on 

Appropriations, ‘‘Combatting Transnational 

Criminal Organizations and Related Trafficking’’ 

(May 3, 2023), https://www.cbp.gov/about/ 

congressional-resources/testimony (last accessed 

Sept. 1, 2023). 14 19 U.S.C. 1498(b). 

15The procedures for personal or oral 

declarations are set forth in 19 CFR 148.12, 148.13, 

and 148.62, and are not affected by this proposed 

rule. 

16 19 CFR 143.23(j). This same process is also 

used for entry of bona-fide gifts meeting the 

requirements of 19 CFR 10.152 and 10.153. 

17 19 CFR 143.26(b). 

18 19 CFR 128.21(a); 19 CFR 143.23(k). 

19 19 CFR 143.23(k); 19 CFR 128.24(e). 

or smuggled into the United States 

through the mail or through express 

consignment carriers.13 CBP uses a 

multi-faceted approach to prevent 

illegal drugs from entering the country, 

and one key facet is advance 

information and targeting. Advance 

electronic shipping information allows 

CBP to quickly identify, target, and 

deter the entry of dangerous illicit drugs 

in all operational environments. This 

rulemaking contributes to the effort to 

stop the flow of illegal drugs into the 

United States by expanding the 

collection of enhanced advance 

electronic data for low-value shipments. 

To address the above challenges, this 

document will explain the statutory 

authority that authorizes CBP to regulate 

the entry of low-value shipments, 

describe the current regulatory 

landscape, and propose new regulations 

that establish a new electronic entry 

process and clarify the parameters of the 

administrative exemption. 

III. Statutory Authority 

All merchandise imported into the 

customs territory of the United States is 

subject to entry and clearance 

procedures. These procedures ensure 

the proper appraisement, valuation, and 

tariff classification of the merchandise 

for the purpose of collecting the lawful 

amount of duties owed, as well as 

compliance with all other laws and 

regulations administered and enforced 

by CBP. Different procedures are 

provided for the entry and clearance of 

merchandise depending upon the value 

of the merchandise. There are ‘‘formal 

entry’’ procedures established by 19 

U.S.C. 1484 and 1485, which are 

generally applicable to shipments of 

merchandise valued in excess of $2,500. 

Part 142 of title 19 of the CFR (19 CFR 

part 142) implements 19 U.S.C. 1484, as 

amended, and prescribes formal entry 

procedures. Formal entry generally 

involves the completion and filing of 

one or more CBP forms, or their 

electronic equivalent, as well as the 

filing of commercial documents 

pertaining to the transaction. 

Exempt from the requirements of 19 

U.S.C. 1484 and 1485 are entries made 

under 19 U.S.C. 1498, which, for the 

most part, are limited to shipments of 

merchandise valued at $2,500 or less 

(referred to as ‘‘informal entries’’). 

Specifically, 19 U.S.C. 1498 authorizes 

the Secretary of the Treasury to 

‘‘prescribe rules and regulations for the 

declaration and entry of merchandise 

when the aggregate value of the 

shipment does not exceed an amount 

specified . . . by regulation, but not 

more than $2,500.’’ Informal entry 

regulations are found at 19 CFR part 

143, subpart C. While informal entries 

are ‘‘excepted’’ from formal entry 

requirements, the Secretary may include 

any formal entry requirement in the 

rules and regulations governing 

informal entry.14 The statutory 

framework of 19 U.S.C. 1498 authorizes, 

in effect, a less formal entry process 

than under 19 U.S.C. 1484. As a result, 

informal entry procedures are less 

burdensome and complex than the 

formal entry procedures. These 

simplified procedures reduce the overall 

administrative burden on informal entry 

filers. 

Shipments that are eligible for the 

administrative exemptions at 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2) are a subset of the informal 

entries covered by 19 U.S.C. 1498, 

which authorizes the Secretary to 

promulgate such special rules and 

regulations as the Secretary determines 

are necessary and appropriate for the 

declaration and entry of shipments 

valued at $2,500 or less. Under 19 

U.S.C. 1321, the Secretary is authorized 

to promulgate regulations to admit 

certain low-value articles duty- and taxfree in order to avoid expense and 

inconvenience to the Government that is 

disproportionate to the amount of 

revenue that would otherwise be 

collected. As noted above, regulations 

for the entry of low-value shipments, 

which are authorized under 19 U.S.C. 

1498 may, but are not required to, 

include any of the rules that are 

otherwise applicable for formal entry 

under 19 U.S.C. 1484 and 1485. 

Lastly, the Secretary is authorized by 

19 U.S.C. 1321(b) to prescribe 

exceptions to an administrative 

exemption, if consistent with the 

purposes of the exemption or if 

‘‘necessary for any reason to protect the 

revenue or to prevent unlawful 

importations.’’ 

IV. Current Regulatory Procedures for 

Entry of Qualifying Low-Value 

Shipments 

The regulations pertaining to the 

exemptions in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2) are 

found throughout various parts of title 

19 of the CFR. The administrative 

exemption at 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) is 

implemented at 19 CFR 10.151, which 

explains that qualifying merchandise 

not exceeding $800 and meeting the 

conditions of 19 CFR 10.153 will be 

admitted free of duty and tax. The 

exemption for bona-fide gifts is 

implemented at 19 CFR 10.152. For lowvalue shipments accompanying a 

person, the merchandise comes in under 

an oral declaration pursuant to 19 CFR 

part 148.15 Shipments imported by mail 

are covered by 19 CFR part 145, and 

shipments imported by express 

consignment operators and carriers are 

covered by 19 CFR part 128. Lastly, 

informal entry procedures for qualifying 

low-value shipments are found in 19 

CFR part 143, subpart C. 

A. Release From Manifest Process 

With certain exceptions, low-value 

shipments qualifying for the 

administrative exemption may be 

entered by presenting the bill of lading 

or a manifest listing each bill of 

lading.16 This type of informal entry is 

termed the ‘‘release from manifest 

process.’’ Generally, such shipments are 

released from CBP custody based on the 

information provided on the manifest or 

bill of lading. Qualifying low-value 

shipments may be entered, using 

reasonable care, by the owner, 

purchaser, or consignee of the shipment, 

or, when appropriately designated by 

one of these persons, a customs broker 

licensed under 19 U.S.C. 1641.17 The 

information required for release from 

manifest may be provided by 

consignees, such as carriers and express 

consignment operators. The following 

information must be provided as part of 

the release from manifest process: the 

country of origin of the merchandise; 

shipper name, address and country; 

ultimate consignee name and address; 

specific description of the merchandise; 

quantity; shipping weight; and value.18

No Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) subheading is 

required on a manifest, and no entry 

summary is required, for low-value 

shipments.19

Among other things, 19 CFR 10.153 

sets forth the conditions to be applied 

by a CBP officer in determining whether 

an article or parcel shall be exempted 

from duty and tax under 19 CFR 10.151 

as a qualifying low-value shipment. In 

particular, 19 CFR 10.153 provides that 

consolidated shipments addressed to 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3052 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

20See 19 U.S.C. 1671h; 19 U.S.C. 1673g (requiring 

CBP to collect antidumping and countervailing duty 

deposits for ‘‘all entries, or withdrawals from 

warehouse, for consumption of merchandise subject 

to [an antidumping or countervailing duty] order’’) 

(emphasis added). 

21An ‘‘express consignment operator or carrier’’ 

is defined in 19 CFR 128.1(a) as ‘‘an entity 

operating in any mode or intermodally moving 

cargo by special express commercial service under 

closely integrated administrative control. Its 

services are offered to the public under advertised, 

reliable timely delivery on a door-to-door basis. An 

express consignment operator assumes liability to 

Customs for the articles in the same manner as if 

it is the sole carrier.’’ 

22 19 CFR 128.21 and 128.24(e). 

23 19 CFR 145.11. 

24 19 CFR 143.22; see also 19 CFR 145.12(a)(1). 

25 In this rulemaking, CBP uses the phrase 

‘‘partner government agencies’’ in the preamble 

interchangeably with the phrase ‘‘other government 

agencies,’’ which is found in title 19 of the CFR. 

26 84 FR 35405 (July 23, 2019). The original pilot 

was expanded to include shipments arriving by 

ocean and international mail and was extended 

through August 2021. 84 FR 67279 (Dec. 9, 2019). 

It was subsequently extended through August 2023 

(86 FR 48435 (Aug. 30, 2021)), and then again 

through August 2025 (88 FR 10140 (Feb. 16, 2023)). 

27 88 FR 10140 (Feb. 16, 2023). 

one consignee shall be treated as one 

importation; alcoholic beverages and 

cigars (including cheroots and 

cigarillos) and cigarettes containing 

tobacco, cigarette tubes, cigarette 

papers, smoking tobacco (including 

water pipe tobacco, pipe tobacco, and 

roll-your-own tobacco), snuff, or 

chewing tobacco are not exempt; any 

merchandise of a class or kind provided 

for in any absolute or tariff-rate quota, 

whether the quota is open or closed, is 

not exempt; and, there is no exemption 

from any tax imposed under the Internal 

Revenue Code that is collected by other 

agencies on imported goods. In 

addition, any merchandise subject to 

antidumping and countervailing duties 

is not exempt.20

In addition to the regulations 

described above, which generally apply 

to all low-value shipments, CBP has 

established regulations for express 

consignment operators and carriers 

(ECOs) in 19 CFR part 128.21 The 

procedure for entry of qualifying lowvalue shipments imported by ECOs is 

set forth in 19 CFR 128.21 and 

128.24(e). CBP requires that ECOs 

provide the manifest information listed 

in 19 CFR 128.21 in advance of arrival 

of all cargo (i.e., the advance manifest). 

The information required on the 

advance manifest for qualifying lowvalue shipments is identical to the 

information required for the release 

from manifest process under 19 CFR 

143.23(k), but, pursuant to 19 CFR 

128.24(e), such shipments must be 

segregated on the advance manifest 

when it is used as the entry document.22

Pursuant to 19 CFR 145.31, qualifying 

low-value shipments sent through the 

mail are generally passed free of duty 

and tax without the preparation of an 

entry in accordance with 19 CFR 145.12. 

The information needed for entry and 

release is supplied in the 

documentation accompanying the mail 

package. Generally, this documentation 

consists of the customs declaration and 

invoice or bill of sale (or, in the case of 

merchandise not purchased or 

consigned for sale, a statement of the 

fair retail value in the country of 

shipment).23

Regardless of the method or mode of 

transportation, CBP may require a 

formal entry for any merchandise if 

deemed necessary for import 

admissibility enforcement purposes, 

revenue protection, or the efficient 

conduct of customs business.24

B. Partner Government Agency 

Requirements 

A low-value shipment is not exempt 

from partner government agency (PGA) 

requirements.25 Many PGAs do not have 

exemptions from their reporting 

requirements for low-value shipments 

and require strict accountability of 

imported goods for national security 

and health and safety reasons, and to 

identify specific shipments of 

potentially violative products for 

reporting or enforcement purposes. 

Low-value shipments may also require 

the payment of applicable PGA duties, 

fees, or excise taxes collected by other 

agencies. Shipments that have PGA data 

reporting requirements or require the 

payment of any duties, fees, or taxes 

must generally be entered using the 

appropriate informal or formal entry 

process to ensure that the PGA 

requirements are met. Low-value 

shipments subject to PGA requirements 

are currently ineligible for entry under 

the release from manifest process. 

C. Challenges of the Release From 

Manifest Process 

The release from manifest process is 

a slow and labor-intensive process. A 

CBP officer must review each entry and 

provide a determination regarding 

release. While this process may have 

been sufficient decades ago, the sheer 

volume of imports and the limited 

resources at the ports of entry make it 

untenable today. 

Moreover, the data currently provided 

on the standard manifest is insufficient 

or too vague for CBP to effectively 

screen merchandise and provide 

admissibility decisions in a timely 

manner. The data often does not 

adequately identify the entity causing 

the shipment to cross the border, the 

final recipient, or the contents of the 

package. With the dramatic increase in 

shipments that only provide minimal 

data, CBP is left with fewer data points 

about a greater number of shipments. 

Many of these shipments are 

undervalued or incorrectly presented for 

release from manifest as non-PGA 

shipments, and thus do not qualify for 

the administrative exemption. More 

information about these shipments will 

help CBP to identify these shipments 

prior to release, thereby protecting 

consumers from purchasing goods that 

do not meet regulatory health and safety 

standards and protecting U.S. 

businesses from unfair competition 

against imported goods that would 

otherwise be charged duties or restricted 

from entry. 

V. Section 321 Data Pilot and Entry 

Type 86 Test 

To address the challenges described 

above, CBP launched two voluntary 

pilot programs pertaining to low-value 

shipments in 2019: the Section 321 Data 

Pilot and the Entry Type 86 Test. The 

Section 321 Data Pilot began with nine 

voluntary participants from the trade 

community to test the feasibility of CBP 

accepting advance data for shipments 

eligible for the administrative 

exemption.26 Currently, CBP requires 

carriers and other regulated parties to 

transmit certain information relating to 

commercial cargo prior to the arrival of 

the cargo in the United States. However, 

in the e-commerce environment, 

traditionally regulated parties, such as 

carriers, are unlikely to possess all of 

the information relating to a shipment’s 

supply chain that CBP needs to 

effectively identify high-risk shipments. 

The Section 321 Data Pilot tests the 

feasibility of obtaining this advance 

information from parties other than 

those required to submit it pursuant to 

the existing regulations, such as online 

marketplaces. The Section 321 Data 

Pilot also tests the collection of 

additional data that is generally not 

required under current regulations. 

Participants in the Section 321 Data 

Pilot agree to transmit certain data 

elements for each qualifying low-value 

shipment. Initial pilot participants 

included carriers, e-commerce 

marketplaces, a technology firm, and 

logistics providers. In 2023, CBP 

modified the Section 321 Data Pilot to 

allow participants to transmit optional 

data elements and to permit additional 

trade members to participate.27 The 

purpose of the pilot is to improve CBP’s 

ability to identify and target high-risk ecommerce shipments including 

narcotics, weapons, and products 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3053 

28 84 FR 40079 (Aug. 13, 2019). 

29Merchandise imported by mail is excluded 

from the Entry Type 86 Test and may not be entered 

under entry type 86. 

30For example, a party with a financial interest 

in the merchandise could constitute an owner or a 

purchaser that may file an entry type 86. 

Additionally, a broker properly appointed by the 

owner or the purchaser, or for example, by a thirdparty warehouse receiving the merchandise as a 

consignee, may file an entry type 86. 

31The enhanced entry process is required for 

goods subject to PGA data requirements seeking 

duty-free entry under the administrative exemption. 

32Some of the data elements collected under the 

enhanced entry process in this proposed 

rulemaking may be similar to advance data 

collected for cargo security purposes pursuant to 

regulations issued under the authority of 19 U.S.C. 

1415, such as in the case of Air Cargo Advance 

Screening (ACAS) data. CBP notes that 19 U.S.C. 

1415(a)(3)(F) prohibits data collected under that 

statute’s implementing regulations from being used 

for commercial enforcement purposes, including for 

determining merchandise entry. This rulemaking is 

being proposed under the statutory authorities 

pertaining to the entry of merchandise as detailed 

in section III. Accordingly, the regulations issued 

under 19 U.S.C. 1415 will continue to apply 

without any modification by this proposed 

rulemaking. 

posing a danger to the public’s health 

and safety. 

The other pilot, the Entry Type 86 

Test, authorized a new entry process for 

qualifying low-value shipments in the 

Automated Commercial Environment 

(ACE) through the development of a 

new informal entry type 86.28 The test 

created a means for qualifying low-value 

shipments subject to PGA data 

requirements to benefit from the use of 

a section 321 entry process for the first 

time, allowing these shipments to claim 

duty- and tax-free treatment under the 

administrative exemption. Prior to the 

development of entry type 86, low-value 

shipments subject to PGA requirements 

were required to be entered using the 

more complex informal entry type 11 or 

formal entry.29 The Entry Type 86 Test 

also expedites the clearance of 

compliant low-value shipments into the 

United States through the use of an 

electronic release in ACE. 

Under this test, an owner, purchaser, 

or customs broker appointed by an 

owner, purchaser, or consignee may file 

an entry type 86.30 Ten data elements in 

the entry type 86 are required to be 

transmitted to CBP, including the 10- 

digit classification for the merchandise 

under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (HTSUS). This 

information allows CBP to determine 

whether the shipment is subject to PGA 

data reporting requirements. Any PGA 

data reporting requirements must be 

satisfied by the transmission of the PGA 

Message Set and the filing of any 

supporting documentation via the 

Document Image System (DIS). The PGA 

Message Set enables the trade 

community to electronically submit all 

data required by the PGAs only once to 

CBP, eliminating the necessity for the 

submission and subsequent manual 

processing of paper documents, and 

makes the required data available to the 

relevant PGAs for import and 

transportation-related decision-making. 

The Entry Type 86 Test has allowed 

CBP to test electronic release in ACE for 

low-value shipments, including those 

with PGA data requirements. It has also 

allowed CBP to test operational 

procedures involved with the new entry 

type, including associated challenges 

with electronic release in ACE and 

necessary coordination with PGAs. 

Both pilots have yielded positive 

benefits for CBP and the trade 

community. Specifically, under the 

Section 321 Data Pilot, CBP was able to 

test the feasibility of collecting new data 

elements that identify the entities 

responsible for the movement of lowvalue shipments, the precise contents of 

these shipments, and their final 

destination after arriving in the United 

States. Collection of this information 

allows CBP to conduct faster and more 

accurate risk assessments, and trade 

members providing this more detailed 

data may benefit from fewer CBP holds. 

Similarly, as a result of the Entry Type 

86 Test, the trade community has 

experienced fewer holds and faster 

clearance, often same-day clearance, 

versus the previous wait times of up to 

eight days. Trade members have also 

reported time and cost savings as 

detailed below in section VII. 

If and when this proposed rule 

becomes a final rule, CBP will end the 

Entry Type 86 Test. CBP proposes to 

codify the Entry Type 86 Test’s 

electronic entry process as part of the 

new enhanced entry process, with 

certain changes as discussed in the next 

section. The Section 321 Data Pilot, 

however, will continue with respect to 

those data elements and filers not 

covered by a final rule, for further 

evaluation of the pilot and the risks 

associated with low-value shipments. 

Changes to the Section 321 Data Pilot 

will be announced in a separate Federal 

Register notice. 

VI. Discussion of Proposed 

Amendments 

This rulemaking proposes 

amendments to provisions found in 19 

CFR parts 10, 101, 128, 143, and 145. 

