Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
If you've been thinking of Customs' proposed importer Security Filing (ISF) rule as just another post-9/11 exercise in information gathering, think again.
On the face of it, the proposed rule—popularly known as "10 + 2" because it requires 10 data sets from importers and two additional sets from ocean carriers—is indeed about collecting information for security purposes. When it issued the proposal, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said its aim was to learn more about imports and their origins, intermediate stops, and final destinations in order to screen cargo for security risks.
But data collection may be just the tip of the regulatory iceberg. Although the final rule has not yet been issued, most observers agree that 10 + 2 will lead to big changes in importers' day-to-day operations as well as their supply chain relationships.Here's a look at what may lie ahead, and what you can do now to be ready when the rule does take effect.
What? You should be worried
Although the trade community fully supports CBP's efforts to improve security, some aspects of 10 + 2 are making people nervous. In fact, CBP received some 500 comments after its proposal was published.
how it all adds up
Under the proposed "10 + 2" rule, importers would have to electronically file information along with the bill of lading number at least 24 hours before their cargo is loaded on board a ship. Carriers would have to file container status reports daily and stow plans no later than 48 hours after departure from the last foreign port.
Importers would be required to provide the following information:
1. Manufacturer or supplier name and address
2. Seller name and address
3. Buyer name and address
4. Ship-to name and address
5. Container stuffing location name and address
6. Consolidator name and address
7. Importer of record number/foreign trade zone applicant identification number
8. Consignee number(s)
9. Country of origin
10. Commodity classification number to at least six digits under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
Carriers would be required to provide the following data:
1. Vessel stow plan
2. Container status messages
The complete Notice of Proposed Rulemaking can be found here (pdf).
What is everyone worried about? The data elements (see sidebar) are nothing unusual, and the process itself seems relatively straightforward: Importers will be required to collect the information, format it in whatever way CBP eventually specifies, and transmit it at least 24 hours before cargo is loaded on board a vessel. (Carriers have different deadlines.)
That may sound simple, but the commercial realities of international trade will make it difficult to achieve—and that's what has people worried. One problem is that different parties in a supply chain "own" the required information, and they're not always willing to share what they consider to be confidential, says Melissa Irmen, vice president of products and strategy for Integration Point, a company that provides global trade management (GTM) systems. For example, suppliers may not want to reveal the names of subcontracted manufacturers.
Timing is also an issue. Importers provide some information to CBP when goods arrive in the United States and send the rest 10 days later. Once the rule goes into effect, they will have to submit some of that same information— and some data they've never had to provide before—weeks before the goods arrive in the United States, Irmen notes.
Another complication: CBP will require the manufacturer's or supplier's name and address, country of origin, and tariff classification to be linked for each commodity at the line-item level. That will be a special challenge for the many companies that routinely classify or resell products while they're en route, says Philip J. Sutter, vice president of import compliance at JPMorgan Chase. "What will happen when you make a sale while the shipment is on the water, and the shipment is broken up and sold to five different parties? ... How do you show that and track it? How do you modify the ISF?"
Arthur Litman, who was formerly vice president of regulatory affairs and compliance for FedEx Trade Networks and now heads his own consulting firm, Customs Advice, is concerned that the tidal wave of additional data might overwhelm CBP's information systems. The agency's new Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system is still under development, and the existing systems are already overburdened, he said at the Coalition of New England Companies for Trade (CONECT) Northeast Trade and Transportation Conference in March. It's likely that "a system that is on its last legs is going to have to support 10 + 2."
At the conference, Litman raised a number of other questions that Customs has yet to address, including the following: Will CBP compare the Importer Security Filing to its related entry filing? Why may importers batch-file entry summaries but must submit a separate ISF for each shipment? And why does CBP plan to acknowledge receipt but not indicate approval or provide a unique identifier so importers can track and amend their submissions?
Many people question why the rule does not consider importers' involvement in existing security programs. "What about parties participating in C-TPAT (the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism)?" asks Sutter. "They're already tasked with ensuring the security of their supply chains. As of right now, they will be treated like everyone else."
Officials are taking the trade community's questions and comments seriously."There will be some adjustments based on the comments. ... Some of them, frankly, brought up things we had not considered," said Richard DiNucci, director of security filing in CBP's Secure Freight Initiative Office, at the CONECT conference.
Get the ball rolling
Though it's likely to be months before the final rule is in place, the experts consulted for this article say there is still much that importers can do to get the compliance ball rolling. Among their recommendations:
Learn more about your sources. Compliance with 10 + 2 will require more knowledge about what happens at the point of origin than many importers currently have, says Nathan Pieri, senior vice president of marketing and product management at Management Dynamics, a provider of GTM systems. If you aren't fully familiar with your supply and manufacturing base, this is a good time to verify that the information you have is current, he says. Even if you buy from overseas distributors, find out what you can about the chain of custody prior to the point where you take control.
Classify products as early as possible and share the information with your supply chain partners. Including the classification on the purchase order is an effective way to accomplish that. (To read about one importer that's using this strategy, see "central command," below.) One of the most helpful steps you can take is to establish a classification database that trusted brokers, forwarders, and suppliers can access, says Sutter. The aim is to assure accurate, consistent data throughout every import transaction.
