The appropriate CBP officer may initiate proceedings for the suspension, for a specific period of time, or revocation of the license or permit of any broker for any of the following reasons:
(a) The broker has made or caused to be made in any application for any license or permit under this part, or report filed with CBP, any statement which was, at the time and in light of the circumstances under which it was made, false or misleading with respect to any material fact, or has omitted to state in any application or report any material fact which was required;
(b) The broker has been convicted, at any time after the filing of an application for a license under § 111.12, of any felony or misdemeanor which:
(1) Involved the importation or exportation of merchandise;
(2) Arose out of the conduct of customs business; or
(3) Involved larceny, theft, robbery, extortion, forgery, counterfeiting, fraudulent concealment, embezzlement, fraudulent conversion, or misappropriation of funds;
(c) The broker has violated any provision of any law enforced by CBP or the rules or regulations issued under any provision of any law enforced by CBP;
(d) The broker has counseled, commanded, induced, procured, or knowingly aided or abetted the violations by any other person of any provision of any law enforced by CBP or the rules or regulations issued under any provision of any law enforced by CBP;
(e) The broker has knowingly employed, or continues to employ, any person who has been convicted of a felony, without written approval of that employment from the appropriate Executive Director, Office of Trade,;
(f) The broker has, in the course of customs business, with intent to defraud, in any manner willfully and knowingly deceived, misled or threatened any client or prospective client;
(g) The broker has been convicted of committing or conspiring to commit an act of terrorism as described in section 2332b of title 18, United States Code; or
(h) The broker no longer meets the applicable requirements of §§ 111.11 and 111.19.
[T.D. 00-17, 65 FR 13891, Mar. 15, 2000, as amended by CBP Dec. 22-21, 87 FR 63319, Oct. 18, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Byung Wu Lee v. United States, 329 F.3d 817 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
· cites it 4× “The main charge was violation of 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 (c), which provided for revocation of a broker’s license when the “broker has violated any provision of law enforced by Customs or the rules or regulations issued under any such provision.”
Urbano v. United States, 967 F. Supp. 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).
· cites it 7× “1 The report recommended the district director revoke plaintiffs customs broker’s license pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 (c),(f) 2 based on plaintiffs failure to comply with numerous regulations establishing procedures for record-keeping and conducting a business.”
Lee v. United States, 196 F. Supp. 2d 1351 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).
· cites it 6× “The Commissioner of Customs approved the initiation of those proceedings on December 7, 1995, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 (c), which authorizes license suspension or revocation proceedings where a broker has “violated any provision of any law enforced by Customs or the rules…”
Delgado v. United States, 536 F. Supp. 2d 1328 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).
· cites it 11× “Delgado was being charged with violating (1) 19 C.F.R. §§ 111.53 (c) and 111.32 (violating Customs law or regulation by filing false documentation); (2) 19 C.”
Barnhart v. United States Treasury Dep't, 613 F. Supp. 370 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1985).
· cites it 2× “This was accomplished by the promulgation of 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 , which encompasses the improper conduct specified in Part III of the regulations and places the brokerage community on notice as to the types of conduct prohibited.”
Boynton v. United States, 517 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).
· cites it 3× “” 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 (c). See also, 19 U.S.”
Delgado v. United States, 491 F. Supp. 2d 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).
· cites it 4× “The Statement of Charges informed Delgado that his License might be revoked pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 111.53 (c) & 111.32 (violating Customs law or regulation by filing false documentation), 19 C.”
Fusco v. United States Treasury Dep't, 695 F. Supp. 1189 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).
· cites it 2× “Additionally, the freight forwarder exception merely allows compensation for services; it does not condone the actual practice of Customs business by an unlicensed person.”
Shiepe v. United States, 36 F. Supp. 2d 402 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).
· cites it 4× “32 , prohibiting a broker from filing, procuring or assisting in the filing of any claim, or of any document, affidavit, or other papers, known by such broker to be false and knowingly giving, soliciting or procuring the giving of any false or misleading information in matters…”
United States v. Puentes, 2017 CIT 33 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).
“91 (stating that monetary penalty may not “exceed an aggregate of $30,000 for one or more of the reasons set forth in [ 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 ] (a) through (f) ...”).”
Boynton v. United States, 536 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).
· cites it 2× “” 19 C.F.R. § 111.53 (c). See also, 19 U.S.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 111.53(b)(1) — 1 case
Delgado v. United States, 491 F. Supp. 2d 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).
“The Statement of Charges informed Delgado that his License might be revoked pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 111.53 (c) & 111.32 (violating Customs law or regulation by filing false documentation), 19 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.