Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009
SEMA LEGISLATIVE AND TECHNICAL AFFAIRS


Health Care Reform Takes Center Stage

SEMA Members Agree the Solution Must Be Affordable

By Stuart Gosswein

 SEMA News-May 2009-From the Hill

SEMA members expressed a strong desire to provide access to high-quality health care benefits to their workers, even though it was a financial strain on their small business to do so, especially under current economic conditions.

SEMA members responded to a comprehensive survey conducted in early 2009 with a clear message that the nation’s health care system is broken. The survey results underscored the need to make tough, balanced decisions to help solve the problem. Issues include whether to require businesses to offer coverage and individuals to buy insurance.

Under the current system, nearly 27 million small-business owners, employees and dependents are left uninsured. Skyrocketing premiums have made it especially difficult for specialty-automotive companies to offer health care coverage to their employees. Enacting legislation to help SEMA-member businesses gain access to affordable coverage remains a top priority for the association—especially during these times of economic uncertainty.

“The SEMA member survey provides valuable insight into the health care dilemma faced by small businesses,” said Steve McDonald, SEMA’s vice president of government affairs. “SEMA members want to ensure that their employees have access to quality coverage while cautioning that there is no one-size-fits-all answer. More than any other, one point revealed in the survey results is abundantly clear: In the midst of the current economic downturn, the solution must be affordable.”

Nearly all SEMA members are small businesses. As of early 2009, 25% of SEMA-member companies participating in the survey provided health insurance and paid the entire premium. Another 47% asked the worker to pay a portion of the premium, while 28% provided no health care coverage. Since SEMA last surveyed its members on this question in 2005, there’s been a continued trend toward requiring the worker to help pay the premium. Companies also took other steps to reduce premiums, such as seeking reduced coverage and increased deductibles.

Last year, insurance premiums rose at an annual rate of 10% and beyond for more than 50% of respondent companies. For those companies that provided coverage, 27% of respondents paid an average premium of $3,000–$5,000 per employee per year, while 36% paid more than $5,000 per year.

The survey indicated a willingness to work within the current employer-based system or transfer health insurance responsibilities to individuals. The key message was that any solution needed to be affordable and could not impose costly mandates on the employer.

The survey showed that federal health care tax credits to employers would be a powerful incentive for increasing health insurance coverage. Nearly 41% of the respondents agreed that a federal tax credit of $2,000 per employee would make it financially possible for their companies to voluntarily cover 60% of the premiums. Another 43% already provide at least 60% coverage. There was also widespread support for permitting small businesses to band together to pool risk, reduce insurance premiums and level the playing field between large and small companies in the health care market.

In contrast, SEMA members generally opposed a national pay-or-play policy with mandates on employers to provide certain defined health care benefits to their workers or pay into a government insurance plan that would. Sixty-six percent of the respondents were opposed to the government defining the kind of health care coverage an employer must provide or the percent of premiums that an employer must pay under a pay-or-play system. Under proposed legislation, small businesses could be exempt from such a system, but their workers could be required to purchase insurance on their own through an individual mandate.

SEMA members expressed a strong desire to provide access to high-quality health care benefits to their workers, even though it was a financial strain on their small business to do so, especially under current economic conditions. SEMA members criticized the government and insurance companies for not doing enough to control health care costs and expressed frustration, confusion and uncertainty over the exact reasons why premiums have been rising so quickly.

SEMA is a member of the Small Business Coalition for Affordable Healthcare, the nation’s leading coalition dedicated to increasing access and affordability of health insurance for the largest segment of the uninsured—small-business owners, employees and their dependents. Congress is expected to begin debating reform legislation in the near future. President Obama has indicated that he wants to expand the current employer-based system and implement other structural reforms to promote market-based competition, reduce costs and simplify paperwork.

“SEMA welcomes the current opportunity to provide a national solution for access to affordable care,” said McDonald. “We remain enthused about legislation that would establish state or nationwide health insurance purchasing pools offering small businesses a wide range of health plan choices.

SEMA will also work to promote other comprehensive reforms to provide quality, value and competition.”

For more information about the survey, please contact Stuart Gosswein at stuartg@sema.org.