Think about who should submit 10 + 2 data. If the required information resides with different parties—parties who may or may not be willing to share it with you—will you be comfortable if they submit it, perhaps to a neutral third party? Irmen says her customers are divided into three camps: Some want total control, some want suppliers to submit data under their supervision, and others are willing to leave it entirely up to their suppliers. To accommodate different scenarios, GTM systems providers are developing tools that will collect transmissions from disparate sources and combine the data into a single ISF submission.
Reconsider your terms of sale. If you're buying under Incoterms that leave control in suppliers' hands, you could have trouble getting data on transactions that fall outside of your contractual responsibility, says Pieri. Under DDP (Delivered Duty Paid), for example, the seller controls every step right through customs clearance and duty payment, yet the U.S. importer will be held responsible for information it may never have been privy to. "That's the kind of situation that might cause a decision to change relationships or let someone else be responsible," Pieri says. For example, some large importers might shift to FOB (Free On Board) terms to gain more control and visibility, while smaller ones might buy through distributors rather than be the importer of record.
Strengthen relationships with supply chain partners. Importers will be asking overseas agents, suppliers, and freight forwarders to provide more information than ever before, points out Wayne Slossberg, vice president of GTM provider QuestaWeb. Nobody enjoys added burdens, but they will have to be service-oriented and cooperative if they want to maintain their status as preferred vendors, he says. Be sensitive to the fact that the proposed rule will change your partners' business processes, too. For example, customs brokers primarily are involved with events at the destination, but most of the 10 + 2 information relates to the point of origin. As a result, they may need to forge closer relationships with freight forwarders and logistics service providers at the point of origin, Pieri says.
Clarify and formalize changing responsibilities. Some companies include broad enough wording in their supplier contracts to cover almost any additional responsibilities that may arise, Sutter says. But not all contracts are written in such a way. If your contracts don't allow for such contingencies, add them in and specify what happens if someone fails to perform his or her new duties properly.
Take advantage of technology. The complexity of CBP's requirements and the fact that submissions must be in an as-yet-undetermined electronic format mean that it will be "almost impossible" to comply without an assist from technology, Slossberg says.
Web-based solutions will make it feasible for different parties to populate the data fields while maintaining control over who can access what information and who has rights to modify it. The GTM vendors consulted for this article agree that any solution should be able to repurpose the data for both the ISF and the entry. For the systems to provide optimal control over information, they should provide visibility from the initial purchase order (PO) to final delivery. "If everything flows from a central point and if you have a good process for your POs, then everything does fall into place," Pieri says.
Still unclear is how well the pieces of this puzzle will fit together. Just how the importer's data will marry up electronically with the carrier's information is a burning question. Irmen also notes that many importers have no idea which information their suppliers handle manually and which is completely electronic. She recommends finding out how they currently handle the data you'll need for 10 + 2.And if you plan to have suppliers—especially those in developing countries—enter ISF data directly, verify that they have the necessary security safeguards, computing power, and process management standards in place.
Start now
Compliance with 10 + 2 will be a challenge for just about every company. Large importers might have an easier time of it than their smaller counterparts because they usually have established procedural hierarchies, considerable internal resources, and plenty of clout with their suppliers. The downside, Irmen says, is that they have so many suppliers to deal with.
Small importers, on the other hand, are unlikely to have much leverage with suppliers. They face the same compliance challenges as bigger companies, but most will need extra help, perhaps in the form of a third party to gather and submit the data. Or they may need simpler, more affordable versions of GTM solutions than are currently on the market—something GTM vendors are working on right now, Slossberg says.
Although the nitty-gritty details of the final rule won't be revealed for many months, experts say it's time to act on what we know so far. As Litman urged the audience at his CONECT conference session, "Every one of us has to stop thinking about 'what if ' and start thinking about 'how.'"
central command
It's a good thing John Wainwright is a bit of a control freak. Because of that, Wainwright, who is the vice president of customs compliance for Leggett & Platt Inc., can be fairly certain that his company is ahead of the curve when it comes to compliance with the proposed Importer Security Filing, better known as the "10 + 2" rule.
A few years back, Leggett & Platt, a manufacturer of furniture and bedding parts, store display shelves, and a variety of other items, installed a global trade management (GTM) system from Management Dynamics and tightened controls over its import procedures. "Little did we know back then that we were putting in place a lot of what we'll need for 10 + 2," Wainwright says.
At the center of Leggett's compliance strategy is a tight relationship between international trade and purchasing. In fact, Wainwright's Global Services Group reports to purchasing. "If Customs comes in for an audit, they won't be asking for the entry data," he says. "They'll be looking for the purchase order, the invoice, what you paid, and the receipt so they can compare it to the entry."
That's why Leggett incorporates customs information for each line item into its purchase orders. "A purchase order can't even be given to a supplier until all the data is there, including the classification," Wainwright says. "In fact, everything is classified before it's even ordered."
As it turns out, much of the data on the purchase orders (POs) will be needed for the Importer Security Filing. Examples include the seller's address, the importer's identification number, and the 10-digit Harmonized Tariff System classification (though 10 + 2 will only require six digits).
Holding all the compliance cards in one hand ensures that customs authorities here and abroad receive accurate— and consistent—information. "All the suppliers can do is tell us what they are shipping against a PO," says Wainwright. "It's the one thing that gives me confidence. More hands tend to make more mistakes."
Although there's still more work to do, Wainwright says he's being cautious about how much time and money he'll invest before he knows for sure "what's coming and when it's coming." Customs could still revise its requirements, he points out. "The ... final [rule] may not be what we're looking at right now."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."