CBP generally intends this proposed 

rule’s provisions to be severable from 

each other. CBP expects to provide 

additional detail on severability in the 

final rule once CBP has considered 

public comments and finalized the 

regulatory language. CBP proposes to 

combine the successful aspects of the 

Section 321 Data Pilot and Entry Type 

86 Test to create a new, alternative 31

process for entering low-value 

shipments (referred to as the ‘‘enhanced 

entry process’’) that would, among other 

benefits, allow CBP to target high-risk 

shipments more effectively in advance 

of the shipment’s arrival in the United 

States, including those shipments 

containing synthetic opioids such as 

illicit fentanyl. The new enhanced entry 

process incorporates a selection of the 

most useful data elements tested in the 

Section 321 Data Pilot and uses an 

electronic entry process similar to what 

was tested in the Entry Type 86 Test.32

The enhanced entry process would 

require the submission of advance data, 

within specified time frames, about the 

contents, origin, and destination of the 

shipments. Furthermore, the new 

process would allow CBP to maintain 

two key benefits of the Entry Type 86 

Test, namely the expedited clearance of 

certain shipments and the availability of 

duty- and tax-free entry for qualifying 

low-value shipments, including those 

that are subject to PGA requirements. 

This document also proposes to revise 

the current release from manifest 

process for entering low-value 

shipments (renamed as the ‘‘basic entry 

process’’) to require additional data 

elements that would assist CBP in 

verifying eligibility for duty- and taxfree entry of low-value shipments and 

bona-fide gifts. 

Additionally, this document proposes 

to define who is the ‘‘one person’’ to 

whom the $800 exemption applies, 

explain eligibility requirements for the 

exemption, and clarify the definition of 

a ‘‘shipment,’’ among other things. 

Lastly, this document proposes to 

correct typographical errors and make 

minor amendments for clarity and 

stylistic purposes. 

Part 10, among other things, 

establishes the administrative 

exemptions for low-value shipments 

and bona-fide gifts in the regulations 

and lists the conditions that must be 

met to qualify for the exemptions. Part 

101 contains general definitions, which 

includes the definition of a ‘‘shipment.’’ 

Part 143, subpart C contains the 

informal entry procedures. Accordingly, 

the new enhanced entry process is set 

forth in proposed § 143.23(j) and (l). The 

parties who can make entry of low-value 

shipments and the applicable standards 

of care are found in § 143.26. Specific 

procedures for shipments imported by 

mail are found in part 145, and 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3054 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

33The separate exemption for articles 

accompanying and for the personal/household use 

of travelers returning from abroad, under 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(B), is not implicated or changed by this 

rulemaking. 

34CBP may require a formal consumption or 

appraisement entry for any merchandise if deemed 

necessary for import admissibility enforcement 

purposes, revenue protection, or the efficient 

conduct of customs business. 19 CFR 143.22. Any 

such formally entered merchandise is not eligible 

for the administrative exemptions. See 19 CFR 

10.151and 10.152. 

procedures for express consignment 

operators and carriers are found in part 

128. 

A. Part 10 

Section 10.151 broadly sets forth the 

administrative exemption of 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(C) in the CBP regulations. 

Similarly, § 10.152 sets forth the 

administrative exemption for bona-fide 

gifts under 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(A).33

Section 10.153 sets forth the conditions 

to be applied by a CBP officer in 

determining whether an article or parcel 

shall be exempted from duty and tax 

under § 10.151 or 10.152. CBP is 

proposing several changes to these 

sections to clarify the parameters of 

these exemptions and more closely align 

the language in the regulations with the 

statutory text. 

1. Shipments Exceeding $800 

There has been some confusion in the 

trade community regarding how the 

$800 value limit is applied when 

multiple low-value shipments are 

imported by one person on the same 

day. To provide clarity, CBP proposes to 

amend § 10.151 to explain that when the 

aggregate fair retail value of shipments 

imported by one person on one day 

under § 10.151 exceeds $800, then all 

such shipments imported on that day by 

that person become ineligible for dutyand tax-free entry under the 

administrative exemption. Such 

shipments would have to be entered 

under appropriate informal or formal 

entry procedures. 

2. Party Eligible for Administrative 

Exemption and Party Authorized To 

Make Entry 

In order to enforce the administrative 

exemption, CBP must ensure that the 

aggregate fair retail value in the country 

of shipment of articles imported by one 

person on one day and exempted from 

the payment of duty does not exceed the 

statutory limit of $800. CBP proposes to 

amend § 10.151 to require that the ‘‘one 

person’’ eligible for the administrative 

exemption is the owner or purchaser of 

the merchandise imported on one day. 

It is possible that the party who is 

eligible for the administrative 

exemption (i.e., the owner or purchaser) 

is different from the party who is 

authorized to make entry under 

§ 143.26(b). Accordingly, CBP proposes 

to include a cross-reference in § 10.151 

to clarify that merchandise for which 

the administrative exemption is being 

claimed must be entered by a party 

authorized to make entry under 

§ 143.26(b). 

3. Single Orders Sent Separately To 

Circumvent Duties and Evidence of Fair 

Retail Value 

The statutory text of 19 U.S.C. 1321(a) 

prohibits goods from a single order or 

contract from being forwarded in 

separate lots to obtain the benefit of the 

administrative exemption. The current 

regulation differs from the statute in that 

the regulation requires that the single 

order must be sent separately for the 

‘‘express purpose’’ of obtaining free 

entry or avoiding compliance with 

pertinent laws. CBP proposes to align 

this provision with the statute and 

remove the limiting language that 

requires an ‘‘express purpose’’ to be 

established. 

CBP proposes removing the clause in 

§ 10.151 that describes the documents 

(or oral declaration) used to evidence 

the fair retail value of a shipment. CBP 

believes that the informal entry 

procedures cited to in the last sentence 

of § 10.151 more comprehensively 

describe the required data and 

documents needed to file or support 

entry of the shipment. 

4. Other Amendments to §§ 10.151 and 

10.152 

Currently, the regulations in §§ 10.151 

and 10.152 state that the port director 

‘‘shall’’ provide duty- and tax-free entry 

of shipments meeting the value limits in 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(A) and (C). The 

value limit, however, is not the only 

requirement that shipments must meet 

in order to obtain duty- and tax-free 

entry under these sections. All other 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements must also be met. 

Furthermore, the administrative 

exemptions are a privilege and not an 

absolute right. CBP maintains the 

authority, pursuant to 19 CFR 143.22, to 

require a formal entry, and assess any 

attendant duties, taxes, and fees, as 

applicable, for any such shipment for 

import admissibility enforcement 

purposes, revenue protection, or the 

efficient conduct of customs business.34

Therefore, CBP proposes to replace 

‘‘shall’’ with ‘‘may,’’ reflecting that the 

exemptions are granted based on the 

port director’s discretion. 

CBP also proposes amending 

§§ 10.151 and 10.152 to clarify that 

eligible merchandise must be entered 

under the specific informal entry 

procedures listed in each section in 

order to enter free of duty and tax. If 

another form of entry is used, such as 

informal type 11 entry or formal entry, 

then applicable duties and taxes will be 

assessed. For clarity, in §§ 10.151 and 

10.152, CBP proposes replacing the 

more general cross-reference to subpart 

C of part 143 with the specific citations 

to the applicable informal entry 

procedures in § 143.23(j). 

In § 10.152, CBP is proposing to 

remove the cross-references to 

§§ 148.12, 148.51, and 148.64 because 

they reference the process of entering 

gifts along with household or personal 

articles which accompany a person 

upon the person’s arrival from abroad, 

all of which may be entered pursuant to 

an oral declaration. Section 10.152 

pertains to bona-fide gifts sent from 

persons in foreign countries to persons 

in the United States subject to the 

exemption under 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(A), which is distinct from the 

separate exemption under 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(B) for personal and 

household goods (including gifts) 

accompanying persons arriving in the 

United States. Accordingly, CBP 

proposes to remove those crossreferences to avoid confusion. 

Lastly, CBP proposes updating the 

undesignated center heading preceding 

§ 10.151 to replace ‘‘$200’’ with ‘‘$800’’ 

to align with the current value limit in 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C). In the same 

heading, CBP proposes hyphenating the 

phrase ‘‘bona fide’’ for consistency with 

the text in § 10.152. 

5. Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties 

Section 10.153 sets forth, among other 

things, the guidance to be applied by a 

CBP officer in determining whether an 

article or parcel should be exempted 

from duty and tax under § 10.151. CBP 

proposes adding a new paragraph (i), 

which would clarify the existing 

requirement that merchandise subject to 

antidumping and countervailing duties 

(AD/CVD) is not eligible for the 

administrative exemption. CBP has a 

ministerial role in administering and 

enforcing AD/CVD orders in accordance 

with instructions from the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce). 

Commerce’s instructions specifically 

direct CBP to assess AD/CVD on all 

entries for consumption of subject 

merchandise, without any exceptions. 

Further, the AD/CVD statutes 

specifically apply to ‘‘all entries, or 

withdrawals from warehouse, for 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3055 

35 19 U.S.C. 1671h (CVD); 19 U.S.C. 1673g (AD). 

36See 19 CFR 143.22. 

consumption of merchandise subject to 

[an AD/CVD] order on or after the date 

of publication of such order,’’ without 

any mention of the administrative 

exemption or other exemption from the 

applicability of AD/CVD to all entries of 

subject merchandise.35

In addition, new paragraph (i) also 

reinforces CBP’s authority to deny the 

administrative exemption for any other 

merchandise otherwise precluded by 

law from eligibility. 

6. Other Amendments to § 10.153 

CBP proposes updating the 

nomenclature in the introductory text of 

§ 10.153 by changing ‘‘Customs’’ to 

‘‘CBP.’’ Additionally, in paragraph (a) 

and the introductory text of paragraph 

(d), CBP proposes hyphenating the 

phrase ‘‘bona fide’’ for consistency with 

the text in § 10.152. 

B. Part 101 

CBP proposes amending the 

definition of ‘‘shipment’’ in § 101.1 to 

clarify that a single shipment 

corresponds to an individual bill of 

lading. An individual bill of lading is 

not a consolidation of several bills of 

lading and is not a master bill or other 

consolidated document. An individual 

bill of lading is a bill representing an 

individual shipment that has its own 

unique bill number and tracking 

number, where the shipment is assigned 

to a single ultimate consignee, and no 

lower bill unit exists. An individual bill 

of lading, also known as a ‘‘house bill,’’ 

is used in all modes of transportation. 

It may be referred to as an ‘‘individual 

air waybill’’ in the air environment or a 

‘‘simple bill’’ in the ocean environment. 

C. Part 128 

Part 128 sets forth requirements and 

procedures for the clearance of imported 

merchandise carried by ECOs, including 

couriers, under special procedures. 

Current § 128.24 explains the informal 

entry procedures for express 

consignment shipments, including 

shipments meeting the requirements of 

§ 10.151. As was done above in § 10.151, 

CBP proposes replacing the word ‘‘will’’ 

with ‘‘may’’ in the first sentence of the 

introductory text of § 128.24(e) to reflect 

that CBP has the discretion to require 

formal entry for any low-value 

shipment.36 CBP proposes adding a 

cross-reference in the introductory text 

of § 128.24(e) to the entry procedures for 

low-value shipments in § 143.23(j). The 

procedures in § 143.23(j) require that an 

individual bill of lading must 

accompany each entry. Under the 

current regulations, an advance manifest 

listing each bill of lading may be used 

as the entry document, and shipments 

valued at $800 or less must be 

segregated on the advance manifest. 

Accordingly, CBP is removing the 

requirement to segregate shipments 

valued at $800 or less on an advance 

manifest because, although the advance 

manifest is still required, it is the 

individual bill of lading that serves as 

the entry document. As a result, there is 

no need to segregate shipments on the 

advance manifest. CBP is also removing 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2), because the 

data and documents required for entry 

are explained in § 143.23(j)–(l). 

CBP proposes to add a new paragraph 

(f) to § 128.24 to specify the entry 

procedures to be used for entering bonafide gifts. Bona-fide gifts may not be 

entered under the new enhanced entry 

process. CBP is also amending 

paragraph (d) to clarify that an entry 

summary is not required for qualifying 

low-value shipments and bona-fide gifts 

passing free of duty and tax pursuant to 

paragraphs (e) and (f), respectively. 

Current § 128.21(a) lists the manifest 

information required in advance of the 

arrival of all express consignment cargo. 

CBP proposes to amend paragraph 

(a)(4)(ii) to explain that the HTSUS 

subheading number is not required for 

low-value shipments entered under the 

basic entry process in § 143.23(k), but it 

is required for shipments entered under 

the enhanced entry process in 

§ 143.23(l) (unless a waiver is obtained). 

Lastly, CBP proposes to replace the 

reference to ‘‘Customs’’ in § 128.21(b) 

with ‘‘CBP.’’ 

D. Part 143 

Under this proposed rulemaking, 

qualifying low-value shipments can be 

entered under two alternative processes 

to receive duty- and tax-free entry, 

either under the basic entry process or 

the enhanced entry process. This 

section explains the requirements of 

each process. 

1. General Requirements for Shipments 

Not Over $800 and Bona-Fide Gifts 

The general requirements for entry of 

qualifying low-value shipments and 

bona-fide gifts are set forth in the 

revisions proposed in § 143.23(j). 

Paragraph (j) states that in order to enter 

qualifying shipments, the party making 

entry must provide the individual bill of 

lading (house bill or equivalent), or 

other shipping document used to file or 

support entry, as a basic requirement. In 

addition, the requirements of either the 

basic entry process in paragraph (k) or 

the enhanced entry process in paragraph 

(l) must be met. 

The proposed revisions to paragraphs 

(j)(1)–(3) explain when certain types of 

merchandise are limited to entry under 

either the basic or enhanced process in 

order to qualify for the administrative 

exemption. Proposed paragraph (j)(1) 

states that merchandise may be subject 

to other legal requirements, including 

the requirements of other Federal, State, 

or local agencies, as applicable. In the 

case of merchandise regulated by other 

Federal agencies, the merchandise may 

not be entered under the basic entry 

process under § 143.23(k), but may be 

entered under the enhanced entry 

process under § 143.23(l). However, any 

merchandise that is not exempt from the 

payment of any applicable PGA duties, 

fees, or taxes is not eligible for entry 

under either entry process. Any filing 

that is determined to owe any duties, 

fees, or taxes will be rejected by CBP 

and must be re-filed using the 

appropriate informal or formal entry 

process. 

Proposed paragraph (j)(2) explains 

that mail importations may not be 

entered using the basic entry process in 

§ 143.23(k), but may be entered using 

the enhanced entry process in 

§ 143.23(l). Further information about 

mail importations is found in § 145.31. 

Lastly, proposed paragraph (j)(3) 

explains that bona-fide gifts under 

§ 10.152 are not eligible to use the 

enhanced entry process and must use 

the basic entry process in § 143.23(k). 

2. Basic Entry Process 

CBP proposes to amend the current 

release from manifest process described 

in § 143.23(j) and (k). First, CBP 

proposes renaming the existing process 

in § 143.23(j) and (k) as the ‘‘basic entry 

process’’ to differentiate it from the 

proposed new ‘‘enhanced entry 

process.’’ The requirements for the basic 

entry process will be consolidated in 

§ 143.23(k). 

The proposed basic entry process 

maintains the general procedures of the 

existing release from manifest process, 

with slight modifications. As explained 

in paragraph (k), low-value shipments 

meeting the requirements in § 10.151 or 

bona-fide gifts meeting the requirements 

in § 10.152 may be entered under the 

basic entry process. Release under the 

proposed basic entry process will be 

obtained by providing an individual bill 

of lading (house bill or equivalent) and 

will require the filer to provide the data 

elements listed in paragraph (k). The 

entry data may either be transmitted 

electronically through a CBP-authorized 

electronic data interchange (EDI) system 

or be submitted in paper format. 

There are some changes to the data 

elements from the current process. The 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3056 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

37 19 CFR 143.23(k). 

38 19 CFR 10.152. The exemption may be granted 

if the conditions in § 10.153 are met and ‘‘the 

aggregate fair retail value in the country of 

shipment of such articles received by one person on 

one day does not exceed $100 or, in the case of 

articles sent from a person in the Virgin Islands, 

Guam, and American Samoa, $200.’’ (Emphasis 

added.) 

39When duties or other charges or fees are 

assessed on an import, they are calculated using the 

appraised value of the imported good, pursuant to 

19 U.S.C. 1401a, which is not based on the good’s 

retail value in the country of shipment. 

Alternatively, for the purposes of the administrative 

exception, the value to be evaluated to determine 

qualification for duty- and tax-free treatment is the 

fair retail value in the country of shipment. 

40The trigger time is no later than the time that 

wheels are up on the aircraft, and the aircraft is en 

route directly to the United States. 68 FR 68140; see 

also, 19 CFR 122.48a(b). 

following information must be provided 

under the existing process: the country 

of origin of the merchandise; shipper 

name, address and country; ultimate 

consignee name and address; specific 

description of the merchandise; 

quantity; shipping weight; and value.37

In § 143.23(k)(3), CBP proposes to also 

require the name and address of the 

person claiming the administrative 

exemption under § 10.151 or 10.152, 

i.e., the person who is being exempted 

from the payment of duty for the 

qualifying low-value shipment. For 

qualifying low-value shipments, this 

would be the name and address of the 

owner or purchaser as set forth in 

§ 10.151. For bona-fide gifts, it would be 

the name and address of the person 

receiving the articles as set forth in 

§ 10.152.38 This is crucial information 

that CBP needs to enforce the 

cumulative statutory ‘‘one person on 

one day’’ monetary restriction. 

Additionally, in proposed 

§ 143.23(k)(8), CBP requires the name 

and address of the final deliver-to party, 

if distinct from the party eligible for the 

administrative exemption in paragraph 

(k)(3). This refers to the final party in 

the United States to whom the 

merchandise is to be delivered. The 

purpose of this data element is to enable 

CBP to know to whom and where the 

imported merchandise is destined to be 

delivered in the United States. To avoid 

duplication of data elements, CBP is 

proposing to remove the name and 

address of the ultimate consignee, 

currently required by § 143.23(k)(3). 

CBP is also proposing amendments to 

several of the existing data elements. 

CBP proposes to clarify that the quantity 

requested is the ‘‘manifested quantity of 

the merchandise’’ and the weight is 

referring to the ‘‘shipment weight.’’ 