A Roadmap to Enacting Reform

Legislation must be enacted into law in order to achieve any significant health care reform. Previous attempts have failed, so success this time is not guaranteed. Here are some contemplated steps on a path to reform.

Step one has been accomplished: gaining widespread agreement that the health care delivery system is broken. Unlike in years past, the major players are all willing to talk—politicians, health care providers, insurance companies, drug companies, big and small businesses, individuals, etc. Reasons vary: the current system is unsustainable, the number of uninsured is increasing, there are profits to be made by providing care to the uninsured, etc. Step two is reaching an agreement on a direction for reform. President Obama wants to expand the current employer-based system and implement other structural reforms to promote market-based competition, reduce costs and simplify paperwork. Under this approach, companies would be required to provide minimum health coverage to their workers or pay a percentage of payroll to fund a nationwide health insurance program for uninsured Americans. The payroll tax would probably not apply to “small businesses,” but that term has not been defined.

SEMA News-May 2009-From the Hill  

“The United States spends $2 trillion a year on health care, and that number is expected to double in the next 10 years. America’s fiscal situation will remain on shaky ground as long as we continue receiving such poor returns on this crucial investment. If our initial efforts to restore American prosperity are ever to bear true fruit, Congress must follow up by creating a high-quality, universally accessible and cost-effective health-care system.”

—Senator Max Baucus, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee

If there is to be any consensus for large-scale reform, expanding the current employer-based system is the likely candidate. The other approaches would likely be very disruptive and controversial, whether creating a single-payer government system or switching to individual coverage. Nevertheless, any reform will pose difficult hurdles. For the employer-based system, sample deal breakers include: What is the payroll tax? Will small businesses with 25 employees have to pay a tax? Will all individuals be required to secure coverage? Will competition drive down insurance premiums?

Congress will attempt to craft legislation to address these and other questions. Lawmakers in the U.S. Senate and House will hold hearings and discussions this spring. The goal is to draft legislation in Congress during the summer and complete work this year. It is a very ambitious if not impossible schedule, since the issues—taxes, health and commerce—are under the jurisdiction of multiple committees. Additionally, there will likely be significant political differences on the role and scope of government intervention in the marketplace. Whether these differences can be bridged is unclear. Lawmakers view the current window of opportunity to achieve success as narrow, since the momentum created by the 2008 elections will slow and we will soon be caught up in the 2010 election cycle. The nation’s economic woes may further slow progress.

SEMA is actively engaged on Capitol Hill and working closely with the National Federation of Independent Business and, as a member of the Small Business Coalition for Affordable Healthcare, to represent and address small-business concerns during this critical debate.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

 SEMA News - May 2009 

Alise Miner

SEMA Vice President of Internal Systems and Project Teams

SEMA News-May 2009-Inside SEMA-Alise MinerSEMA News: Can you briefly explain your role and the role of your department at SEMA?

Alise Miner: The role of my department is to assist in the day-to-day operations of the association. The department consists of two pieces: information technology and business technology. The information technology piece is responsible for internal IT support from PCs to Macs, networks to servers, internal IT project development as well as managing and assisting in the deployment of external IT projects for the association.

The business technology piece was developed in 2005 to work directly with the SEMA Business Technology Committee (BTC) and member companies on the association’s technology initiatives and the adoption of the industry’s data standards. These initiatives are critical in our ever-changing world for increased efficiencies in the supply chain and to help our members sell more.

My role for the association encompasses those areas as well as improving internal efficiencies and standardizing procedures, including Lean Office and ISO compliance. My other responsibilities include helping to establish cross-functional teams within the association to support both Board of Directors’ and internal strategic initiatives. These additional roles help SEMA better anticipate and adapt to the ongoing needs of our membership and the industry.

SN: SEMA has just completed a redesign of the SEMA.org website. Can you give us some highlights of the new site?

AM: The redesign of the SEMA.org site has been developed to take full advantage of today’s one-on-one communications and social networking technologies. Our site will deliver targeted information to the employees of SEMA-member companies based on job function, region, product interest and company type. These parameters allow us to make assumptions about an employee’s interests and direct relevant education, research, event, government affairs, council and news content through informational media channels.

With my business technology hat on, I continually preach the importance of computer-to-computer communications and connectivity. The “MySEMA” feature within the site opens a new world of enhanced features to our members, allowing them to connect and communicate. Using technology similar to what is found on social networking sites, such as Facebook and LinkedIn, employees of member companies can now connect to each other, send e-mail, contact staff and, most importantly, receive targeted updates from media channels.

Our development of social networking technologies and matchmaking will also be featured in registration for the SEMA Show. We will use these new features to connect buyers and exhibitors before, during and after the Show.

The site will enable our members to access information 24/7 that will make them more productive and knowledgeable. We’ll enhance our ability to get the right information to the right people at the right time.

SN: What are some of the other projects you and your team are working on?

AM: During our development of the redesigned SEMA.org site we utilized agile project-management methodologies—feel free to Google that one! Using the agile approach allows all of our teams to be more adaptive for the future projects of the association, including the ongoing enhancements to our new web-based community.

We are currently working on bringing all of our member-related websites together under one login—similar to OpenID for all my IT friends. This enhancement will allow our members to seamlessly move through all information, whether it is their MySEMA on SEMA.org, association dues management, the online education learning center from the SEMA Education Institute (SEI) or activities related to the SEMA Show.

This collaborative approach brings together feedback from our members and staff and improves our ability to deliver additional benefits to our membership. The results are more targeted to meet their needs in a rapid manner. Just as our members remain adaptive and agile in the current environment, we have positioned our teams to be just as responsive.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

 SEMA News - May 2009 

Alise Miner

SEMA Vice President of Internal Systems and Project Teams

SEMA News-May 2009-Inside SEMA-Alise MinerSEMA News: Can you briefly explain your role and the role of your department at SEMA?

Alise Miner: The role of my department is to assist in the day-to-day operations of the association. The department consists of two pieces: information technology and business technology. The information technology piece is responsible for internal IT support from PCs to Macs, networks to servers, internal IT project development as well as managing and assisting in the deployment of external IT projects for the association.

The business technology piece was developed in 2005 to work directly with the SEMA Business Technology Committee (BTC) and member companies on the association’s technology initiatives and the adoption of the industry’s data standards. These initiatives are critical in our ever-changing world for increased efficiencies in the supply chain and to help our members sell more.

My role for the association encompasses those areas as well as improving internal efficiencies and standardizing procedures, including Lean Office and ISO compliance. My other responsibilities include helping to establish cross-functional teams within the association to support both Board of Directors’ and internal strategic initiatives. These additional roles help SEMA better anticipate and adapt to the ongoing needs of our membership and the industry.

SN: SEMA has just completed a redesign of the SEMA.org website. Can you give us some highlights of the new site?

AM: The redesign of the SEMA.org site has been developed to take full advantage of today’s one-on-one communications and social networking technologies. Our site will deliver targeted information to the employees of SEMA-member companies based on job function, region, product interest and company type. These parameters allow us to make assumptions about an employee’s interests and direct relevant education, research, event, government affairs, council and news content through informational media channels.

With my business technology hat on, I continually preach the importance of computer-to-computer communications and connectivity. The “MySEMA” feature within the site opens a new world of enhanced features to our members, allowing them to connect and communicate. Using technology similar to what is found on social networking sites, such as Facebook and LinkedIn, employees of member companies can now connect to each other, send e-mail, contact staff and, most importantly, receive targeted updates from media channels.

Our development of social networking technologies and matchmaking will also be featured in registration for the SEMA Show. We will use these new features to connect buyers and exhibitors before, during and after the Show.

The site will enable our members to access information 24/7 that will make them more productive and knowledgeable. We’ll enhance our ability to get the right information to the right people at the right time.

SN: What are some of the other projects you and your team are working on?

AM: During our development of the redesigned SEMA.org site we utilized agile project-management methodologies—feel free to Google that one! Using the agile approach allows all of our teams to be more adaptive for the future projects of the association, including the ongoing enhancements to our new web-based community.

We are currently working on bringing all of our member-related websites together under one login—similar to OpenID for all my IT friends. This enhancement will allow our members to seamlessly move through all information, whether it is their MySEMA on SEMA.org, association dues management, the online education learning center from the SEMA Education Institute (SEI) or activities related to the SEMA Show.