Lastly, to maintain consistency with the 

statutory language, CBP is specifying 

that the value required is the ‘‘fair retail 

value in the country of shipment’’ in 

U.S. dollars.39

3. Enhanced Entry Process 

Proposed § 143.23(l) sets forth the 

enhanced entry process. This process is 

limited to low-value shipments meeting 

the requirements of § 10.151. 

Accordingly, qualifying bona-fide gifts 

under § 10.152 must use the basic entry 

process for duty- and tax-free entry. 

The enhanced entry process requires 

the electronic transmission of the 

individual bill of lading (house bill or 

equivalent) or other shipping document 

used to file or support entry. In 

addition, enhanced entry filers must 

transmit the data elements in paragraph 

(k) and paragraphs (l)(1)–(2) to CBP. 

CBP acknowledges that it is possible 

that the required data elements do not 

all reside with one party. The entry, 

however, can only be filed by one of the 

parties eligible to file entry. Therefore, 

in such cases, the party filing the entry 

will need to gather the required data 

from others before filing. 

The enhanced entry process requires 

data to be transmitted to CBP in advance 

of arrival of the shipment to allow for 

CBP to timely conduct targeting and 

offer expedited release. For consistency 

with other advance data requirements, 

CBP proposes to adopt, for the enhanced 

entry process, the same time frames as 

currently applicable for filing advance 

electronic data (AED) under regulations 

promulgated pursuant to section 343 of 

the Trade Act of 2002, 19 U.S.C. 1415 

(the Trade Act regulations). Therefore, 

all the required information and 

documentation must be transmitted to 

CBP through a CBP-authorized EDI 

system on or before the deadline for 

receipt of advance cargo information. 

Mail shipments using the enhanced 

entry process are subject to a separate 

filing deadline, which can be found in 

§ 145.31. For all other shipments, the 

required time frame to file an enhanced 

entry varies depending on the mode of 

transportation, and will be the same as 

provided for AED filings for each mode 

under the Trade Act regulations, which 

are as follows: 

• For vessel cargo, the filing must be 

received by CBP 24 hours before the 

cargo is laden aboard the vessel at the 

foreign port. 19 CFR 4.7 and 4.7a. 

• For air cargo, the filing must be 

received by CBP either: (1) no later than 

the time of the departure of the aircraft 

for the United States,40 in the case of 

aircraft that depart for the United States 

from any foreign port or place in North 

America, including locations in Mexico, 

Central America, South America (from 

north of the Equator only), the 

Caribbean, and Bermuda; or (2) no later 

than four hours prior to the arrival of 

the aircraft in the United States, in the 

case of aircraft that depart for the United 

States from any foreign area other than 

those specified in 19 CFR 122.48a(b)(1). 

19 CFR 122.48a(b)(1). 

• For rail cargo, the filing must be 

received by CBP no later than two hours 

prior to the cargo reaching the first port 

of arrival in the United States. 19 CFR 

123.91. 

• For truck cargo, the filing must be 

received by CBP no later than either 30 

minutes or one hour prior to the 

carrier’s reaching the first port of arrival 

in the United States, or such lesser time 

as authorized, based upon the CBPapproved system employed to present 

the information. 19 CFR 123.92. 

If the required information has not 

been transmitted by the time frames 

specified, those shipments will not 

receive a release message upon arrival of 

the conveyance. Such shipments will be 

held for additional action, such as an 

exam or document review before a 

manual clearance may be given. 

In order to account for the various 

types of merchandise that may be 

entered subject to the administrative 

exemption, the data elements required 

for the enhanced entry process are split 

into subparagraphs (1) and (2). 

Subparagraph (1) data must be 

transmitted for all shipments. The data 

in subparagraph (2) may not be 

applicable to all shipments, but if the 

data exists, it must be transmitted. CBP 

may request supporting documentation 

to conduct verification of any of the data 

elements. 

Under proposed § 143.23(l)(1), the 

following data elements must be 

transmitted for all shipments: 

(i) Clearance Tracing Identification 

Number (CTIN) 

The CTIN refers to the individual bill 

of lading number or other unique 

identification number used to associate 

the merchandise on the individual bill 

of lading with the eligible imported 

merchandise for which entry is sought. 

(ii) Country of Shipment of the 

Merchandise 

This refers to the country where the 

goods were located when the shipment 

was created for exportation to the 

United States. For example, a good 

originating in Country A is shipped to 

a storage facility in Country B and is 

then sold and prepared for exportation 

to the United States. It is then 

transshipped through Country C before 

arriving in the United States. In this 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3057 

41 19 CFR 101.1. 

42 Id. 

43See the December 13, 2013 Federal Register 

notice (78 FR 75931) for a further discussion of the 

PGA Message Set and the October 15, 2015 Federal 

Register notice (80 FR 62082) for a further 

discussion of DIS. 

scenario, the country of shipment is 

Country B. 

(iii) 10-Digit Classification of the 

Merchandise in Chapters 1–97 (and 

Additionally in Chapters 98–99, if 

Applicable) of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

The 10-digit HTSUS classification 

must be provided for all shipments 

unless the HTSUS waiver privilege has 

been obtained pursuant to paragraph 

(m) and asserted for the entry. 

Regardless of whether the waiver 

privilege is granted, merchandise 

subject to requirements of other 

government agencies will always 

require the HTSUS subheading number 

to be filed. The intent of collecting 

HTSUS data is primarily for CBP to 

verify what partner government agency 

requirements may apply to the 

merchandise. 

Unless otherwise prohibited, a 

Chapter 98 or Chapter 99 commodity 

may also be entered under the enhanced 

entry process. In such cases, the Chapter 

98 or Chapter 99 HTSUS classification 

must be provided in addition to the 

underlying Chapters 1–97 HTSUS 

classification for the merchandise. 

(iv) Additional Data Elements 

CBP is also requiring at least one of 

the data elements listed under 

paragraph (l)(1)(iv). These data elements 

include the internet address known as 

the uniform resource locator (URL) to 

the marketplace’s product listing for the 

merchandise in the entry; product 

picture; product identifier; and/or a 

shipment x-ray or other security 

screening report number verifying 

completion of foreign security scanning 

of the shipment. These data elements 

would be used by CBP to verify the 

contents of the shipment for 

admissibility purposes. 

CBP intends for the product identifier 

to be a commercial product identifier 

such as the part number, stock keeping 

unit (SKU), or product code. However, 

CBP is seeking the trade community’s 

input regarding suggestions for 

acceptable product identifiers. 

The security screening report number, 

applicable to ECOs, is also included as 

one of the four options. CBP seeks the 

trade community’s input about its 

viability for being submitted as part of 

the enhanced entry process. 

Next, proposed § 143.23(l)(2) lists 

additional information that must be 

transmitted for all shipments, if 

applicable. These data elements 

include: 

(i) Seller Name and Address 

The seller is the party that made, or 

offered or contracted to make, a sale of 

the merchandise. Seller information is 

critical to CBP’s efforts to identify and 

interdict shipments of goods that 

infringe intellectual property rights or 

are of a substandard quality that renders 

them otherwise restricted from entry. 

These goods undercut the 

competitiveness of U.S. businesses and 

pose health and safety concerns. 

(ii) Purchaser Name and Address 

The purchaser is the last known party 

to whom the goods are sold, or the party 

to whom the goods are contracted to be 

sold, at the time of importation. 

Importation occurs when a vessel 

arrives within the limits of a port in the 

United States with intent then and there 

to unlade such merchandise.41 In the 

case of merchandise imported other 

than by vessel, importation occurs when 

the merchandise arrives within the 

customs territory of the United States.42

Although this data element may seem 

to overlap with the data elements in 

§ 143.23(k)(3) and (8), that would not 

always be the case. One of the main 

purposes of this proposed rule is to try 

to capture all the parties involved with 

complex e-commerce transactions. It is 

possible, for example, that Party A 

purchases a product on an online 

marketplace from Party B to be sent to 

Party C’s address in the United States. 

In this scenario, it is possible that the 

name of Party B could be provided in 

§ 143.23(k)(3) as the owner, and the 

name of Party C is provided in 

§ 143.23(k)(8) as the final deliver-to 

party in the United States. Without this 

separate data element requesting the 

name and address of the purchaser, CBP 

would not know the party who initiated 

this transaction (i.e., Party A). 

(iii) Any Data or Documents Required 

by Other Government Agencies 

If the merchandise is subject to any 

PGA data reporting requirements, the 

filer must transmit the PGA Message Set 

and file any supporting documentation 

via the Document Image System (DIS).43

(iv) Advertised Retail Product 

Description 

This refers to the exact product 

description as listed in the 

advertisement for sale. This must 

include a description that is more 

detailed than what is provided on the 

manifest. For example, products listed 

on online marketplaces include detailed 

descriptions of the merchandise, 

dimensions, weight, etc. 

(v) Marketplace Name and Website or 

Phone Number 

This refers to the party that provides 

an internet (e.g., online, website, 

application (‘‘app’’), electronic mail) or 

telephonic (e.g., telephone, television, 

or catalog) means of offering products 

for sale. The marketplace may be a seller 

or a third party offering products on 

behalf of a seller. 

4. HTSUS Waiver Privilege 

The proposed enhanced entry process 

requires the submission of a 10-digit 

HTSUS classification for determining 

whether the merchandise is subject to 

PGA data requirements. CBP 

understands that many companies have 

their own internal risk assessment 

processes, which include ways to 

determine whether imported 

merchandise is subject to PGA 

requirements. Accordingly, the 

proposed regulations provide for parties 

to apply for a waiver of the reporting 

requirement for the 10-digit HTSUS 

classification if the filing party has 

documented internal controls that 

ensure certain compliance measures. 

This waiver is intended for filers with 

demonstrated capabilities and histories 

of segmenting out goods subject to PGA 

requirements. The waiver lifts the data 

requirement for 10-digit HTSUS 

classification as part of the enhanced 

entry only for goods that are not subject 

to PGA requirements. Waivers do not 

apply to goods that are subject to PGA 

requirements, for which the 10-digit 

HTSUS classification is always required 

under the enhanced entry process. 

Proposed § 143.23(m) sets forth the 

application requirements for the HTSUS 

waiver privilege, actions CBP may take 

on the application, and the appeals 

process. Notwithstanding the 

availability of this privilege, a 10-digit 

HTSUS classification would still be 

required for imported merchandise 

subject to PGA requirements. The 

waiver may only be used to enter 

merchandise under the enhanced entry 

process without providing the 10-digit 

HTSUS classification, when the 

imported merchandise is not subject to 

PGA requirements. 

A party eligible to make an enhanced 

entry may apply for the HTSUS waiver 

privilege by submitting an application 

containing the information in paragraph 

(m)(2) to the Director, Cargo Security 

and Controls Division, Office of Field 

Operations, at ecommerce@cbp.dhs.gov. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3058 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

44Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1641, ‘‘customs 

business’’ is defined as those activities involving 

transactions with CBP concerning the entry and 

admissibility of merchandise, its classification and 

valuation, the payment of duties, taxes, or other 

charges assessed or collected by CBP on 

merchandise by reason of its importation, or the 

refund, rebate, or drawback of those duties, taxes, 

or other charges. ‘‘Customs business’’ also includes 

the preparation of documents or forms in any 

format and the electronic transmission of 

documents, invoices, bills, or parts thereof, 

intended to be filed with CBP in furtherance of such 

activities, whether or not signed or filed by the 

preparer, or activities relating to such preparation, 

but does not include the mere electronic 

transmission of data received for transmission to 

CBP. 

45See 19 CFR 141.46; see, e.g., 19 U.S.C. 1641; 

19 U.S.C. 1484; 19 CFR parts 111 and 141. 46 19 CFR 128.1(f). 

The application process must include 

information demonstrating that the 

applicant does not import goods subject 

to PGA requirements or it must have in 

place documented internal controls 

used in the ordinary course of business 

to identify PGA goods with certainty. 

An applicant must demonstrate that the 

internal controls allow the applicant to 

properly classify merchandise under the 

HTSUS at the 10-digit classification, 

determine whether merchandise is 

subject to the requirements of other 

government agencies, and determine 

whether merchandise is otherwise 

precluded by law from eligibility for the 

administrative exemption under 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C). Participation in the 

Customs Trade Partnership Against 

Terrorism (CTPAT) program does not 

guarantee approval of an application, 

but may be considered along with other 

factors on a case-by-case basis. 

The Office of Field Operations, in 

consultation with the Office of Trade, 

will make the determination to grant or 

deny the application on a case-by-case 

basis. CBP will respond to applications 

within 60 days of receipt. CBP will 

conduct periodic compliance reviews of 

privileges granted. CBP may revoke the 

privilege at any time if it determines 

that a company’s internal controls fall 

below the standards set by CBP, as 

proposed in 19 CFR 143.23(m)(2)(ii). If 

a company does not agree to participate 

in a review, then the privilege will be 

revoked. 

If an application is denied or the 

waiver is revoked, an appeal may be 

submitted by email within 30 days of 

the date of denial or revocation to the 

Executive Director, Trade Policy and 

Programs, Office of Trade, CBP 

Headquarters, at ecommerce@

cbp.dhs.gov. The denial of an 

application or the revocation of a 

waiver, does not preclude a party from 

reapplying for the privilege in the 

future. Reapplications must specify and 

address past denials and revocations of 

the privilege. 

Once obtained, the waiver privilege 

must be asserted as part of the entry 

filing for a shipment. CBP will track 

whether the imported merchandise in a 

shipment is eligible for the privilege 

through a ‘‘flag’’ or certification 

checkbox in ACE. 

5. Party Who May Make Entry and 

Standard of Care 

Section 143.26 addresses the right to 

make entry and the standard of care for 

informal entries. Current § 143.26(b) 

addresses who has the right to make 

entry, and states that shipments valued 

at $800 or less may be entered, using 

reasonable care, by the owner, 

purchaser, or consignee of the shipment 

or, when appropriately designated by 

one of these persons, a customs broker. 

These parties may continue to file entry 

under the basic entry process, and CBP 

proposes to add a clarifying crossreference to § 143.23(k). Carriers often 

enter low-value shipments as nominal 

consignees under the release from 

manifest process. They will continue to 

be able to do so under the basic entry 

process in proposed § 143.23(k). This is 

not the case, however, under the 

enhanced process in proposed 

§ 143.23(l). CBP proposes to add new 

paragraph (c) to § 143.26 that establishes 

an exception for enhanced entries 

regarding the parties who may make 

entry and the standard of care required. 

CBP proposes that an enhanced entry 

under § 143.23(l) may be entered using 

reasonable care, by the owner or 

purchaser of the shipment, an express 

consignment operator or carrier in 

possession of the shipment (see 

§ 128.1(a)), or when appropriately 

designated by the owner, purchaser, or 

consignee of the shipment, a customs 

broker. The filing of a basic or an 

enhanced entry, like the filing of any 

entry, is considered ‘‘customs business’’ 

under 19 U.S.C. 1641.44 CBP notes that 

customs brokers must be authorized to 

conduct customs business on behalf of 

another party through a valid power of 

attorney and must comply with all other 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

applicable to brokers.45 This proposed 

rule does not preclude further 

amendments of the regulations at a later 

date to include other enhanced entry 

filers, including possibly the United 

States Postal Service. Any such 

expansion would be considered in a 

future rulemaking. 

Unlike in the basic entry process, 

consignees are not permitted to file an 

enhanced entry without using a customs 

broker. However, ECOs are permitted to 

file an enhanced entry without using a 

customs broker, even though they are 

consignees, because they are better able 

to provide detailed information to CBP 

about the imported merchandise. ECOs, 

by regulation, are expected to exercise 

‘‘a high degree of control over the 

shipments, particularly in regard to the 

reliability of information supplied for 

Customs purposes.’’ 46 Typically, it is 

the owner or purchaser (i.e., a party 

with a direct nexus to the merchandise) 

who provides ECOs with information 

about the shipment. This closely 

integrated administrative control over 

shipments from pick-up to delivery 

uniquely positions ECOs, as opposed to 

other consignees, to obtain and provide 

to CBP accurate information about the 

contents of the shipment and to 

determine if the merchandise is subject 

to PGA requirements. 

ECOs transporting eligible shipments 

would qualify to file without using a 

customs broker under the enhanced 

entry process. Under 19 U.S.C. 1498, 

CBP has broad authority to promulgate 

special rules for the declaration and 

entry of merchandise subject to the 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) exemption, to 

include identifying specific parties in 

the implementing regulations who are 

permitted to make entry on their own 

behalf. 

Section 143.26 also addresses the 

standard of care required for informal 

entries, including for entries of lowvalue shipments. Shipments entered 

under the basic process in proposed 

§ 143.23(k) are covered by § 143.26(b) 

and the standard of care continues to be 

‘‘reasonable care.’’ 

For enhanced entries under proposed 

§ 143.23(l), proposed § 143.26(c) states 

that the general standard of care is 

reasonable care, but sets forth more 

specific provisions for the data elements 

in § 143.23(l)(1)(iv)(A)–(D) and 

143.23(l)(2)(iv)–(v). Specifically, these 

include the URL to the product listing, 

product picture, product identifier, 

shipment x-ray or other security 

screening report number, advertised 

product description, and marketplace 

information. CBP recognizes that these 

are non-traditional data elements and 

may not be easily verifiable by the party 

filing the entry if they are being passed 

onto the filer by third parties. 

Accordingly, when a party eligible to 

file the entry transmits the entry 

information specified above and 

receives any of that information from 

another party, CBP will take into 

consideration how, in accordance with 

ordinary commercial practices, the 

transmitting party acquired such 

information, and whether and how the 

transmitting party is able to verify this 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3059 

47This rulemaking does not place any new 

requirements on the U.S. Postal Service to provide 

data to CBP and does not impose any new liabilities 

on it. 

48 19 CFR 145.11. 

49 19 CFR 143.22 and 145.12(a)(1). 50 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2). 

51These shipments are also commonly referred to 

as ‘‘de minimis’’ shipments. 

52 Data provided by CBP’s Office of Field 

Operations on July 6, 2023 (FY2015) and CBP’s 

Office of Trade on November 8, 2023 (FY2023). 

53Fentanyl is a potent synthetic opioid that is 

contributing to the ongoing opioid crisis in the 

United States. 

information. When the transmitting 

party is not reasonably able to verify 

such information, CBP will permit the 

party to transmit the information on the 

basis of what the party reasonably 

believes to be true. 

CBP proposes adding a crossreference to the first sentence in 

paragraph (b) to recognize the more 

specific provisions in new paragraph 

(c). 

E. Part 145 

CBP proposes amending § 145.31 to 

allow for mail shipments to be entered 

though the enhanced entry process. 