This collaborative approach brings together feedback from our members and staff and improves our ability to deliver additional benefits to our membership. The results are more targeted to meet their needs in a rapid manner. Just as our members remain adaptive and agile in the current environment, we have positioned our teams to be just as responsive.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

 SEMA News - May 2009 

Alise Miner

SEMA Vice President of Internal Systems and Project Teams

SEMA News-May 2009-Inside SEMA-Alise MinerSEMA News: Can you briefly explain your role and the role of your department at SEMA?

Alise Miner: The role of my department is to assist in the day-to-day operations of the association. The department consists of two pieces: information technology and business technology. The information technology piece is responsible for internal IT support from PCs to Macs, networks to servers, internal IT project development as well as managing and assisting in the deployment of external IT projects for the association.

The business technology piece was developed in 2005 to work directly with the SEMA Business Technology Committee (BTC) and member companies on the association’s technology initiatives and the adoption of the industry’s data standards. These initiatives are critical in our ever-changing world for increased efficiencies in the supply chain and to help our members sell more.

My role for the association encompasses those areas as well as improving internal efficiencies and standardizing procedures, including Lean Office and ISO compliance. My other responsibilities include helping to establish cross-functional teams within the association to support both Board of Directors’ and internal strategic initiatives. These additional roles help SEMA better anticipate and adapt to the ongoing needs of our membership and the industry.

SN: SEMA has just completed a redesign of the SEMA.org website. Can you give us some highlights of the new site?

AM: The redesign of the SEMA.org site has been developed to take full advantage of today’s one-on-one communications and social networking technologies. Our site will deliver targeted information to the employees of SEMA-member companies based on job function, region, product interest and company type. These parameters allow us to make assumptions about an employee’s interests and direct relevant education, research, event, government affairs, council and news content through informational media channels.

With my business technology hat on, I continually preach the importance of computer-to-computer communications and connectivity. The “MySEMA” feature within the site opens a new world of enhanced features to our members, allowing them to connect and communicate. Using technology similar to what is found on social networking sites, such as Facebook and LinkedIn, employees of member companies can now connect to each other, send e-mail, contact staff and, most importantly, receive targeted updates from media channels.

Our development of social networking technologies and matchmaking will also be featured in registration for the SEMA Show. We will use these new features to connect buyers and exhibitors before, during and after the Show.

The site will enable our members to access information 24/7 that will make them more productive and knowledgeable. We’ll enhance our ability to get the right information to the right people at the right time.

SN: What are some of the other projects you and your team are working on?

AM: During our development of the redesigned SEMA.org site we utilized agile project-management methodologies—feel free to Google that one! Using the agile approach allows all of our teams to be more adaptive for the future projects of the association, including the ongoing enhancements to our new web-based community.

We are currently working on bringing all of our member-related websites together under one login—similar to OpenID for all my IT friends. This enhancement will allow our members to seamlessly move through all information, whether it is their MySEMA on SEMA.org, association dues management, the online education learning center from the SEMA Education Institute (SEI) or activities related to the SEMA Show.

This collaborative approach brings together feedback from our members and staff and improves our ability to deliver additional benefits to our membership. The results are more targeted to meet their needs in a rapid manner. Just as our members remain adaptive and agile in the current environment, we have positioned our teams to be just as responsive.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Drew Hardin
Photo Courtesy Source Interlink Media Archives

 

Mines Field

SEMA News-May 2009-SEMA HeritageYears before Bill France Sr. organized stock car racing on Florida’s most famous beach, stock cars of a different sort went wheel to wheel on tracks around the country. The idea was to pit cars in showroom-floor tune—primarily Fords, as it turned out— against one another to demonstrate their performance chops for prospective buyers. Think of it as “win on Sunday, sell on Monday,” the early years.

One of those races, the Gilmore Gold Cup, was held in February 1934 on a 1.9-mile track at Mines Field in Los Angeles, an area that’s now part of the Los Angeles International Airport. Some 60,000–75,000 people turned out to watch the 250-mile event, which took four hours to finish. Stubby Stubblefield’s ’33 Ford roadster was declared the Gold Cup winner, with an average speed of 62.37 mph.

Another Mines Field entrant was this ’34 Ford roadster driven by Shorty Cantlon and sponsored by W. I. Tupman, then a downtown Los Angeles Ford dealer. We haven’t been able to dig up Shorty’s results, but his hot iron displays many of the speed tricks typical of the era. To get the most out of the Flathead V8—left bone stock per the AAA, the race’s sanctioning body—the ’34 was streamlined and lightened by removing its fenders, running boards, bumpers, lights, windshield and more. The resulting iconic look has been imitated by hot rodders and abetted by SEMA members ever since.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Drew Hardin
Photo Courtesy Source Interlink Media Archives

 

Mines Field

SEMA News-May 2009-SEMA HeritageYears before Bill France Sr. organized stock car racing on Florida’s most famous beach, stock cars of a different sort went wheel to wheel on tracks around the country. The idea was to pit cars in showroom-floor tune—primarily Fords, as it turned out— against one another to demonstrate their performance chops for prospective buyers. Think of it as “win on Sunday, sell on Monday,” the early years.

One of those races, the Gilmore Gold Cup, was held in February 1934 on a 1.9-mile track at Mines Field in Los Angeles, an area that’s now part of the Los Angeles International Airport. Some 60,000–75,000 people turned out to watch the 250-mile event, which took four hours to finish. Stubby Stubblefield’s ’33 Ford roadster was declared the Gold Cup winner, with an average speed of 62.37 mph.

Another Mines Field entrant was this ’34 Ford roadster driven by Shorty Cantlon and sponsored by W. I. Tupman, then a downtown Los Angeles Ford dealer. We haven’t been able to dig up Shorty’s results, but his hot iron displays many of the speed tricks typical of the era. To get the most out of the Flathead V8—left bone stock per the AAA, the race’s sanctioning body—the ’34 was streamlined and lightened by removing its fenders, running boards, bumpers, lights, windshield and more. The resulting iconic look has been imitated by hot rodders and abetted by SEMA members ever since.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Drew Hardin
Photo Courtesy Source Interlink Media Archives

 

Mines Field

SEMA News-May 2009-SEMA HeritageYears before Bill France Sr. organized stock car racing on Florida’s most famous beach, stock cars of a different sort went wheel to wheel on tracks around the country. The idea was to pit cars in showroom-floor tune—primarily Fords, as it turned out— against one another to demonstrate their performance chops for prospective buyers. Think of it as “win on Sunday, sell on Monday,” the early years.

One of those races, the Gilmore Gold Cup, was held in February 1934 on a 1.9-mile track at Mines Field in Los Angeles, an area that’s now part of the Los Angeles International Airport. Some 60,000–75,000 people turned out to watch the 250-mile event, which took four hours to finish. Stubby Stubblefield’s ’33 Ford roadster was declared the Gold Cup winner, with an average speed of 62.37 mph.

Another Mines Field entrant was this ’34 Ford roadster driven by Shorty Cantlon and sponsored by W. I. Tupman, then a downtown Los Angeles Ford dealer. We haven’t been able to dig up Shorty’s results, but his hot iron displays many of the speed tricks typical of the era. To get the most out of the Flathead V8—left bone stock per the AAA, the race’s sanctioning body—the ’34 was streamlined and lightened by removing its fenders, running boards, bumpers, lights, windshield and more. The resulting iconic look has been imitated by hot rodders and abetted by SEMA members ever since.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Linda Spencer

 

New U.S. Government Regulation Impacts All Companies Importing Product into the United States

SEMA News-May-2009-International

Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders.

Importing product into the United States just became more complicated and costly due to a new U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulation. The Importer Security Filing (ISF), which is commonly known as the “10+2” initiative (because it requires importers to supply 10 pieces of data and shipping companies another two items), marks the first time importers are required to communicate with the CBP regarding incoming shipments.

All importers—from those bringing in one container a year to those importing products weekly—are equally liable under this new rule, which took effect January 26, 2009, and mandates that importers or their designated agents supply the required data electronically at a minimum of 24 hours before the products are loaded onto ships in the overseas port. Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders. The CBP is delaying enforcement for one year in order to allow companies time to implement compliant systems.