Parties interested in using the postal 

service to ship merchandise using the 

enhanced entry process will have to 

ensure that all required information is 

transmitted to CBP using the procedure 

set forth in § 143.23(l).47 A mail customs 

declaration and invoice will continue to 

be required in accordance with § 145.11. 

The customs declaration is the ‘‘other 

shipping document used to file or 

support entry’’ referenced in § 143.23(j) 

and (l). The data for mail shipments 

must be received by CBP no later than 

the date the merchandise departs from 

the country of posting. Mail shipments 

are not eligible to use the basic entry 

process because the current method of 

entering qualifying low-value mail 

shipments free of duty and tax will 

continue to remain available. Under the 

current method, the information needed 

for entry and release is supplied in the 

documentation accompanying the mail 

package. Generally, this documentation 

consists of the customs declaration and 

invoice or bill of sale (or, in the case of 

merchandise not purchased or 

consigned for sale, a statement of the 

fair retail value in the country of 

shipment).48

Lastly, CBP proposes to replace the 

word ‘‘will’’ with ‘‘may’’ in the first 

sentence of § 145.31 and the word 

‘‘shall’’ with ‘‘may’’ in the first sentence 

of § 145.32 to reflect that CBP has the 

discretion to require formal entry for 

any low-value shipment.49

VII. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Executive Orders 13563 (Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review) and 

12866 (Regulatory Planning and 

Review), as amended by Executive 

Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory 

Review), direct agencies to assess the 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives, and if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, 

reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and 

promoting flexibility. 

This rulemaking is a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under section 3(f)(1) 

of Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 14094, because the 

rulemaking would have an annual effect 

of $200 million or more during at least 

one year of the analysis. A regulatory 

impact analysis, entitled Entry of LowValue Shipments (ELVS) Rulemaking, 

has been included in the docket of this 

rulemaking (docket number [USCBP– 

2025–0002]). The following presents a 

summary of the aforementioned 

regulatory impact analysis. 

1. Purpose of the Rule 

Section 321(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)), as amended 

by the Trade Facilitation and Trade 

Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTEA), 

section 901, Public Law 114–125, 130 

Stat. 122, authorizes administrative 

exemptions from duty and tax for three 

categories of articles. These categories 

include: bona-fide gifts valued at $100 

or less ($200, if the gift is from certain 

island possessions) sent from persons in 

foreign countries to persons in the 

United States; certain personal or 

household articles valued at $200 or less 

accompanying persons arriving in the 

United States; and other articles when 

the value of the article is $800 or less.50

These exemptions are subject to the 

condition that the aggregate fair retail 

value in the country of shipment of 

articles imported by one person on one 

day and exempted from duty cannot 

exceed the authorized amounts. Also, 

these exemptions are not to be granted 

if merchandise covered by a single order 

or contract is forwarded in separate lots 

to obtain the benefit of duty- and taxfree entry. 

This proposed rulemaking primarily 

concerns shipments covered by the 

administrative exemption in 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(C), i.e., shipments of 

merchandise (other than bona-fide gifts 

and certain personal and household 

goods accompanying travelers arriving 

from abroad) imported by one person on 

one day having an aggregate fair retail 

value in the country of shipment of not 

more than $800. For simplicity, all 

references to ‘‘the administrative 

exemption’’ in this document will be to 

the administrative exemption found in 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C). References 

made to the other administrative 

exemptions in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2) will 

be specified as appropriate. In addition, 

this document refers to shipments not 

exceeding $800 as ‘‘low-value 

shipments.’’ 51 Low-value shipments 

that qualify for the administrative 

exemption in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) are 

referred to as ‘‘qualifying low-value 

shipments.’’ The administrative 

exemption is implemented in part 10 of 

title 19 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (19 CFR part 10) at 19 CFR 

10.151 and 10.153, and is also 

referenced in 19 CFR parts 128, 143, and 

145. 

Goods exceeding the de minimis limit 

($800) or not satisfying all other 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

are not eligible for the administrative 

exemption and may not use the entry 

procedures for qualifying low-value 

shipments. Such goods must be entered 

using the appropriate formal or informal 

entry procedure and may be subject to 

duties and tax as provided by law. Put 

simply, qualifying low-value shipments 

must be entered in limited quantities 

per recipient (so as not to exceed the 

value limit). Everyday examples of 

typical low-value shipments might 

include cosmetics, a sweater, or a phone 

charger purchased from an online 

retailer. 

Over the past eight years, the number 

of low-value shipments entering the 

United States has increased 

dramatically, from approximately 139 

million shipments in 2015 to over 1 

billion in 2023.52 This increase in 

shipment volume poses significant 

challenges for CBP, which must mitigate 

the risk of illicit items entering the 

country. Illicit items may include items 

that pose potential health, safety, and 

economic security threats; however, the 

illegal importation of illicit fentanyl via 

the smaller parcels that characterize 

low-value shipments is of particular 

concern.53

To facilitate the flow of legitimate 

trade while also mitigating risks 

associated with the substantial increase 

in the number of low-value shipments, 

in September 2019, CBP launched a test 

program, called the ‘‘Entry Type 86 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3060 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

54Seizure statistics provided by CBP subject 

matter experts on September 27, 2024. These data 

are from CBP’s seizure database (SEACATS) and are 

specifically cargo-related seizures and do not 

include seizures in the passenger environment or 

seizures performed by U.S. Border Patrol or Air and 

Marine Operations. 

55For a complete list of the proposed changes to 

the data elements required for the enhanced entry 

process, please see chapter 1 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking. 

Test.’’ The test program is voluntary and 

open to all trade participants, and it 

modernizes the submission of entry data 

for these low-value shipments by 

providing for an electronic entry and 

clearance process. This process results 

in faster clearance times for these 

shipments, a benefit to the trade and 

consumers, and reduces the amount of 

manual time that must be spent by CBP 

officers clearing goods that are 

considered low risk. As an additional 

benefit, the test program allows certain 

low-value shipments subject to the 

requirements of partner government 

agencies (PGAs) like the U.S. Food and 

Drug Administration (FDA) or the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) to be 

entered without filing an informal type 

11 or formal entry. For any dutiable 

merchandise, filing an informal type 11 

or formal entry requires the payment of 

duties even for qualifying low-value 

shipments that would otherwise be 

exempt under the administrative 

exemption. 

In exchange for improved clearance 

times and the ability to use the 

administrative exemption for low-value 

goods subject to PGA requirements, as 

part of the electronic filing process, 

trade participants provide additional 

information about each shipment. This 

additional information allows CBP to 

better identify and focus on relatively 

higher-risk shipments, such as those 

suspected of containing illicit fentanyl. 

Although these shipments are low 

value, they pose the same potential 

health, safety, and economic security 

risks as larger and more traditional 

containerized shipments. In FY 2023, 

the overwhelming majority of CBP 

actions on inadmissible cargo were 

taken against low-value goods. Of 

107,300 seizures across all cargo types, 

93,065 (87 percent) were seizures of 

low-value cargo.54 CBP faces significant 

challenges in targeting these low-value 

shipments, while still maintaining the 

clearance speeds the private sector has 

come to expect. 

While CBP receives some advance 

electronic data for low-value shipments 

from carriers, the transmitted data often 

does not adequately identify the entity 

causing the shipment to cross the 

border, the final recipient, or the 

contents of the package. For example, in 

today’s environment, CBP may not 

receive any advance information on the 

entity causing the shipment to travel to 

the United States (e.g., the seller or 

manufacturer). Taken together, the 

overwhelming volume of low-value 

packages as well as the vague and 

inaccurate electronic data, pose a 

significant challenge to CBP’s ability to 

identify and interdict high risk 

packages. The provision of additional 

data also facilitates CBP’s ability to 

properly vet shipments requiring review 

by PGAs and request presentation of the 

merchandise for inspection, when 

necessary. 

The test program has been embraced 

by a large portion of the trade 

community, which appreciates the 

administrative efficiency of the 

electronic process, substantially faster 

clearance of low-risk shipments, and in 

certain cases, lawful avoidance of duties 

and taxes, including for shipments 

subject to PGA requirements. Many 

members of the trade community have 

begun utilizing entry type 86 for some 

or all of their low-value shipments. 

Previously, these filers would have 

utilized release from manifest 

(including shipments entered through 

the express environment) or formal or 

informal entry (i.e., type 01 or 11). 

From CBP’s perspective, the test has 

been successful, but certain 

modifications can close identified 

security gaps. The modernization of the 

filing process for these shipments was 

essential to facilitating the flow of trade. 

Absent an automated CBP process, 

under current funding and staffing 

constraints, CBP would have faced 

significant challenges processing the 

current quantity of low-value shipments 

under the release from manifest process. 

However, to achieve significant security 

improvements and better facilitate the 

flow of legitimate trade, CBP believes 

the transmission of additional 

information about the contents of each 

shipment is necessary. 

In this rulemaking, CBP proposes 

codifying the successful elements of the 

Entry Type 86 Test, including the 

provision of an electronic entry and 

automated clearance process for 

qualifying low-value shipments and 

duty- and tax-free entry for qualifying 

low-value PGA goods, while also adding 

new data requirements to the entry 

filing. As an example, filers may choose 

to provide an internet address, known 

as the uniform resource locator (URL), 

to the product’s online listing or another 

image of the product as part of the entry 

filing.55 The data collected through this 

‘‘enhanced entry process’’ will further 

improve CBP’s ability to quickly release 

legitimate qualifying low-value 

shipments, allowing its officers to focus 

on targeting higher-risk shipments. 

Ultimately, CBP anticipates this 

increased focus on higher-risk 

shipments will improve its ability to 

intercept illicit goods, such as fentanyl. 

Importantly, under the proposed rule, 

use by the trade of the enhanced entry 

process continues to be voluntary; CBP 

will also continue to offer a process 

similar to the existing release from 

manifest process with more limited data 

requirements, referred to as the ‘‘basic 

entry process.’’ 

The report accompanying this NPRM 

includes two separate analyses. First, 

we estimate the incremental benefits 

and costs of the Entry Type 86 Test, 

beginning in 2020 and assuming that the 

test would continue uninterrupted in 

the future (through 2034) in the absence 

of this rulemaking effort. CBP believes 

this assumption is reasonable because 

both CBP and industry participants have 

made significant logistical and 

administrative changes in order to 

achieve the benefits of electronic entry 

and clearance. 

Second, we estimate the future 

incremental benefits and costs of the 

proposed rule, which creates the new, 

voluntary enhanced entry process and 

retains, with minor revisions, the 

current release from manifest process. 

We estimate these incremental benefits 

and costs relative to a baseline 

(counterfactual) scenario where entry 

type 86 remains an option for entering 

qualifying low-value shipments into the 

United States. In addition, we present 

these impacts relative to a baseline 

without the Entry Type 86 Test to help 

readers understand the combined effect 

of the program that is being codified in 

the rulemaking as well as the 

modifications to the program under 

consideration in the proposed rule. 

Impacts are estimated from 2025 

through 2034 (10 years). 

For the Entry Type 86 Test, our 

analysis finds that the benefits of 

automation and faster clearance are 

likely to outweigh the burden of 

providing additional data. Potential 

security benefits are discussed 

qualitatively. We also find that some 

parties utilizing entry type 86 benefit 

from reduced tariff payments relative to 

other entry options. Available peerreviewed literature suggests that the 

reduced tariff payments associated with 

a portion of the affected shipments is 

likely to affect U.S. consumers in the 

form of lower prices, making the lost 

tariff revenue a transfer of resources 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3061 

56Please see chapter 5 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for additional information. 

57 81 FR 58831 (Aug. 26, 2016). 

58While other entry types are available, entry 

type 01 and 11 volumes far surpass those of all 

other entry types to the point where they do not 

measurably impact the effects of the rule. Therefore, 

for the purposes of this analysis, CBP focuses on 

type 01 and 11 volumes. 

59Not all PGA shipments are subject to fees, 

which are separate and distinct from duties and 

taxes. Shipments subject to PGA fees may not use 

the enhanced entry process for low-value shipments 

and instead must file a formal or informal type 11 

entry, or other appropriate type of entry. Qualifying 

low-value PGA shipments that are not subject to 

any PGA fees will be eligible to use the enhanced 

entry process. 

60Please see chapter 1 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for a detailed discussion of the data 

elements required for the enhanced and basic entry 

processes. 

61Regulatory alternatives are discussed in greater 

detail in chapter 10 of the full regulatory analysis. 

62Please see chapter 5 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for a more detailed discussion. 

63Please see chapter 4 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for more detail. 

64Please see chapters 3 and 5 of the full 

regulatory impact analysis included in the docket 

of this rulemaking for additional information. 

from the U.S. Government to 

consumers.56

For the proposed rule, we quantify 

additional administrative costs, while 

additional security benefits are 

discussed qualitatively. Processing 

clearance times are unchanged relative 

to the Entry Type 86 Test. Similarly, no 

additional transfers, including reduced 

tariff payments, result from the 

proposed rule. Our findings are 

discussed in greater detail in the 

remainder of this summary of the 

aforementioned regulatory impact 

analysis in the docket of this 

rulemaking. 

2. Need for the Proposed Rule 

In 2016, section 901(d) of TFTEA 

amended 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) by 

increasing the daily value limit for the 

administrative exemption from $200 to 

$800. CBP published an interim final 

rule amending the regulations to 

implement the new statutory amount 

and to specify certain goods excluded 

from the administrative exemption.57

Otherwise, CBP has not made any 

significant changes to the regulatory 

requirements by which such shipments 

are entered since 1995. In the nearly 

three decades since, however, there 

have been significant changes in the 

trade environment and supply chains, 

substantial increases in the volume of 

shipments, and advancements to CBP’s 

capabilities that necessitate the 

modernization of these regulations to 

better serve both CBP and the trade 

community. 

3. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

In the proposed rule, CBP seeks to 

codify an electronic entry process for 

qualifying low-value shipments seeking 

entry into the United States. Under this 

process, advance data elements are 

transmitted to CBP via a CBP-authorized 

electronic data interchange (EDI) 

system, such as the Automated 

Commercial Environment (ACE). This 

proposed new process is termed the 

‘‘enhanced entry process.’’ In order to 

file an enhanced entry, CBP will require 

the submission of certain advance 

electronic data, including data about the 

contents, value, origin, and final 

destination of eligible shipments. This 

information will enable CBP to more 

efficiently target high-risk shipments 

while maintaining expedited clearance 

for low-risk shipments submitting 

advance data. This rulemaking also 

proposes to create an HTSUS waiver 

that would allow certain approved 

entities to use the enhanced entry 

process without providing an HTSUS 

number in certain cases. 

Filing entry under the enhanced entry 

process is optional. Shipments subject 

to PGA requirements may use the 

enhanced entry process or entry types 

01 and 11, as well as other appropriate 

entry types.58 The enhanced entry 

process will not be available for 

shipments subject to PGA fees; such 

shipments must be entered as an 

informal entry type 11 or formal entry, 

or other appropriate entry type, subject 

to payment of all applicable duties, 

taxes, and fees.59

Finally, the current default clearance 

process for qualifying low-value 

shipments, known as the ‘‘release from 

manifest’’ process, will continue to be 

offered with some modifications 

described below, and will be referred to 

as the ‘‘basic entry process.’’ The basic 

entry process may not be utilized for 

goods subject to PGA data 

requirements.60

CBP considered two additional 

regulatory alternatives; neither 

alternative is embodied in this NPRM. 

First, CBP considered a less stringent 

alternative formalizing the Entry Type 

86 Test through a rulemaking that 

would make entry type 86 permanent. 

This scenario represents a continuation 

of existing entry options for low-value 

shipments under the test with no 

changes to entry processes or required 

data elements. Second, CBP considered 

a more stringent regulatory alternative 

in which the enhanced entry process 

did not include an option for filers to 

obtain a HTSUS waiver privilege 

(‘‘waiver’’) from CBP. This waiver is 

intended for filers with demonstrated 

capabilities and histories of segmenting 

out goods subject to PGA requirements. 

The waiver lifts the data requirement for 

the 10-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (HTSUS) 

classification as part of the enhanced 

entry for qualifying low-value goods 

that are not subject to PGA 

requirements. Under this regulatory 

alternative, such a waiver would not be 

made available to any filers.61

4. Entry Type 86 Test Benefits, Costs, 

and Transfers 

This analysis first estimates the past 

and future effects of the existing Entry 

Type 86 Test, assuming no new rule is 

promulgated. We estimate effects on 

CBP, customs brokers, software 

providers, express consignment 

operators and carriers (ECOs), and 

importers. We estimate benefits and 

transfers using information provided by 

affected entities, including impacts to 

clearance times, tariff payments, and 

express fees.62 To estimate costs, we 

rely on information provided during 

discussions with CBP and interviews 

with the trade industry.63 Many of these 

outcomes are informed by our 

understanding of historical shipment 

volumes and expectations as to future 

growth in low-value shipments. Based 

on our analysis, effects of the Entry 

Type 86 Test include the following: 

• Benefits: The primary benefit is 

faster release of low-value shipments 

into commerce resulting from the 

automated clearance process. These 

benefits are quantified based on peerreviewed literature estimating 

willingness to pay for saving a day of 

transit time per shipment.64 In addition, 

the Entry Type 86 Test has improved 

CBP’s ability to target inadmissible 

goods, resulting in security-related 

benefits. 

• Costs: Administrative 

implementation costs focus on activities 

such as software reprogramming, staff 

training, and additional data collection. 

These implementation costs are offset 

by administrative cost savings 

associated with reduced CBP officer 

time reviewing documentation and 

reduced administrative time preparing 

filings for shipments that switch from 

informal type 11 or formal entry to entry 

type 86. Relevant unit costs and cost 

savings are estimated based on 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3062 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

65Please see chapters 3 and 4 of the full 

regulatory impact analysis included in the docket 

of this rulemaking for additional information. 

66 19 U.S.C. 58c(b)(9)(A)(ii); 19 CFR 24.23(b). The 

express fee refers to the express consignment 

carrier/centralized hub facility fee, per individual 

waybill/bill of lading. 