Information required includes 1) importer of record number; 2) consignee number; 3) seller (owner) name/address; 4) buyer (owner) name/address; 5) ship-to party; 6) manufacturer (supplier) name/address; 7) country of origin; 8) Commodity Harmonized Tariff Schedule number (must be submitted 24 hours prior to the product being loaded onto the ship); 9) container stuffing location; and 10) consolidator name/address.

The 10+2 initiative has been developed as part of CBP’s ongoing strategy to assess and identify high-risk shipments so as to prevent smuggling and ensure cargo safety and security.

In response to concerns raised by industry and lawmakers on Capitol Hill over the likely additional costs and delays importers would be subject to as a direct result of the rule and the fact that much is unknown as to whether importers will be able to supply the data in the timeframe required, the CBP agreed to keep the comment period open through the end of July 2009. SEMA, as part of a coalition of businesses, has called for a longer comment period to document compliance issues that arise as companies begin to meet the 10+2 requirements.

Because setting up a CBP-compliant electronic transmittal system is said to cost in the range of $25,000 (CBP estimate) for the initial setup charges, most small- and medium-size importers will find that the only feasible option is to pay a third party, such as a broker, to conduct the filing on their behalf. Brokers have been announcing fee increases to file the new data element requirements. The additional costs vary greatly, with the most often-heard estimates of $50–$200 per shipment.

Continual updating of the data submitted to the CBP is required. The ISF must be amended if there is a change or more accurate information becomes available before the goods enter the U.S. port, but after the initial filing, thus increasing the likely broker fees as well.

SEMA News-May 2009-International

Attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Most importers do not have access to the data in all 10 categories required for importers 24 hours in advance of loading containers onto vessels in foreign ports. Some of this information is uniquely known to various parties within the supply chain. Among the parties having sole information on one or more of the required data elements are manufacturers, suppliers, carriers, WDs and retailers, which typically fit into three groups, including those parties: 1) involved in the order and manufacture of goods; 2) involved in the preparation and arrangement of goods for shipment; and 3) involved in the shipment and customs clearance of goods from the foreign port to the United States.

The CBP acknowledges this and notes that importers might have particular difficulty complying with four of the required items during the 24 hours prior to ship loading, including manufacturer supplier, ship-to party, country of origin and commodity HTSUS number. Additionally, the CBP admits that there may be no data available at all during the 24 hours prior to lading for two additional items: container stuffing location and consolidator (stuffer) name/address. For the first group of items, the government agrees during the period of the interim rule for companies to submit partial information, which would need to be updated as information becomes available. For the last two items, the government extends the allowable reporting period up to 24 hours before the product arrives in the United States.

The complete and timely submittal of the importer data elements may be more problematic for shipments that are consolidated in containers. For such shipments, the supply chain is generally more complex and the importer has less control of the flow of goods and associated security filing information. The consolidator may be consolidating multiple shipments from one or more shippers in a container destined for one or more customers. It may be necessary for consolidators to advance their cutoff deadlines in order to ensure that the security filing data is provided by the shippers to the importers (or their designated agents) and is then transmitted to and accepted by CBP in advance of the 24-hour deadline.

While the CBP has said that it is delaying penalties for one year, it has provided itself with the legal wiggle room to impose them sooner based on “lack of effort” on the part of importers. Specifically, the interim rule notes that the CBP will “show restraint in enforcing the rule, taking into account difficulties that importers may face in complying with the rule, so long as importers are making satisfactory progress toward compliance and are making a good-faith effort to comply with the rule to the extent of their current ability.”

In addition, attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Additional information on 10+2 is available at www.sema.org/international or by contacting Linda Spencer at lindas@sema.org.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Linda Spencer

 

New U.S. Government Regulation Impacts All Companies Importing Product into the United States

SEMA News-May-2009-International

Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders.

Importing product into the United States just became more complicated and costly due to a new U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulation. The Importer Security Filing (ISF), which is commonly known as the “10+2” initiative (because it requires importers to supply 10 pieces of data and shipping companies another two items), marks the first time importers are required to communicate with the CBP regarding incoming shipments.

All importers—from those bringing in one container a year to those importing products weekly—are equally liable under this new rule, which took effect January 26, 2009, and mandates that importers or their designated agents supply the required data electronically at a minimum of 24 hours before the products are loaded onto ships in the overseas port. Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders. The CBP is delaying enforcement for one year in order to allow companies time to implement compliant systems.

Information required includes 1) importer of record number; 2) consignee number; 3) seller (owner) name/address; 4) buyer (owner) name/address; 5) ship-to party; 6) manufacturer (supplier) name/address; 7) country of origin; 8) Commodity Harmonized Tariff Schedule number (must be submitted 24 hours prior to the product being loaded onto the ship); 9) container stuffing location; and 10) consolidator name/address.

The 10+2 initiative has been developed as part of CBP’s ongoing strategy to assess and identify high-risk shipments so as to prevent smuggling and ensure cargo safety and security.

In response to concerns raised by industry and lawmakers on Capitol Hill over the likely additional costs and delays importers would be subject to as a direct result of the rule and the fact that much is unknown as to whether importers will be able to supply the data in the timeframe required, the CBP agreed to keep the comment period open through the end of July 2009. SEMA, as part of a coalition of businesses, has called for a longer comment period to document compliance issues that arise as companies begin to meet the 10+2 requirements.

Because setting up a CBP-compliant electronic transmittal system is said to cost in the range of $25,000 (CBP estimate) for the initial setup charges, most small- and medium-size importers will find that the only feasible option is to pay a third party, such as a broker, to conduct the filing on their behalf. Brokers have been announcing fee increases to file the new data element requirements. The additional costs vary greatly, with the most often-heard estimates of $50–$200 per shipment.

Continual updating of the data submitted to the CBP is required. The ISF must be amended if there is a change or more accurate information becomes available before the goods enter the U.S. port, but after the initial filing, thus increasing the likely broker fees as well.

SEMA News-May 2009-International

Attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Most importers do not have access to the data in all 10 categories required for importers 24 hours in advance of loading containers onto vessels in foreign ports. Some of this information is uniquely known to various parties within the supply chain. Among the parties having sole information on one or more of the required data elements are manufacturers, suppliers, carriers, WDs and retailers, which typically fit into three groups, including those parties: 1) involved in the order and manufacture of goods; 2) involved in the preparation and arrangement of goods for shipment; and 3) involved in the shipment and customs clearance of goods from the foreign port to the United States.

The CBP acknowledges this and notes that importers might have particular difficulty complying with four of the required items during the 24 hours prior to ship loading, including manufacturer supplier, ship-to party, country of origin and commodity HTSUS number. Additionally, the CBP admits that there may be no data available at all during the 24 hours prior to lading for two additional items: container stuffing location and consolidator (stuffer) name/address. For the first group of items, the government agrees during the period of the interim rule for companies to submit partial information, which would need to be updated as information becomes available. For the last two items, the government extends the allowable reporting period up to 24 hours before the product arrives in the United States.

The complete and timely submittal of the importer data elements may be more problematic for shipments that are consolidated in containers. For such shipments, the supply chain is generally more complex and the importer has less control of the flow of goods and associated security filing information. The consolidator may be consolidating multiple shipments from one or more shippers in a container destined for one or more customers. It may be necessary for consolidators to advance their cutoff deadlines in order to ensure that the security filing data is provided by the shippers to the importers (or their designated agents) and is then transmitted to and accepted by CBP in advance of the 24-hour deadline.

While the CBP has said that it is delaying penalties for one year, it has provided itself with the legal wiggle room to impose them sooner based on “lack of effort” on the part of importers. Specifically, the interim rule notes that the CBP will “show restraint in enforcing the rule, taking into account difficulties that importers may face in complying with the rule, so long as importers are making satisfactory progress toward compliance and are making a good-faith effort to comply with the rule to the extent of their current ability.”

In addition, attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Additional information on 10+2 is available at www.sema.org/international or by contacting Linda Spencer at lindas@sema.org.

Fri, 05/01/2009 - 14:55

SEMA News - May 2009

By Linda Spencer

 

New U.S. Government Regulation Impacts All Companies Importing Product into the United States

SEMA News-May-2009-International

Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders.

Importing product into the United States just became more complicated and costly due to a new U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulation. The Importer Security Filing (ISF), which is commonly known as the “10+2” initiative (because it requires importers to supply 10 pieces of data and shipping companies another two items), marks the first time importers are required to communicate with the CBP regarding incoming shipments.