67Please see chapters 3 and 5 of the full 

regulatory impact analysis included in the docket 

of this rulemaking for additional information. 

interviews with the trade and CBP 

staff.65

• Transfers: Two types of transfers 

are likely, including reduced revenues 

to the U.S. Government due to importers 

opting for entry type 86 instead of entry 

types subject to express fees 66 (i.e., 

manifest clearance in express hubs) and 

tariffs (i.e., informal type 11 or formal 

entries). These revenues are estimated 

based on express fees published in the 

Federal Register and tariff rates 

available from the U.S. International 

Trade Commission.67

Where possible, we quantify and 

monetize these impacts over a 15-year 

period from 2020 to 2034. These 

outcomes are the incremental effects of 

the Entry Type 86 Test relative to a 

baseline scenario where entry type 86 is 

not available. Table 1 summarizes these 

quantified benefits, costs, and cost 

savings (excluding transfers) through 

time and presents net benefits for each 

year. Based on our analysis, the total net 

benefits of the Entry Type 86 Test are 

estimated to be approximately $19 

billion (undiscounted, 2023 dollars) 

over the 15-year period. In present value 

terms, the net benefits are 

approximately $17 billion (assuming a 2 

percent discount rate). 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOTAL ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST BENEFITS, COSTS, AND COST SAVINGS

[In 2023 dollars] c d

Fiscal year Benefits Costs Cost savings Net benefits 

(A) (B) (C) (= A¥B + C) 

Past Impacts 

2020 ................................................................................................. $43,030,483 $4,316,816 $127,208,543 $165,922,210 

2021 ................................................................................................. 139,966,936 3,758,383 361,271,949 497,480,501 

2022 ................................................................................................. 129,442,889 3,678,928 351,131,510 476,895,471 

2023 ................................................................................................. 282,639,872 6,022,697 650,253,194 926,870,369 

2024 ................................................................................................. 311,757,221 6,547,586 717,241,795 1,022,451,430 

Total undiscounted ................................................................... 906,837,401 24,324,410 2,207,106,990 3,089,619,981 

Total present value (2 percent) a .............................................. 948,430,560 25,682,967 2,312,234,507 3,234,982,100 

Annualized (2 percent) b ........................................................... 178,675,386 4,838,429 435,603,206 609,440,162 

Future Impacts 

2025 ................................................................................................. 340,874,571 7,072,475 784,230,396 1,118,032,491 

2026 ................................................................................................. 369,991,920 7,597,365 851,218,997 1,213,613,552 

2027 ................................................................................................. 399,109,270 8,122,254 918,207,598 1,309,194,614 

2028 ................................................................................................. 428,226,620 8,647,144 985,196,199 1,404,775,675 

2029 ................................................................................................. 457,343,969 9,172,033 1,052,184,800 1,500,356,736 

2030 ................................................................................................. 486,461,319 9,696,922 1,119,173,401 1,595,937,797 

2031 ................................................................................................. 515,578,669 10,221,812 1,186,162,002 1,691,518,859 

2032 ................................................................................................. 544,696,018 10,746,701 1,253,150,603 1,787,099,920 

2033 ................................................................................................. 573,813,368 11,271,591 1,320,139,204 1,882,680,981 

2034 ................................................................................................. 602,930,718 11,796,480 1,387,127,805 1,978,262,042 

Total undiscounted ................................................................... 4,719,026,442 94,344,777 10,856,791,003 15,481,472,668 

Total present value (2 percent) a .............................................. 4,280,128,169 85,655,755 9,847,043,148 14,041,515,561 

Annualized (2 percent) c ........................................................... 423,111,089 8,467,480 973,427,194 1,388,070,803 

Past and Future Impacts (2020–2034) 

Total undiscounted .......................................................................... 5,625,863,843 118,669,187 13,063,897,993 18,571,092,649 

Total present value (2 percent) a ..................................................... 5,228,558,729 111,338,723 12,159,277,655 17,276,497,661 

Annualized (2 percent) d .................................................................. 361,328,921 7,694,262 840,288,674 1,193,923,333 

Notes: 

We present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. For reporting purposes, and to reflect the uncertainty inherent 

in these estimates, we recommend rounding these estimates to two significant figures. 

Table does not include transfers (see Table 2 for transfers). 

aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

bBenefits, costs, and net benefits for past years are annualized over a 5-year period from 2020 to 2024. 

cBenefits, costs, and net benefits for future years are annualized over a 10-year period from 2025 to 2034. 

dBenefits, costs, and net benefits for all years are annualized over a 15-year period from 2020 to 2034. 

Table 2 illustrates the effects of the 

Entry Type 86 Test from 2025 through 

2034 by presenting a distribution of the 

benefits, costs, cost savings, transfers, 

and net benefits experienced by each 

entity type. Administrative 

implementation activities produce an 

annualized net benefit of approximately 

$960 million (2 percent discount rate, 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3063 

68Please see chapter 9 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for additional information. 

69Please see chapter 8 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for additional information. 

2023 dollars) and improvements in 

clearance time produce an annualized 

net benefit of approximately $420 

million (2 percent discount rate, 2023 

dollars). Changes in express fees and 

tariffs paid by consignees are considered 

to be transfers, producing $0 in net 

benefits. Importantly, impacts on social 

welfare and fiscal impacts are not 

additive; the former represents estimates 

of willingness to pay and opportunity 

costs, while the latter reflects changes in 

revenue. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST ANNUALIZED IMPACTS BY ENTITY TYPE FROM 2025–2034 

[2 Percent discount rate, in 2023 dollars] 

Effect U.S. Government Trade/consumers Net effect 

Impacts on Social Welfare 

Administrative Implementation ............................................................................. $972,773,259 ($7,813,546) $964,959,714 

Transmitting Data ......................................................................................... 0 (7,267,112) (7,267,112) 

Programming ................................................................................................ (227,558) (612,630) (840,188) 

Training ......................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Collecting New Data Elements ..................................................................... 0 (360,180) (360,180) 

Time Savings ................................................................................................ 973,000,818 426,376 973,427,194 

Improved Clearance Time ................................................................................... 0 423,111,089 423,111,089 

Total Increase in Social Welfare .................................................................. 972,773,259 415,297,543 1,388,070,803 

Fiscal Impacts (Transfers) 

Tariffs ................................................................................................................... (2,095,103,797) 2,095,103,797 0 

Express Fees ....................................................................................................... (163,886,413) 163,886,413 0 

Total Fiscal Impacts ..................................................................................... (2,258,990,211) 2,258,990,211 0 

Notes: 

We present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. For reporting purposes, and to reflect the uncertainty inherent 

in these estimates, we recommend rounding these estimates to two significant figures. 

Costs are shown using parentheses. 

aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

b Impacts are annualized over 10 years from 2025 to 2034. We estimate the annualized impacts from the perspective of an individual in 2020, 

when entities started incurring costs or benefits related to the Entry Type 86 Test. This reflects the equal payment that would need to be made in 

each of the 10 years to equal the total present value of the costs and benefits. 

The full regulatory impact analysis 

included in the docket of this 

rulemaking provides detailed 

discussions of key sources of 

uncertainty related to costs, benefits, 

and transfers of the Entry Type 86 Test. 

The full regulatory impact analysis also 

includes a quantitative sensitivity 

analysis to highlight the importance of 

key assumptions and presents the 

results in appendix A. 

5. Proposed Rule Benefits, Costs, and 

Transfers 

This proposed rule updates the data 

elements currently required under the 

Entry Type 86 Test. We estimate 

impacts likely to be experienced by 

CBP, customs brokers, software 

providers, ECOs, and consignees due to 

the provision of these additional data 

elements. While the proposed rule is 

expected to produce security benefits, 

we are unable to quantify these benefits 

in this analysis due to data 

limitations.68 As with our analysis of 

the Entry Type 86 Test, we estimate 

costs of the proposed rule using 

information obtained through 

discussions with CBP and interviews 

with the trade.69 Key cost categories 

include administrative implementation 

activities, such as software 

reprogramming, staff training, and 

additional data collection. Incremental 

changes in tariff or fee revenue relative 

to Baseline 1 are not anticipated. 

For the three regulatory alternatives 

considered by CBP, we estimate the 

anticipated benefits, costs, and transfers 

under two baseline scenarios. We first 

consider the incremental effects of the 

proposed rule relative to a baseline 

scenario where CBP continues to 

implement the Entry Type 86 Test. This 

scenario reflects the most likely forecast 

of available entry types absent the 

proposed rule. CBP is not currently 

equipped to handle the now-sizable 

low-value shipment volumes manually 

without any automated clearance 

process like entry type 86. Reverting to 

an entirely manual process would be 

infeasible and contrary to CBP’s mission 

to facilitate the entry of legitimate goods 

into the United States. 

We also present results considering an 

alternative baseline scenario regarding 

the future availability of an automated 

entry process in the absence of a new 

rule. This alternative baseline scenario 

assumes that, beginning in 2025, the 

technology and processes developed for 

electronic filing and automated 

clearance under the Entry Type 86 Test 

would no longer be available for lowvalue shipments and, effectively, are 

reinstated with this rulemaking. This 

baseline scenario is a counterfactual 

used to illustrate the cumulative effects 

of this rulemaking and not an 

announcement of a change to the 

existing Entry Type 86 Test. The 

practical result of applying this 

alternative baseline scenario is an 

estimate of the cumulative impacts of 

(1) continuing to leverage the advances 

made with the implementation of the 

Entry Type 86 Test, while also (2) 

making enhancements to the process via 

the proposed rule. CBP recognizes that 

the public may have an interest in 

understanding the combined effect of 

the program that is being codified in the 

rulemaking as well as the modifications 

to the program under consideration in 

the proposed rule and this baseline 

scenario allows the reader to do that— 

the effects, when measured against this 

baseline scenario, are the total 

prospective effects of the Entry Type 86 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3064 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

Test and this rulemaking. For the 

purposes of this analysis, CBP considers 

the second baseline to be the primary 

baseline for this rulemaking. 

Where possible, we quantify and 

monetize these impacts over a 10-year 

period from 2025 to 2034. Table 3 

provides a summary of the costs, 

benefits, and transfers resulting from 

each regulatory alternative, including 

relevant chapters where these impacts 

are presented. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF THE INCREMENTAL IMPACTS OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES UNDER ALTERNATIVE BASELINE

SCENARIOS

Regulatory alternative a

Baseline scenario (2025–2034) 

Baseline 1: Entry Type 86 Test continues Baseline 2: No Entry Type 86 Test 

1. Codify the Entry Type 86 Test .................. Costs, benefits, and transfers are zero ....... Costs, benefits, and transfers of the proposed rule 

are equivalent to the future impacts estimated for 

Entry Type 86 Test.b

2. (Preferred) Enhanced entry with HTSUS 

waiver available.

Costs, benefits, and transfers are presented in Chapters 7 to 9 of the full analysis.Costs, benefits, and transfers of the proposed rule 

are equal to the sum of the Entry Type 86 Test 

future impacts and the proposed rule impacts.b

3. Enhanced entry with no HTSUS waiver 

available.

Costs, benefits, and transfers are presented in Chapters 7 to 9 of the full analysis, including unquantified costs associated with no waiver provision.Costs, benefits, and transfers of the proposed rule 

are equal to the sum of the Entry Type 86 Test 

future impacts, the proposed rule impacts, and 

unquantified costs associated with no waiver provision.b

Notes: 

a Detailed discussion of regulatory alternatives is available in Chapter 10 of the full analysis. 

b Detailed discussion of future Entry Type 86 Test impacts and this proposed rule’s impacts is available in Chapters 3 to 6 and Chapters 7 to 9 

of the full analysis respectively. 

a. Preferred Regulatory Alternative: 

Baseline 1 (Entry Type 86 Test 

Continues) 

Table 4 presents total present value 

costs assuming a baseline where the 

Entry Type 86 Test were to continue in 

the absence of this new regulation. 

Because benefits are unquantified, we 

are unable to calculate the likely net 

benefits of the proposed rule. Total 

present value costs of the proposed rule 

over the 10-year period of analysis are 

estimated to be approximately $110 

million (2023 dollars), assuming a 

discount rate of 2 percent. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RULE BENEFITS AND COSTS—BASELINE 1: ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST CONTINUES

[In 2023 dollars] 

Fiscal year Benefits Costs c Net benefits d

2025 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. $91,854,198 ..............................

2026 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,139,656 ..............................

2027 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,184,004 ..............................

2028 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,228,352 ..............................

2029 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,272,700 ..............................

2030 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,317,048 ..............................

2031 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,361,396 ..............................

2032 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,405,744 ..............................

2033 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,450,092 ..............................

2034 ......................................................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 2,494,440 ..............................

Total undiscounted ........................................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 112,707,628 ..............................

Total present value (2 percent) a ...................................... Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 110,718,728 ..............................

Annualized present value (2 percent) b ............................ Positive Unquantified .............................................................. 12,084,247 ..............................

Notes: 

aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

b Costs are annualized over a 10-year period from 2025 to 2034. 

cWe present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. For reporting purposes, and to reflect the uncertainty inherent in these estimates, 

we recommend rounding these estimates to two significant figures. d Net benefits are uncertain due to our inability to quantify the likely incremental security benefits of the proposed rule. 

Table 5 presents the distribution of 

costs and benefits by entity type 

assuming a baseline where the Entry 

Type 86 Test exists. Affected entities 

include the U.S. Government 

(representing CBP, the Department of 

the Treasury, and PGAs) and trade/ 

consumers (including customs brokers, 

software providers, ECOs, importers, 

and other industry participants, 

including consumers). Administrative 

implementation activities are likely to 

cost approximately $12 million (2023 

dollars) on an annualized basis, 

assuming a discount rate of 2 percent. 

Security-related effects, including 

providing the data needed to help 

interdict fentanyl smuggling, result in 

positive benefits that we are unable to 

quantify due to data limitations. 

Improvements in clearance time, and 

changes in express fees and tariffs paid 

by trade participants, are unlikely to 

result from the proposed rule when 

compared to the baseline that includes 

the Entry Type 86 Test. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3065 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RULE ANNUALIZED IMPACTS BY ENTITY TYPE—BASELINE 1: ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST

CONTINUES

[2 Percent discount rate, in 2023 dollars] 

Effect U.S. Government Trade/consumers Subtotal 

Impacts on Social Welfare 

Administrative Implementation ................................................................. ($680,248) ($11,403,999) ($12,084,247) 

Transmitting Data ............................................................................. 0 0 0 

Programming .................................................................................... (680,248) (10,657,045) (11,337,293) 

Training ............................................................................................. 0 (35,450) (35,450) 

Collecting New Data Elements ......................................................... 0 (711,504) (711,504) 

Time Savings .................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Improved Clearance Time ....................................................................... 0 0 0 

Security .................................................................................................... Positive Unquantified Positive Unquantified Positive Unquantified 

Total Increase in Social Welfare ...................................................... (680,248) (11,403,999) (12,084,247). 

Fiscal Impacts (Transfers) 

Tariffs ....................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Express Fees ........................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Total Fiscal Impacts ......................................................................... 0 0 0 

Notes: 

We present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. 

Costs are shown using parentheses. 

aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

b Costs are annualized over 10 years from 2025 to 2034. 

The full regulatory impact analysis 

included in the docket of this 

rulemaking provides detailed 

discussions of key sources of 

uncertainty related to costs, benefits, 

and transfers of this proposed rule. The 

full regulatory impact analysis also 

includes a quantitative sensitivity 

analysis to highlight the importance of 

key assumptions and presents the 

results in appendix A. 

b. Preferred Regulatory Alternative: 

Baseline 2 (No Entry Type 86 Test) 

Table 6 presents total present value 

costs assuming a baseline where the 

Entry Type 86 Test does not exist. 

Because security benefits of the Entry 

Type 86 Test and the proposed rule are 

unquantified, the likely cumulative net 

benefits of these interventions are 

underestimated. Assuming a baseline 

without the Entry Type 86 Test, total 

present value net benefits over the 10- 

year period of analysis are estimated to 

be at least $14 billion (2023 dollars), 

assuming a discount rate of 2 percent. 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE BENEFITS AND COSTS—BASELINE 2: NO ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST

[In 2023 dollars] 

Fiscal year Benefits c Costs Cost savings Net benefits d

(A) (B) (C) (= A ¥ B + C) 

2025 ................................................................................................. $340,874,571 $98,926,674 $784,230,396 $1,026,178,293 

2026 ................................................................................................. 369,991,920 9,737,021 851,218,997 1,211,473,897 

2027 ................................................................................................. 399,109,270 10,306,258 918,207,598 1,307,010,610 

2028 ................................................................................................. 428,226,620 10,875,495 985,196,199 1,402,547,323 

2029 ................................................................................................. 457,343,969 11,444,733 1,052,184,800 1,498,084,036 

2030 ................................................................................................. 486,461,319 12,013,970 1,119,173,401 1,593,620,750 

2031 ................................................................................................. 515,578,669 12,583,208 1,186,162,002 1,689,157,463 

2032 ................................................................................................. 544,696,018 13,152,445 1,253,150,603 1,784,694,176 

2033 ................................................................................................. 573,813,368 13,721,682 1,320,139,204 1,880,230,890 

2034 ................................................................................................. 602,930,718 14,290,920 1,387,127,805 1,975,767,603 

Total undiscounted ................................................................... 4,719,026,442 207,052,405 10,856,791,003 15,368,765,040 

Total present value (2 percent) a .............................................. 4,280,128,169 196,374,484 9,847,043,148 13,930,796,832 

Annualized (2 percent) b ........................................................... 423,111,089 20,551,727 973,427,194 1,375,986,556 

Notes: 

We present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. For reporting purposes, and to reflect the uncertainty inherent 

in these estimates, we recommend rounding these estimates to two significant figures. aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

bBenefits, costs, and net benefits are annualized over a 10-year period from 2025 to 2034. 

cBenefits are underestimated due to our inability to quantify the anticipated security-related benefits of the proposed rule. These values reflect 

only the quantified benefits of the Entry Type 86 Test. The total benefits associated with a baseline without the Entry Type 86 Test would be the 

values presented in this table as well as additional positive unquantified benefits. d Net benefits are underestimated due to our inability to quantify the likely incremental security benefits of the proposed rule.


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3066 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

Table 7 presents the distribution of 

costs and benefits by entity type 

assuming a baseline where the Entry 

Type 86 Test does not exist. 

Administrative implementation 

activities are likely to produce a positive 

annualized net benefit of approximately 

$950 million (2 percent discount rate, 

2023 dollars) and improvements in 

clearance time produce a positive 

annualized net benefit of approximately 

$420 million (2 percent discount rate, 

2023 dollars). Security-related effects, 

including providing the data needed to 

help interdict illicit fentanyl, result in 

positive benefits that we are unable to 

quantify due to data limitations. 

Changes in express fees and tariffs paid 

by consignees are considered to be 

revenue transfers, producing $0 in net 

benefits. Importantly, impacts on social 

welfare and fiscal impacts are not 

additive; the former represents estimates 

of willingness to pay and opportunity 

costs, while the latter reflects changes in 

revenue. 

TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RULE ANNUALIZED IMPACTS BY ENTITY TYPE—BASELINE 2: NO ENTRY TYPE 86 TEST

[2 Percent discount rate, in 2023 dollars] 

Effect U.S. Government Trade/consumers Subtotal 

Impacts on Social Welfare 

Administrative Implementation ................................................................. $972,093,012 ($19,217,545) $952,875,467 

Transmitting Data ............................................................................. 0 (7,267,112) (7,267,112) 

Programming .................................................................................... (907,806) (11,269,675) (12,177,481) 

Training ............................................................................................. 0 (35,450) (35,450) 

Collecting New Data Elements ......................................................... 0 (1,071,684) (1,071,684) 

Time Savings .................................................................................... 973,000,818 426,376 973,427,194

Improved Clearance Time ....................................................................... 0 423,111,089 423,111,089 

Security .................................................................................................... Positive Unquantified Positive Unquantified Positive Unquantified 

Total Increase in Social Welfare ...................................................... 972,093,012 403,893,545 1,375,986,556 

Fiscal Impacts (Transfers) 

Tariffs ....................................................................................................... (2,095,103,797) 2,095,103,797 0 

Express Fees ........................................................................................... (163,886,413) 163,886,413 0 

Total Fiscal Impacts ......................................................................... (2,258,990,211) 2,258,990,211 0 

Notes: 

We present unrounded values in the table to facilitate replication of our analysis. 

Costs are shown using parentheses. 

aPresent value calculations use 2025 as the base year. 

b Costs are annualized over 10 years from 2025 to 2034. 

The full regulatory impact analysis 

included in the docket of this 

rulemaking provides detailed 

discussions of key sources of 

uncertainty related to costs, benefits, 

and transfers of this proposed rule. The 

full regulatory impact analysis also 

includes a quantitative sensitivity 

analysis to highlight the importance of 

key assumptions and presents the 

results in appendix A. 

c. Summary of Regulatory Alternatives 

Table 8 summarizes estimates of net 

benefits for each regulatory alternative 

relative to the two different baseline 

scenarios described earlier. Incremental 

effects estimated relative to Baseline 1 

reflect the net benefits of the 

enhancements to the existing Entry 

Type 86 Test that will be codified if the 

proposed rule is finalized. Incremental 

effects estimated relative to Baseline 2 

reflect the cumulative net benefits of 

continuing to leverage the systems and 

processes put in place to implement the 

Entry Type 86 Test in combination with 

the enhancements included in the 

proposed rule. To reflect the uncertainty 

inherent in the analysis presented in 

this report, we round our results to two 

significant figures. 

TABLE 8—ANNUALIZED NET BENEFITS OF REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

[2 Percent discount rate, in 2023 dollars] abc

Regulatory alternative 

Baseline scenario 

Baseline 1: d

Entry Type 86 Test continues 

Baseline 2: e

No Entry Type 86 

1. Codify Entry Type 86 Test ............... $0 ............................................................................ $1.4 billion + unquantified security benefits. 

2. (Preferred) Enhanced entry with 

HTSUS waiver available.

¥$12 million + unquantified security benefits associated with enhanced data elements (e.g., 

URL).

$1.4 billion + unquantified security benefits associated with HTSUS and enhanced data elements 

(e.g., URL). 

3. Enhanced entry with no HTSUS 

waiver available.

¥$12 million + unquantified security benefits associated with enhanced data elements (e.g., 

URL) ¥unquantified costs of obtaining HTSUS 

codes if no waiver is available.

$1.4 billion + unquantified security benefits associated with HTSUS and enhanced data elements 

(e.g., URL)¥unquantified costs of obtaining 

HTSUS codes if no waiver is available. 

Notes: 

aTo reflect the uncertainty inherent in these estimates, we round estimates to two significant figures. 

b Net benefits are annualized over a 10-year period from 2025–2034. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3067 

c Implementation of the Entry Type 86 Test also results in substantive transfers between the U.S. Government and consumers in the form of 

reduced tariffs and fees. These transfers are summarized in Table 2. Because the transfers represent off-setting costs to the U.S. Government 

and benefits to consumers, their net benefit is $0. The enhancements considered in the proposed rule are unlikely to result in additional transfers. d Incremental effects estimated relative to Baseline 1 reflect the net benefits of the enhancements to the existing Entry Type 86 Test that will 

be codified if the proposed rule is finalized. d Incremental effects estimated relative to Baseline 1 reflect the net benefits of the enhancements to the existing Entry Type 86 Test that will 

be codified if the proposed rule is finalized. e Incremental effects estimated relative to Baseline 2 reflect the cumulative net benefits of continuing to leverage the systems and processes 

put in place to implement the Entry Type 86 Test in combination with the enhancements included in the proposed rule. 

B. Additional Requirements for 

Regulatory Analysis 

Table 9 provides a cost accounting 

statement for the proposed rule where 

the baseline includes the Entry Type 86 

Test. Table 10 provides the analogous 

information assuming the Entry Type 86 

Test did not exist. 

TABLE 9—A–4—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED RULE—BASELINE 1 

[Entry Type 86 Test continues] 

Category Annualized estimate 

(in 2023 dollars) 1

Benefits: 

Monetized benefits ...................................... None. 

Quantified, non-monetized benefits ............. None. 

Qualitative (unquantified) benefits ............... Improved security resulting from more efficient targeting of inbound low-value shipments. Improved security includes the interdiction of fentanyl smuggling, among other things. Enforcement of customs regulations plays a critical role in protecting the American public, environment, and economy. 

Costs: 

Monetized costs ........................................... $12 million. 

Quantified, non-monetized costs ................. None. 

Qualitative (unquantified) costs ................... None. 

Transfers: 

Monetized budgetary transfers .................... None. 

Other monetized transfers ........................... None. 

Distributional Effects: 

Effects on State, local, and/or tribal governments.

Effects on small businesses ........................

Which entities are affected by the proposed rule depends on whether the costs associated 

with transmitting shipments through the enhanced entry process are passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. If customs brokers and express consignment operators 

(ECOs) bear the costs, then at least 314 small businesses may be affected; however, only 

some medium and large volume brokers are projected to incur costs that exceed 1 percent 

of their annual revenues. If consignees bear the costs through increased prices, then any 

small business, organization, or government jurisdiction importing low-value shipments has 

the potential to be affected. The increase in the cost per shipment is estimated to be $0.01, 

or 0.03% of the average value of low-value shipments. 

Effects on wages ......................................... Not anticipated. 

Effects on growth ......................................... Not anticipated. 

Source: Calculations using data sources described throughout the main text. 

1Present value calculations use 2025 as the base year. Costs are annualized over 10 years from 2025 to 2034 and reflect a 2 percent discount rate. 

TABLE 10—A–4—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED RULE—BASELINE 2 

[No Entry Type 86 Test] 

Category Annualized estimate 

(in 2023 dollars) 

Benefits: 

Monetized benefits ...................................... $420 million. 

Quantified, non-monetized benefits ............. None. 

Qualitative (unquantified) benefits ............... Improved security resulting from more efficient targeting of inbound low-value shipments. Improved security includes the interdiction of fentanyl smuggling, among other things. Enforcement of customs regulations plays a critical role in protecting the American public, environment, and economy. 

Costs: 

Monetized costs ........................................... $21 million. 

Quantified, non-monetized costs ................. None. 

Qualitative (unquantified) costs ................... Costs to brokers of verifying and assigning HTSUS codes the first time a new product is 

shipped. Because this cost category only applies to new products, and given the potential 

economies of scale, the omission of this cost estimate may result in only a minor overstatement of net benefits. 

Cost Savings: 

Monetized costs savings ............................. $970 million. 

Quantified, non-monetized cost savings ..... None. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3068 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

70 (71 percent * 364 low-volume brokers) + 16 

medium- and high-volume brokers + (86 percent * 

46 software providers) = 314 small businesses 

among the affected industries included in Scenario 

1. 

71Please see chapter 11 of the full regulatory 

impact analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking for additional information. 

72 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2). 

TABLE 10—A–4—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED RULE—BASELINE 2—Continued 

[No Entry Type 86 Test] 

Category Annualized estimate 

(in 2023 dollars) 

Qualitative (unquantified) cost savings ....... None. 

Transfers: 

Monetized budgetary transfers .................... $2.3 billion. 

Other monetized transfers ........................... None. 

Distributional Effects: 

Effects on State, local, and/or tribal governments.

Effects on small businesses ........................

Which entities are affected by the proposed rule depends on whether the costs associated 

with transmitting entry information through the enhanced entry process are passed on to 

consumers in the form of higher prices. If customs brokers, ECOs, and software providers 

bear the costs, then at least 314 small businesses may be affected; however, only some 

medium and large volume brokers and software providers are projected to incur costs that 

exceed 1 percent of their annual revenues. If consignees bear the costs through increased 

prices, then any small business, organization, or government jurisdiction importing qualifying 

low-value goods has the potential to be affected. However, costs to consignees are offset by 

the value of time savings and reduced tariffs and fees. The net effect is a decrease in the 

cost per shipment of $2.86, or a savings equal to approximately 8.9% if the value of a shipment. 

Effects on wages ......................................... Not anticipated. 

Effects on growth ......................................... Not anticipated. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This section examines the impact on 

small entities as required by the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), 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). The 

following presents a summary of the 

small business analysis of the 

aforementioned regulatory impact 

analysis included in the docket of this 

rulemaking (docket number [USCBP– 

2025–0002]). 

This rulemaking will have direct 

effects on consignees, brokers, ECOs, 

and software vendors, but it is not clear 

the extent to which effects are passed on 

from the brokers, ECOs, and software 

vendors to the consignees, so CBP 

conducted the threshold analysis under 

two scenarios—that all the costs are 

passed on and that none of the costs are 

passed on. The analysis demonstrates 

that under both scenarios, a substantial 

number of small businesses may be 

affected by the proposed rule. Assuming 

brokers, ECOs, and software providers 

fully bear the costs they incur (Scenario 

1), we estimate that 75 percent of 

sampled entities qualify as small 

businesses. Extrapolating from a sample 

to the full population of affected brokers 

and software providers suggests that at 

least 314 affected entities are small 

businesses.70 Under the alternate 

assumption that consignees bear the 

cost of the rule (Scenario 2), any small 

entity in the United States has the 

potential to be affected by the rule as a 

consignee. Analysis of a sample of 

consignees for one day in 2023 

demonstrates that 92 percent of 

businesses in the sample qualify as 

small businesses. As such, we conclude 

that this rulemaking could affect a 

substantial number of small entities. 

We next analyze whether the effects 

of the rule are significant. CBP considers 

effects of more than one percent of gross 

annual revenues to be significant. We 

find that under Scenario 1, low-volume 

brokers that are small businesses are 

unlikely to be significantly affected by 

the rule while medium- and highvolume brokers and software providers 

that are small businesses are likely to 

experience costs more than one percent 

of annual revenues. In Scenario 2 the 

impact on small entities is uncertain 

because we lack per consignee annual 

shipment volumes needed to calculate 

entity specific costs. In the ‘‘Entry Type 

86 continues’’ baseline, comparing the 

potential increase in cost per shipment 

with the average value per shipment 

suggests the impact on consignees is 

unlikely to be significant. In the ‘‘no 

Entry Type 86 Test’’ baseline, 

consignees experience a significant net 

benefit given the clearance time savings, 

reduced tariff payments, and reduced 

express fees.71

Due to uncertainty regarding whether 

impacts to various small entities are 

significant and because CBP does not 

know the extent to which the costs will 

be passed on from brokers and software 

providers to the consignees, CBP does 

not certify that this rulemaking has a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities and 

instead we have prepared an Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. CBP 

requests comment on this conclusion. 

D. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) 

1. A Description of the Reasons Why 

Action by the Agency Is Being 

Considered 

Section 321(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)), as amended 

by the Trade Facilitation and Trade 

Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTEA), 

section 901, Public Law 114–125, 130 

Stat. 122, authorizes administrative 

exemptions from duty and tax for three 

categories of articles. These categories 

include: bona-fide gifts valued at $100 

or less ($200, if the gift is from certain 

island possessions) sent from persons in 

foreign countries to persons in the 

United States; certain personal or 

household articles valued at $200 or less 

accompanying persons arriving in the 

United States; and other articles when 

the value of the article is $800 or less.72

These exemptions are subject to the 

condition that the aggregate fair retail 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3069 

73Section 901 did not change the administrative 

exemptions for bona-fide gifts and personal or 

household articles accompanying travelers under 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(A) and (B), respectively. 

74 81 FR 58831 (Aug. 26, 2016). 

75Although the administrative exemption is not 

limited to only e-commerce shipments, the reality 

is that e-commerce shipments comprise a 

significant portion of low-value shipments. 

76Email correspondence with the Office of Trade 

on Feb. 2, 2024. 

77Section 321 Data Pilot, 84 FR 35405 (July 23, 

2019); Test Concerning Entry of Section 321 LowValued Shipments Through Automated Commercial 

Environment (ACE), 84 FR 40079 (Aug. 13, 2019). 

value in the country of shipment of 

articles imported by one person on one 

day and exempted from the payment of 

duty cannot exceed the authorized 

amounts. Also, these exemptions are not 

to be granted if merchandise covered by 

a single order or contract is forwarded 

in separate lots to secure the benefit of 

duty- and tax-free entry. 

This proposed rulemaking primarily 

concerns shipments covered by the 

administrative exemption in 19 U.S.C. 

1321(a)(2)(C), i.e., shipments of 

merchandise (other than bona-fide gifts 

and certain personal and household 

goods accompanying travelers arriving 

from abroad) imported by one person on 

one day and having an aggregate fair 

retail value in the country of shipment 

of not more than $800. 

In 2016, section 901(d) of TFTEA 

amended 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) by 

increasing the daily value limit for the 

administrative exemption from $200 to 

$800.73 CBP published an interim final 

rule amending the regulations to 

implement the new statutory amount 

and to specify certain goods excluded 

from the administrative exemption.74

Otherwise, CBP has not made any 

significant changes to the regulatory 

requirements by which such shipments 

are entered since 1995. In the nearly 

three decades since, however, there 

have been significant changes in the 

trade environment, substantial increases 

in the volume of shipments, and 

advancements to CBP’s capabilities that 

necessitate the modernization of these 

regulations to better serve both CBP and 

the trade community. 

Firstly, e-commerce is a growing 

segment of the U.S. economy and has 

been increasing significantly for the past 

several years.75 Consumer habits are 

changing as the internet empowers 

individuals to make purchases online. 

These advances in economic activity 

have led to increasing volumes of 

imports of low-value shipments, 

creating inspection challenges for CBP. 

Low-value e-commerce shipments pose 

the same health, safety, and economic 

security risks as higher-value 

shipments. Transnational criminal 

organizations and other bad actors 

perceive low-value shipments as less 

likely to be interdicted because these 

types of shipments are not subject to the 

more extensive formal entry procedures. 

This has resulted in attempts to enter 

illicit goods, such as illicit fentanyl, into 

the country through these types of 

shipments. Furthermore, novel and 

complex e-commerce business models 

have complicated and added to the 

traditional array of parties involved in 

the import transaction. New or 

infrequent importers often possess less 

familiarity with U.S. customs laws and 

regulations, which can lead to the 

attempted importation of non-compliant 

goods. This rulemaking proposes data 

requirements that are tailored to capture 

the key parties in these modern trade 

transactions (e.g., the seller, purchaser, 

final deliver-to party, and marketplace), 

thus strengthening CBP’s enforcement 

posture. 

Secondly, the volume of low-value 

shipments has increased dramatically in 

recent years. The statutory increase in 

the daily value limit for the 

administrative exemption from $200 to 

$800 in 2016, coupled with the boom in 

e-commerce, greatly increased the 

number of shipments qualifying for the 

exemption, resulted in new types of 

products becoming eligible for the 

exemption, and revived the trade 

community’s interest in the exemption. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2015, prior to the 

passage of TFTEA, approximately 139 

million shipments valued at $200 or less 

were imported into the United States. In 

FY 2017, after the TFTEA increase to 

$800 went into effect, low-value 

shipments numbered nearly 325 

million. By the end of FY 2022, that 

number more than doubled to 685 

million. Then in FY 2023, CBP cleared 

more than one billion low-value 

shipments. Currently, approximately 4 

million shipments are released each day 

free of duty and tax pursuant to the 

administrative exemption. In fact, CBP 

estimates that over 90 percent of all 

shipments entering the United States are 

low-value shipments valued at $800 or 

less.76 The information requirements for 

these shipments are less rigorous than 

those required for other entry types, e.g., 

formal entries, and no longer provide 

sufficient detail for CBP to accurately 

identify the merchandise in the 

shipment and the parties involved in its 

sale and purchase. This overwhelming 

volume of low-value shipments and lack 

of actionable data collected pursuant to 

the current regulations inhibits CBP’s 

ability to identify and interdict high-risk 

shipments that may contain illegal 

drugs such as illicit fentanyl, 

merchandise that poses a risk to public 

safety, counterfeits, or other contraband. 

The new enhanced entry process for 

low-value shipments proposed in this 

rulemaking would provide CBP with 

necessary information regarding the 

contents of shipments to accurately 

segment risk and determine eligibility 

for the administrative exemption in 

advance of a shipment’s arrival in the 

United States. The receipt of advance 

electronic data would also reduce the 

burden for CBP officers who process 

these large volumes of shipments 

because better data would lead to more 

accurate targeting, which means CBP 

resources will be better focused on 

accurately identifying and interdicting 

violative shipments compared to today 

where the quality of the targeting is 

often impeded by the lack of 

information. 

Last, both CBP and the trade 

community’s technological capabilities 

have greatly advanced since 1995, and 

this proposed rule would adapt the 

regulations to current capabilities. As 

explained in previous sections, in the 

past, CBP cleared low-value shipments 

exclusively through a time-consuming 

and burdensome manual process, and 

staff at the ports of entry became unable 

to quickly and efficiently process the 

increasing volume of trade. 

Consequently, it was not unusual for 

clearance to take up to eight days. Over 

the last several years, CBP has 

collaborated with the trade community 

to obtain input regarding how to more 

accurately identify the nature, origin, 

and ultimate destination of low-value 

shipments. This effort served as the 

foundation for two pilot programs, the 

Section 321 Data Pilot and the Entry 

Type 86 Test, which were implemented 

in 2019 to test CBP’s capabilities to 

collect, and the trade’s ability to 

provide, certain enhanced data through 

CBP-approved electronic systems.77

As illustrated above, the existing 

regulations do not account for the 

complex supply chains surrounding ecommerce transactions, today’s volume 

of trade, or recent technological 

advancements. Consequently, this 

environment is plagued with various 

challenges, including, but not limited 

to, illicit substances like fentanyl and 

other narcotics, counterfeits and other 

goods violative of intellectual property 

rights, and goods made with forced 

labor. CBP’s enforcement efforts have 

brought to light violations of the right to 

make entry, mismanifesting of cargo, 

misclassification, misdelivery (e.g., 

delivery of goods prior to release from 

CBP custody), undervaluation, and 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3070 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

78This includes 71 percent of sampled smallvolume brokers, 73 percent of all medium- and 

large-volume brokers, and none of the sampled 

major ECOs. 

incorrectly executed powers of attorney. 