All importers—from those bringing in one container a year to those importing products weekly—are equally liable under this new rule, which took effect January 26, 2009, and mandates that importers or their designated agents supply the required data electronically at a minimum of 24 hours before the products are loaded onto ships in the overseas port. Penalties for incomplete or non-compliance are steep—$5,000 per incident as well as possible no-load orders. The CBP is delaying enforcement for one year in order to allow companies time to implement compliant systems.

Information required includes 1) importer of record number; 2) consignee number; 3) seller (owner) name/address; 4) buyer (owner) name/address; 5) ship-to party; 6) manufacturer (supplier) name/address; 7) country of origin; 8) Commodity Harmonized Tariff Schedule number (must be submitted 24 hours prior to the product being loaded onto the ship); 9) container stuffing location; and 10) consolidator name/address.

The 10+2 initiative has been developed as part of CBP’s ongoing strategy to assess and identify high-risk shipments so as to prevent smuggling and ensure cargo safety and security.

In response to concerns raised by industry and lawmakers on Capitol Hill over the likely additional costs and delays importers would be subject to as a direct result of the rule and the fact that much is unknown as to whether importers will be able to supply the data in the timeframe required, the CBP agreed to keep the comment period open through the end of July 2009. SEMA, as part of a coalition of businesses, has called for a longer comment period to document compliance issues that arise as companies begin to meet the 10+2 requirements.

Because setting up a CBP-compliant electronic transmittal system is said to cost in the range of $25,000 (CBP estimate) for the initial setup charges, most small- and medium-size importers will find that the only feasible option is to pay a third party, such as a broker, to conduct the filing on their behalf. Brokers have been announcing fee increases to file the new data element requirements. The additional costs vary greatly, with the most often-heard estimates of $50–$200 per shipment.

Continual updating of the data submitted to the CBP is required. The ISF must be amended if there is a change or more accurate information becomes available before the goods enter the U.S. port, but after the initial filing, thus increasing the likely broker fees as well.

SEMA News-May 2009-International

Attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Most importers do not have access to the data in all 10 categories required for importers 24 hours in advance of loading containers onto vessels in foreign ports. Some of this information is uniquely known to various parties within the supply chain. Among the parties having sole information on one or more of the required data elements are manufacturers, suppliers, carriers, WDs and retailers, which typically fit into three groups, including those parties: 1) involved in the order and manufacture of goods; 2) involved in the preparation and arrangement of goods for shipment; and 3) involved in the shipment and customs clearance of goods from the foreign port to the United States.

The CBP acknowledges this and notes that importers might have particular difficulty complying with four of the required items during the 24 hours prior to ship loading, including manufacturer supplier, ship-to party, country of origin and commodity HTSUS number. Additionally, the CBP admits that there may be no data available at all during the 24 hours prior to lading for two additional items: container stuffing location and consolidator (stuffer) name/address. For the first group of items, the government agrees during the period of the interim rule for companies to submit partial information, which would need to be updated as information becomes available. For the last two items, the government extends the allowable reporting period up to 24 hours before the product arrives in the United States.

The complete and timely submittal of the importer data elements may be more problematic for shipments that are consolidated in containers. For such shipments, the supply chain is generally more complex and the importer has less control of the flow of goods and associated security filing information. The consolidator may be consolidating multiple shipments from one or more shippers in a container destined for one or more customers. It may be necessary for consolidators to advance their cutoff deadlines in order to ensure that the security filing data is provided by the shippers to the importers (or their designated agents) and is then transmitted to and accepted by CBP in advance of the 24-hour deadline.

While the CBP has said that it is delaying penalties for one year, it has provided itself with the legal wiggle room to impose them sooner based on “lack of effort” on the part of importers. Specifically, the interim rule notes that the CBP will “show restraint in enforcing the rule, taking into account difficulties that importers may face in complying with the rule, so long as importers are making satisfactory progress toward compliance and are making a good-faith effort to comply with the rule to the extent of their current ability.”

In addition, attempting compliance at this stage allows the input of SEMA members into the difficulties and costs incurred in complying with this program during the open-comment period.

Additional information on 10+2 is available at www.sema.org/international or by contacting Linda Spencer at lindas@sema.org.