Of particular concern is the threat posed 

by illicit fentanyl, fentanyl analogues, as 

well as precursor and other chemicals 

used in illicit drug production that are 

smuggled into the United States by 

transnational criminal organizations. 

CBP uses a multi-faceted approach to 

prevent illegal drugs from entering the 

country, and one key facet is advance 

information and targeting. Advance 

electronic shipping information allows 

CBP to quickly identify, target, and 

deter the entry of dangerous illicit drugs 

in all operational environments. This 

rulemaking contributes to the effort to 

stop the flow of illegal drugs into the 

United States by expanding the 

collection of enhanced advance 

electronic data for low-value shipments. 

2. A Succinct Statement of the 

Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the 

Proposed Rule 

In the proposed rule, CBP seeks to 

refine and codify an electronic entry 

process for qualifying low-value 

shipments seeking entry into the United 

States. This proposed new process is 

termed the ‘‘enhanced entry process.’’ In 

order to file an enhanced entry, CBP 

will require the submission of 

additional electronic data elements, 

such as a product URL or picture, in 

addition to the data currently required 

under the Entry Type 86 Test. This 

additional information will enable CBP 

to more efficiently target high-risk 

shipments. The existing process of 

clearing shipments off the manifest will 

also remain available to the trade with 

some modification; however, it will now 

be referred to as the ‘‘basic entry 

process.’’ 

The legal authority for the 

administrative exemption is provided in 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C). The legal 

authority to prescribe special rules for 

the declaration and entry of low-value 

merchandise is provided in 19 U.S.C. 

1498(a)(1)(A). This administrative 

exemption is implemented in the CBP 

regulations at 19 CFR 10.151 and 

10.153, and the entry rules for the entry 

of merchandise qualifying for this 

exemption are provided in 19 CFR parts 

128, 143, and 145. 

3. A Description of, and, Where 

Feasible, an Estimate of the Number of 

Small Entities to Which the Proposed 

Rule Will Apply 

As described in section 11.2 of the 

full analysis attached in the docket for 

this rule, the proposed rule does not 

directly regulate any one industry. 

Instead, it makes the enhanced entry 

process available to various actors who 

may wish to import low-value 

shipments. Enhanced entries may be 

filed by the owner or purchaser of the 

shipment, an ECO in possession of the 

shipment, or when appropriately 

designated by the owner, purchaser, or 

consignee of the shipment, a licensed 

customs broker. Generally, customs 

brokers will file the entries; however, it 

is unclear which entities will 

experience the incremental costs of the 

rule. 

The threshold analysis presented in 

section 11.2.1 of the full analysis 

attached in the docket for this rule 

describes two possible alternate 

scenarios: 

1. That brokers and ECOs experience 

costs directly and do not pass them on 

to their consumers; and 

2. The total incremental cost of the 

rule is passed on to consignees 

(generally the final owner or purchaser) 

in the form of higher shipment costs. 

No matter which category of entities 

bears the cost of this rule, this analysis 

demonstrates that a substantial number 

of small businesses may be affected by 

the proposed rule. Assuming that 

brokers and ECOs fully bear the costs 

they incur (Scenario 1), we find that 67 

percent of sampled brokers and ECOs 

qualify as small businesses.78

Extrapolating from the sample to the full 

population of brokers suggests that 

approximately 274 brokers are small 

businesses. This analysis does not 

identify small businesses among the 

affected ECOs. Under the alternate 

assumption that consignees bear the 

cost of the rule (Scenario 2), any small 

entity in the United States has the 

potential to be affected by the rule as a 

consignee. Analysis of a sample of 

consignees for one day in 2023 

demonstrates that 92 percent of 

businesses in the sample qualify as 

small. 

4. A Description of the Projected 

Reporting, Record-Keeping and Other 

Compliance Requirements of the 

Proposed Rule, Including an Estimate of 

the Classes of Small Entities That Will 

Be Subject to the Requirement and the 

Type of Professional Skills Necessary 

for Preparation of the Report or Record 

This rule does not establish any new 

recordkeeping requirements outside of 

the additional data elements that will be 

sent to CBP. An enhanced entry may be 

filed for shipments which meet the 

requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) 

and 19 CFR 10.151, by transmitting to 

CBP, the individual bill of lading (house 

bill or equivalent) or other shipping 

document used to file or support entry, 

the data elements listed in previous 

sections for the basic entry process, and 

the following additional data: 

1. Clearance tracing identification 

number (CTIN). ‘‘CTIN’’ means the 

individual bill of lading number or a 

unique identification number used to 

associate the merchandise on the 

individual bill of lading with the 

eligible imported merchandise for 

which entry is sought; 

2. Country of shipment of the 

merchandise. ‘‘Country of shipment’’ 

means the country in which the goods 

were located when the shipment was 

created for exportation to the United 

States; 

3. 10-digit classification for the 

merchandise in Chapters 1–97 (and any 

additional classification in Chapters 98– 

99, if applicable) of the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS), unless the HTSUS waiver 

privilege has been obtained and 

asserted, and the merchandise is not 

subject to the requirements of other 

government agencies; and 

a. HTSUS Waiver Privilege: Parties 

who will file enhanced entries may 

request from CBP a waiver of the 

requirement to transmit the 10-digit 

HTSUS classification unless the 

merchandise is subject to the 

requirements of other government 

agencies. Parties may obtain a waiver by 

demonstrating, at a minimum, the 

following: 

i. The ability to properly classify 

merchandise to the 10-digit HTSUS 

classification; 

ii. The ability to properly determine 

whether merchandise is subject to the 

requirements of other government 

agencies and the ability to properly 

segregate such shipments; and 

iii. The ability to properly determine 

whether merchandise is otherwise 

precluded by law from eligibility for the 

administrative exemption under 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) and the ability to 

properly segregate such shipments. 

4. One or more of the following: 

a. The uniform resource locator (URL) 

to the marketplace’s product listing; 

b. Product picture; 

c. Product identifier; and/or 

d. Shipment x-ray or other security 

screening report number verifying 

completion of foreign security scanning 

of the shipment. 

Conditional data elements for 

enhanced entry: In order for CBP to 

better assess the risks associated with 

low-value shipments, the enhanced 

entry process includes a set of 

conditional data elements which must 

be transmitted to CBP if the data 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3071 

79The typical master bill contains approximately 

6,000 house bills. Much of the information on the 

house bills is identical and the submission is 

largely automated. This results in a higher number 

of submissions with a lower time burden per 

submission for entry type 86 and enhanced entry 

submissions. 

elements are applicable to the 

merchandise in the shipment. (For 

example, if merchandise is subject to 

PGA requirements (for item 3 in the list 

below), then those documents must be 

submitted. If, however, PGA 

requirements are not applicable to the 

merchandise, then that data would not 

be provided.) 

1. Seller name and address; 

2. Purchaser name and address; 

3. Any data or documents required by 

other government agencies; 

4. Advertised retail product 

description; and 

5. Marketplace name and website or 

phone number. ‘‘Marketplace’’ means 

the party that provides an internet (e.g., 

online, website, application (‘‘app’’), 

electronic mail) or telephonic (e.g., 

telephone, television, or catalog) means 

of offering products for sale. The 

marketplace may be a seller or a third 

party offering products on behalf of a 

seller. 

The data elements required for an 

enhanced entry must be received by 

CBP on or before the deadline for 

receipt of advance cargo information, as 

specified below (varies by mode): 

• Vessel. The filing must be received 

by CBP 24 hours before the cargo is 

laden aboard the vessel at the foreign 

port. 19 CFR 4.7 and 4.7a. 

• Air. The filing must be received by 

CBP either: (1) no later than the time of 

the departure of the aircraft for the 

United States, in the case of aircraft that 

depart for the United States from any 

foreign port or place in North America, 

including locations in Mexico, Central 

America, South America (from north of 

the Equator only), the Caribbean, and 

Bermuda; or (2) no later than four hours 

prior to the arrival of the aircraft in the 

United States, in the case of aircraft that 

depart for the United States from any 

foreign area other than those specified 

in 19 CFR 122.48a(b)(1). 19 CFR 

122.48a(b). 

• Rail. The filing must be received by 

CBP no later than two hours prior to the 

cargo reaching the first port of arrival in 

the United States. 19 CFR 123.91. 

• Truck. The filing must be received 

by CBP no later than either 30 minutes 

or one hour prior to the carrier’s 

reaching the first port of arrival in the 

United States, or such lesser time as 

authorized, based upon the CBPapproved system employed to present 

the information. 19 CFR 123.92. 

5. An Identification, to the Extent 

Practicable, of All Relevant Federal 

Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap or 

Conflict With the Proposed Rule 

This rule does not duplicate, overlap, 

or conflict with any other Federal rule. 

CBP is considering an NPRM that would 

make goods subject to trade actions 

ineligible for the administrative 

exemption. If that NPRM is published 

and finalized, that rule would 

supplement this rule. 

6. A Description of Any Significant 

Alternatives to the Proposed Rule That 

Accomplish the Stated Objectives of 

Applicable Statutes and That Minimize 

any Significant Economic Impact of the 

Proposed Rule on Small Entities 

There are no significant alternatives 

that accomplish the stated objectives of 

the proposed rule. As the majority of the 

regulated parties are small businesses, 

this rule would not be effective if CBP 

limited the rule to other than small 

businesses. Further, we note that use of 

the enhanced entry process established 

by this rule is optional. If a small 

business does not wish to provide the 

information required under the 

enhanced entry process, it may use the 

basic entry process, which is nearly 

identical to the release from manifest 

process used historically, and incur no 

costs as a result of this rule. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

an agency may not conduct, and a 

person is not required to respond to, a 

collection of information unless the 

collection of information displays a 

valid control number assigned by OMB. 

The collection of information contained 

in this proposed rule, will be submitted 

to OMB for review under section 

3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). The public can direct comments 

to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: 

Desk Officer for Customs and Border 

Protection. Such comments can be 

submitted in the regulatory docket for 

this proposed rule. 

This rule, if finalized, would 

formalize the Entry Type 86 Test and 

alter the information collection under 

OMB control number 1651–0024 (Entry/ 

Immediate Delivery Application and 

Simplified Entry). This NPRM 

announces the data elements required 

for enhanced entry submissions. 

Enhanced entry submissions, like entry 

type 86 entries, are submitted for entries 

at the house bill level.79 CBP does not 

anticipate a change in the number of 

annual submissions (621,828,643) or 

number of annual respondents (535) 

compared to those caused by the Entry 

Type 86 Test, but will result in an 

increase to the time per response to 

submit a master bill an enhanced 

submission compared to the entry type 

86 submission. The collection will be 

adjusted to reflect the additional 2 

minutes per master bill and the increase 

in total annual burden hours due to the 

change. The current entry type 86 

entries will be converted to the new 

enhanced entry upon the finalization of 

this proposed rulemaking and formal 

OMB approval which will keep the 

number of submissions equal to the 

Entry Type 86 Test. The new estimated 

annual burden for this information 

collection following OMB approval is 

3,843,763 hours. 

Upon finalization of this proposed 

rule and OMB approval, the information 

collection under OMB control number 

1651–0024 will be revised to reflect the 

increased burden hours as follows: 

Paper Only Entry/Immediate Delivery 

Form 3461 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

1,669. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 33,923. 

Estimated Time per Response: 15 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 8,481. 

ACE Cargo Release Electronic 

Submission 

Form 3461 and 3461ALT Excluding 

Enhanced Entry 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

6,580. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 22,970,239. 

Estimated Time per Response: 10 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 3,828,373. 

Enhanced Entry 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

535. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 621,828,643. 

Estimated Time per Response: 0.0007 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 6,909. 

F. National Environmental Policy Act 

DHS and its components analyze 

actions to determine whether the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (‘‘NEPA’’), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., 

applies to these actions and, if so, what 

level of NEPA review is required. 42 

U.S.C. 4336. DHS’s Directive 023–01, 

Revision 01 and Instruction Manual 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3072 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

80CBP is aware of the November 12, 2024 

decision in Marin Audubon Society v. Federal 

Aviation Administration, No. 23–1067 (D.C. Cir. 

Nov. 12, 2024). To the extent that a court may 

conclude that CEQ regulations implementing NEPA 

are not judicially enforceable or binding on this 

agency action, CBP has nonetheless elected to 

follow those CEQ regulations, in addition to DHS’s 

Directive and Instruction Manual, to meet the 

agency’s obligations under NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq. 

023–01–001–01, Revision 01 

(‘‘Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01’’) 

establish the procedures that DHS uses 

to comply with NEPA and the Council 

on Environmental Quality (‘‘CEQ’’) 

regulations for implementing NEPA, 40 

CFR parts 1500 through 1508.80

Federal agencies may establish 

categorical exclusions for categories of 

actions they determine normally do not 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment and, therefore, do 

not require the preparation of an 

Environmental Assessment or 

Environmental Impact Statement. 42 

U.S.C. 4336e(1); see also 40 CFR 1501.4, 

1507.3(c)(8), 1508.1(e). DHS has 

established categorical exclusions, 

which are listed in appendix A of its 

Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01. 

Under DHS’s NEPA implementing 

procedures, for an action to be 

categorically excluded, it must satisfy 

each of the following three conditions: 

(1) the entire action clearly fits within 

one or more of the categorical 

exclusions; (2) the action is not a piece 

of a larger action; and (3) no 

extraordinary circumstances exist that 

create the potential for a significant 

environmental effect. 

DHS has analyzed this action under 

Directive 023–01 and Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01. DHS has made 

a determination that this rulemaking 

action is one of a category of actions that 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment. First, this proposed rule 

clearly fits within the Categorical 

Exclusions A3(a) and A3(d) of DHS’s 

Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, 

Appendix A, for the promulgation of 

rules of a ‘‘strictly administrative or 

procedural nature’’ and rules that 

‘‘interpret or amend an existing 

regulation without changing its 

environmental effect,’’ respectively. The 

proposed rule would create a new 

process for entering low-value 

shipments, allowing CBP to target highrisk shipments more effectively. The 

proposed rule would also revise the 

current process for entering low-value 

shipments to require additional data 

elements that would assist CBP in 

verifying eligibility for duty- and taxfree entry of low-value shipments and 

bona-fide gift. Second, this NPRM is not 

part of a larger action. Third, this NPRM 

presents no extraordinary circumstances 

creating the potential for significant 

environmental effects. Therefore, a more 

detailed NEPA review is not necessary. 

DHS seeks any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of any significant 

environmental effects from this NPRM. 

Signing Authority 

In accordance with Treasury Order 

100–20, the Secretary of the Treasury 

delegated to the Secretary of Homeland 

Security the authority related to the 

customs revenue functions vested in the 

Secretary of the Treasury as set forth in 

6 U.S.C. 212 and 215, subject to certain 

exceptions. This regulation is being 

issued in accordance with DHS 

Directive 07010.3, Revision 03.2, which 

delegates to the Commissioner of CBP 

the authority to prescribe and approve/ 

sign regulations related to customs 

revenue functions. 

Pete Flores, Senior Official 

Performing the Duties of the 

Commissioner, having reviewed and 

approved this document, has delegated 

the authority to electronically sign this 

document to the Director (or Acting 

Director, if applicable) of the 

Regulations and Disclosure Law 

Division of CBP, for purposes of 

publication in the Federal Register. 

List of Subjects 

19 CFR Part 10 

Bonds, Exports, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Trade 

agreements. 

19 CFR Part 101 

Harbors, Organization and functions 

(Government agencies), Seals and 

insignia, Vessels. 

19 CFR Part 128 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Freight, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

19 CFR Part 143 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

19 CFR Part 145 

Exports, Lotteries, Postal Service, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Proposed Amendments to the CBP 

Regulations 

For the reasons stated above in the 

preamble, CBP proposes to amend 19 

CFR parts 10, 101, 128, 143, and 145 as 

set forth below. 

PART 10—ARTICLES CONDITIONALLY 

FREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCED 

RATE, ETC. 

■ 1. The general authority citation for 

part 10 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General 

Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS)), 1321, 1481, 1484, 

1498, 1508, 1623, 1624, 4513. 

* * * * * 

■ 2. Amend the undesignated center 

heading preceding § 10.151 to read as 

follows: 

Importations Not Over $800 and BonaFide Gifts 

■ 3. Revise § 10.151 to read as follows: 

§ 10.151 Importations not over $800. 

Subject to the conditions in § 10.153, 

the port director may pass free of duty 

and tax any shipment of merchandise, 

as defined in § 101.1 of this chapter, 

imported by one person on one day 

having a fair retail value in the country 

of shipment not exceeding $800. When 

multiple shipments are imported by one 

person on one day under this section 

and the aggregate fair retail value of 

those shipments exceeds $800 in the 

country of shipment, then all such 

shipments imported on that day by that 

person become ineligible for the 

privilege of passing free of duty and tax 

under this section. This privilege will 

also be denied if a port director has 

reason to believe that a shipment is one 

of several lots covered by a single order 

or contract sent separately to secure free 

entry or avoid compliance with any 

pertinent law or regulation. For 

purposes of this section, the person 

whose shipment may be granted the 

privilege of passing free of duty and tax 

under 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) is the 

owner or purchaser of the merchandise 

imported on one day. Merchandise for 

which this privilege is claimed must be 

entered under informal entry 

procedures (see § 143.23(j), and 

§§ 128.24, 145.31, 148.12, and 148.62 of 

this chapter) by a party authorized to 

make entry under § 143.26(b) of this 

chapter. 

■ 4. Revise § 10.152 to read as follows: 

§ 10.152 Bona-fide gifts. 

Subject to the conditions in § 10.153, 

the port director may pass free of duty 

and tax any article sent as a bona-fide 

gift from a person in a foreign country 

to a person in the United States, 

provided that the aggregate fair retail 

value in the country of shipment of such 

articles received by one person on one 

day does not exceed $100 or, in the case 

of articles sent from a person in the 

Virgin Islands, Guam, and American 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3073 

Samoa, $200. Articles for which this 

privilege is claimed must be entered 

under informal entry procedures (see 

§ 143.23(j) and § 145.32 of this chapter). 

An article is ‘‘sent’’ for purposes of this 

section if it is conveyed in any manner 

other than on the person or in the 

accompanied or unaccompanied 

baggage of the donor or donee. 

■ 5. Amend § 10.153 by: 

■ a. In the introductory text, removing 

the word ‘‘Customs’’ and adding in its 

place the term ‘‘CBP’’; 

■ b. In paragraphs (a) and (d) 

introductory text, adding a hyphen 

between the words ‘‘bona’’ and ‘‘fide’’; 

and 

■ c. Adding paragraph (i). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 10.153 Conditions for exemption. 

* * * * * 

(i) The exemption provided for in 

§ 10.151 is not to be allowed with 

respect to imported merchandise subject 

to any antidumping or countervailing 

duty determination, instruction, or 

order issued by the Department of 

Commerce; or any other merchandise 

otherwise precluded by law from 

eligibility. 

PART 101—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

■ 6. The general authority citation for 

part 101 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 101, et. 

seq.; 19 U.S.C. 2, 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States), 1623, 1624, 1646a. 

* * * * * 

§ 101.1 [Amended] 

■ 7. Amend § 101.1, in the definition of 

‘‘Shipment’’, by removing the words 

‘‘the bill of lading’’ and adding in their 

place the words ‘‘an individual bill of 

lading (house bill or equivalent)’’. 

PART 128—EXPRESS 

CONSIGNMENTS 

■ 8. The authority citation for part 128 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 58c, 66, 1202 

(General Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States), 1321, 1484, 

1498, 1551, 1555, 1556, 1565, 1624. 

■ 9. Amend § 128.21 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii); and 

■ b. In paragraph (b), removing the word 

‘‘Customs’’ and adding in its place the 

term ‘‘CBP’’. 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 128.21 Manifest requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(ii) If the merchandise is eligible for, 

and is entered under, the informal entry 

procedures as provided in § 128.24, 

except for merchandise eligible to pass 

free of duty and tax as provided in 

§ 128.24(e) or § 128.24(f) and entered 

under § 143.23(k) of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 128.24 by revising 

paragraphs (d) and (e) and adding 

paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 128.24 Informal entry procedures. 

* * * * * 

(d) Entry summary. An entry 

summary (CBP Form 7501, or its 

electronic equivalent) must be presented 

in proper form, and estimated duties 

deposited within 10 days of the release 

of the merchandise under either the 

regular or alternative procedure 

described in this section, unless the 

shipment passes free of duty and tax 

under paragraph (e) or (f) of this section. 

(e) Shipments valued at $800 or less. 

Shipments valued at $800 or less 

meeting the requirements of § 10.151 of 

this chapter may be passed free of duty 

and tax if entered under the procedures 

set forth in § 143.23(j) of this chapter by 

a party eligible to file entry under 

§ 143.26(b) of this chapter. 

(f) Bona-fide gifts. Shipments valued 

at $100 or less ($200, in the case of 

articles sent from persons in the Virgin 

Islands, Guam, and American Samoa) 

meeting the requirements of § 10.152 of 

this chapter may be passed free of duty 

and tax if entered under the procedures 

set forth in § 143.23(k) of this chapter. 

Such shipments are not eligible for the 

procedures set forth in § 143.23(l) of this 

chapter. 

PART 143—SPECIAL ENTRY 

PROCEDURES 

■ 11. The authority citation for part 143 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1321, 1414, 1481, 

1484, 1498, 1624, 1641. 

■ 12. Amend § 143.23 by revising 

paragraphs (j) and (k) and adding 

paragraphs (l) and (m) to read as 

follows: 

§ 143.23 Form of entry. 

* * * * * 

(j) Shipments not over $800 and bonafide gifts. Except in the case of personal 

written or oral declarations (see 

§§ 148.12, 148.13, and 148.62 of this 

chapter), a shipment of merchandise 

eligible for informal entry under 19 

U.S.C. 1498 and meeting the 

requirements of § 10.151 or § 10.152 of 

this chapter may be entered by 

providing the individual bill of lading 

(house bill or equivalent), or other 

shipping document used to file or 

support entry, and by meeting the 

requirements under paragraph (k) or (l) 

of this section. 

(1) Requirements of other government 

agencies. Shipments of merchandise 

may be subject to other legal 

requirements, including the 

requirements of other Federal, State, or 

local agencies, as applicable. 

Merchandise regulated by other Federal 

agencies may not be entered under 

paragraph (k) of this section, but may be 

entered under paragraph (l) of this 

section. 

(2) Mail importations. Mail 

importations pursuant to § 145.31 may 

not be entered under paragraph (k) of 

this section, but may be entered under 

paragraph (l) of this section. 

(3) Bona-fide gifts. Bona-fide gifts 

claiming the exemption in § 10.152 of 

this chapter must be entered under 

paragraph (k) of this section. 

(k) Basic entry process. Shipments of 

merchandise meeting the requirements 

of 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2) and § 10.151 or 

§ 10.152 of this chapter may be entered 

pursuant to paragraph (j) of this section 

by providing the individual bill of 

lading (house bill or equivalent) and the 

following information either 

electronically through a CBP-authorized 

electronic data interchange (EDI) system 

or in paper format: 

(1) Country of origin of the 

merchandise; 

(2) Shipper name, address, and 

country; 

(3) Name and address of the person 

claiming the exemption from duty and 

tax under § 10.151 or § 10.152 of this 

chapter; 

(4) Specific description of the 

merchandise; 

(5) Manifested quantity of the 

merchandise; 

(6) Shipment weight; 

(7) Fair retail value in the country of 

shipment in U.S. dollars (for conversion 

of foreign currency, see subpart C, part 

159 of this chapter); and 

(8) Name and address of the final 

deliver-to party, meaning the final party 

in the United States to whom the 

merchandise is to be delivered, if 

distinct from the party identified in 

paragraph (k)(3) of this section. 

(l) Enhanced entry process. 

Shipments of merchandise meeting the 

requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) 

and § 10.151 of this chapter may be 

entered pursuant to paragraph (j) of this 

section by transmitting to CBP, through 

a CBP-authorized EDI system, the 

individual bill of lading (house bill or 

equivalent) or other shipping document 

used to file or support entry, and the 

information required in paragraph (k) of 

this section and paragraphs (l)(1) and (2) 

of this section. All required 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
3074 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

documentation and information must be 

received by CBP on or before the 

deadline for receipt of cargo information 

(see §§ 4.7 and 4.7a (vessel), 122.48a(b) 

(air), 123.91 (rail), and 123.92 (truck) of 

this chapter), except for mail shipments 

(see § 145.31 of this chapter). 

(1) For all shipments, the following 

must be transmitted: 

(i) Clearance tracing identification 

number (CTIN). ‘‘CTIN’’ means the 

individual bill of lading number or 

other unique identification number used 

to associate the merchandise on the 

individual bill of lading with the 

eligible imported merchandise for 

which entry is sought; 

(ii) Country of shipment of the 

merchandise. For purposes of this 

paragraph (l), ‘‘country of shipment’’ 

means the country where the goods 

were located when the shipment was 

created for exportation to the United 

States; 

(iii) 10-digit classification of the 

merchandise in chapters 1–97 (and 

additionally in chapters 98–99, if 

applicable) of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), 

unless the HTSUS waiver privilege has 

been obtained pursuant to paragraph 

(m) of this section and asserted for the 

entry, and the merchandise is not 

subject to requirements of other 

government agencies; and 

(iv) One or more of the following: 

(A) The uniform resource locator 

(URL) to the marketplace’s product 

listing; 

(B) Product picture; 

(C) Product identifier; and/or 

(D) Shipment x-ray or other security 

screening report number verifying 

completion of foreign security scanning 

of the shipment. 

(2) For all shipments, the following 

information must be transmitted, if 

applicable: 

(i) Seller name and address. For 

purposes of this paragraph (l), ‘‘seller’’ 

means the party that made, or offered or 

contracted to make, a sale of the 

merchandise; 

(ii) Purchaser name and address. For 

purposes of this paragraph (l), 

‘‘purchaser’’ means the last known party 

to whom the goods are sold or the party 

to whom the goods are contracted to be 

sold at the time of importation; 

(iii) Any data or documents required 

by other government agencies; 

(iv) Advertised retail product 

description; and 

(v) Marketplace name and website or 

phone number. For purposes of this 

paragraph (l), ‘‘marketplace’’ means the 

party that provides an internet (e.g., 

online, website, application (‘‘app’’), 

electronic mail) or telephonic (e.g., 

telephone, television, or catalog) means 

of offering products for sale. The 

marketplace may be a seller or a third 

party offering products on behalf of a 

seller. 

(m) Application for HTSUS waiver 

privilege. Under the provisions of this 

paragraph (m), a party may request a 

waiver of the requirement to transmit 

the 10-digit HTSUS classification of the 

merchandise pursuant to paragraph 

(l)(1)(iii) of this section. The HTSUS 

waiver privilege cannot be used when 

merchandise is subject to the 

requirements of other government 

agencies under paragraph (j)(1) of this 

section or where otherwise required by 

law. If subject to such requirements, the 

10-digit HTSUS classification(s) must be 

submitted for all the merchandise in the 

shipment. 

(1) Who may apply. Any party who is 

eligible to file entry under paragraph (l) 

of this section may apply for the HTSUS 

waiver privilege (see § 143.26(b) of this 

chapter regarding parties who may make 

such entries). 

(2) Contents of application. An 

applicant for the HTSUS waiver 

privilege must submit an application via 

email to the Director, Cargo Security 

and Controls Division, Office of Field 

Operations, at ecommerce@cbp.dhs.gov. 

The application must include the 

following: 

(i) Name and address of applicant, 

and an email address to be used for CBP 

correspondence regarding the 

application. 

(ii) Information demonstrating the 

applicant has in place internal controls 

and procedures regarding, at a 

minimum, the following: 

(A) The ability to properly classify 

merchandise under the HTSUS at the 

10-digit classification; 

(B) The ability to properly determine 

whether merchandise is subject to the 

requirements of other government 

agencies and the ability to properly 

segregate such shipments; and 

(C) The ability to properly determine 

whether merchandise is otherwise 

precluded by law from eligibility for the 

administrative exemption under 19 

U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C) and the ability to 

properly segregate such shipments. 

(iii) The applicant must state whether 

a previous application for an HTSUS 

waiver privilege was denied, or if a 

previous approval of such an 

application was revoked. 

(3) Action on application—(i) CBP 

review. CBP will review and verify all 

information submitted with the 

application. For this purpose, CBP may 

request additional information 

(including additional documents) and/ 

or explanations of any of the 

information provided. The verification 

process may include on-site visits and 

demonstrations of the applicant’s 

procedures. Based on its findings from 

the review and verification process, CBP 

will approve or deny the application. 

(ii) Notice to applicant. CBP will 

notify the applicant, via email to the 

email address provided with the 

application, within 60 days of receipt of 

the application of its decision to 

approve or deny the application, or of 

CBP’s inability to approve, deny, or act 

on the application and the reason 

therefor. 

(iii) Approval. The approval of an 

application will be effective as of the 

date of CBP’s notification of approval, 

unless CBP’s notification provides a 

different effective date. 

(iv) Denial. If an application is 

denied, the applicant will be notified 

specifying the reason therefor. A denial 

may be appealed in the manner 

prescribed in paragraph (m)(3)(vi) of 

this section. The applicant may not 

reapply for the HTSUS waiver privilege 

until the reason for the denial is 

resolved. 

(v) Revocation. CBP may propose to 

revoke its approval of an application for 

good cause (such as, noncompliance 

with any applicable customs laws and/ 

or regulations, failure to maintain 

internal controls at the standards set by 

CBP in paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of this 

section, or failure to participate in 

periodic compliance reviews conducted 

by CBP). In the case of a proposed 

revocation, CBP will provide notice, via 

email to the email address provided 

with the application, of the proposed 

revocation of the approval. The notice 

will specify the reasons for CBP’s 

proposed action and the procedures for 

challenging CBP’s proposed revocation, 

as described in paragraph (m)(3)(vi) of 

this section. The revocation will take 

effect 30 days after the date of the 

proposed revocation unless timely 

challenged under paragraph (m)(3)(vi) of 

this section. If timely challenged, the 

revocation will take effect after 

completion of the challenge procedures 

in paragraph (m)(3)(vi) of this section 

unless the challenge is successful. 

(vi) Appeal of denial or challenge to 

proposed revocation. An appeal of a 

denied application, or challenge to the 

proposed revocation of an approved 

application, may be made by email to 

the Executive Director, Trade Policy and 

Programs, Office of Trade, CBP 

Headquarters, at ecommerce@

cbp.dhs.gov, and must be received 

within 30 days of the date of denial or 

proposed revocation. The 30-day period 

for appeal or challenge may be extended 

for good cause, upon written request by 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Proposed Rules 3075 

the applicant or privilege holder. The 

extension request must be made by 

email and received by the Executive 

Director, Trade Policy and Programs, 

Office of Trade, CBP Headquarters, at 

ecommerce@cbp.dhs.gov, within the 30- 

day period. The denial of an application 

or the revocation of a waiver, does not 

preclude a party from reapplying for the 

privilege in the future. 

■ 13. Amend § 143.26 by revising 

paragraph (b) and adding paragraph (c) 

to read as follows: 

§ 143.26 Party who may make informal 

entry of merchandise. 

* * * * * 

(b) Shipments valued at $800 or less. 

Except for merchandise subject to 

paragraph (c) of this section, a shipment 

of merchandise valued at $800 or less 

which qualifies for informal entry under 

19 U.S.C. 1498 and meets the 

requirements in 19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2) 

(see §§ 10.151, 10.152, 10.153, 

143.23(k), 145.31, 145.32, 148.51, and 

148.64 of this chapter) may be entered, 

using reasonable care, by the owner, 

purchaser, or consignee of the shipment 

or, when appropriately designated by 

one of these persons, a customs broker 

licensed under 19 U.S.C. 1641. 

(c) Exception for the enhanced entry 

process. A shipment of merchandise 

valued at $800 or less, which qualifies 

for informal entry under 19 U.S.C. 1498 

and the administrative exemption under 

19 U.S.C. 1321(a)(2)(C), may be entered 

under § 143.23(l), using reasonable care, 

by the owner or purchaser of the 

shipment, an express consignment 

operator or carrier in possession of the 

shipment (see § 128.1(a) of this chapter), 

or when appropriately designated by the 

owner, purchaser, or consignee of the 

shipment, a customs broker licensed 

under 19 U.S.C. 1641 (see part 141, 

subpart C). When a party eligible to file 

the entry transmits the entry 

information required under 

§§ 143.23(l)(1)(iv)(A) through (D) and 

143.23(l)(2)(iv) through (v) of this part, 

and receives any of that information 

from another party, CBP will take into 

consideration how, in accordance with 

ordinary commercial practices, the 

transmitting party acquired such 

information, and whether and how the 

transmitting party is able to verify this 

information. When the transmitting 

party is not reasonably able to verify 

such information, CBP will permit the 

party to transmit the information on the 

basis of what the party reasonably 

believes to be true. 

PART 145—MAIL IMPORTATIONS 

■ 14. The authority citation for part 145 

and the specific authority citation for 

§§ 145.31 and 145.32 continue to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General 

Note 3(i)), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States, 1624. 

* * * * * 

Section 145.31 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 

1321; 

Section 145.32 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 

1321, 1498; 

* * * * * 

■ 15. Revise § 145.31 to read as follows: 

§ 145.31 Importations not over $800 in 

value. 

The port director may pass free of 

duty and tax, without preparing an 

entry as provided for in § 145.12, 

packages containing merchandise 

having an aggregate fair retail value in 

the country of shipment of not over 

$800, subject to the requirements set 

forth in §§ 10.151 and 10.153 of this 

chapter. Such merchandise may 

alternatively be entered under 

§ 143.23(l) of this chapter, in which case 

all required information must be 

transmitted to CBP no later than the 

date the merchandise departs from the 

country of posting. 

§ 145.32 [Amended] 

■ 16. Amend § 145.32 by removing the 

word ‘‘shall’’ and adding in its place the 

word ‘‘may’’. 

Robert F. Altneu, 

Director, Regulations & Disclosure Law 

Division, Regulations & Rulings, Office of 

Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00551 Filed 1–13–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[REG–107420–24] 

RIN 1545–BR21 

Source of Income From Cloud 

Transactions 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

proposed rules for determining the 

source of income from cloud 

transactions for purposes of the 

international provisions of the Internal 

Revenue Code. These proposed rules 

would generally affect taxpayers who 

earn gross income from engaging in 

cloud transactions. 

DATES: Written or electronic comments 

and requests for a public hearing must 

be received by April 14, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters are strongly 

encouraged to submit public comments 

electronically. Submit electronic 

submissions via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and 

REG–107420–24) by following the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Requests for a public hearing 

must be submitted as prescribed in the 

‘‘Comments and Requests for a Public 

Hearing’’ section. Once submitted to the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal, comments 

cannot be edited or withdrawn. The 

Department of the Treasury (Treasury 

Department) and the IRS will publish 

for public availability any comment 

received to its public docket, whether 

submitted electronically or in hard 

copy. Send hard copy submissions to: 

CC:PA:01:PR (REG–107420–24), Room 

5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. 

Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, 

Washington, DC 20044. Submissions 

may be hand-delivered Monday through 

Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 

4 p.m. to: CC:PA:01:PR (REG–107420– 

24), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue 

Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20224. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Concerning the proposed regulations, 

Christopher E. Fulle at (202) 317–5367 

or Michelle L. Ng at (202) 317–6989 (not 

toll-free numbers); concerning 

submissions of comments and requests 

for a public hearing, contact the 

Publications and Regulations branch at 

(202) 317–6901 (not a toll-free number) 

or by email to publichearings@irs.gov 

(preferred). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority 

The proposed regulations are issued 

under the express delegation of 

authority under section 7805 of the 

Internal Revenue Code (Code). Section 

7805(a) directs the Secretary of the 

Treasury or her delegate to prescribe all 

needful rules and regulations for the 

enforcement of that section and others 

in the Code, including all rules and 

regulations as may be necessary by 

reason of any alteration of law in 

relation to internal revenue. 

Background 

Proposed regulations published in the 

Federal Register (84 FR 40317) in 2019 

(REG–130700–14) (the 2019 proposed 

regulations) set forth proposed rules for 

identifying and classifying cloud 

transactions, and the preamble to the 

2019 proposed regulations requested 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS