(a) Minimum amount of bond. The amount of any CBP bond must not be less than $100, except when the law or regulation expressly provides that a lesser amount may be taken. Fractional parts of a dollar will be disregarded in computing the amount of a bond. The bond always will be stated as the next highest dollar.
(b) Guidelines for determining amount of bond. In determining whether the amount of a bond is sufficient, CBP will consider:
(1) The prior record of the principal in timely payment of duties, taxes, and charges with respect to the transaction(s) involving such payments;
(2) The prior record of the principal in complying with CBP demands for redelivery, the obligation to hold unexamined merchandise intact, and other requirements relating to enforcement and administration of customs and other laws and CBP regulations;
(3) The value and nature of the merchandise involved in the transaction(s) to be secured;
(4) The degree and type of supervision that CBP will exercise over the transaction(s);
(5) The prior record of the principal in honoring bond commitments, including the payment of liquidated damages; and
(6) Any additional information contained in any application for a bond.
(c) Periodic review of bond sufficiency. CBP will periodically review each bond on file to determine whether the bond is adequate to protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations. If CBP determines that a bond is inadequate, the principal and surety will be promptly notified in writing. The principal will have 15 days from the date of notification to remedy the deficiency. Notwithstanding the foregoing, where CBP determines that a bond is insufficient to adequately protect the revenue and ensure compliance with applicable law and regulations, CBP may provide written notice to the principal and surety that, upon receipt thereof, additional security in the form of cash deposit or single transaction bond may be required for any and all of the principal's transactions until the deficiency is remedied.
(d) Additional security. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section or any other provision of this chapter, if CBP believes that acceptance of a transaction secured by a continuous bond would place the revenue in jeopardy or otherwise hamper the enforcement of all applicable laws or regulations, CBP may immediately require additional security.
[T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41171, Oct. 19, 1984, as amended by CBP Dec. 15-15, 80 FR 70163, Nov. 13, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Harmoni Int'l Spice, Inc. v. United States, 211 F. Supp. 3d 1298 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).
· cites it 5× “Defendant counters that CBP has broad statutory and regulatory authority and significant discretion to protect the revenue of the United States by requiring enhanced bonding.”
Info. Sciences Corp. v. United States, 85 Fed. Cl. 195 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 3× “The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, however, has issued a ruling governing the disposition of Count I.”
United States v. Rigel Ships Agencies, Inc., 432 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2005).
· cites it 2× “19 C.F.R. § 113.13 (a), (b)(3), (5). Thus, a vessel owner moving a less valuable cargo would likely not be required to post the same bond amount as a larger business regularly moving very valuable cargo.”
Seafood Exporters Ass'n of India v. United States, 479 F. Supp. 2d 1367 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).
· cites it 6× “The Notice stated that Customs would consider this information along with the factors identified in the applicable Customs regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 113.13 (b), in determining a new bond requirement.”
Fedmet Resources Corp. v. United States, 2015 CIT 69 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).
· cites it 5× “(citing 19 C.F.R. § 113.13 (d)), and the authority to review and reject entries is also exercised by the port, id.”
United States v. Washington Int'l Ins., 177 F. Supp. 2d 1313 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).
· cites it 2× “As explained by WIIC, “[t]he surety is compensated to assume reasonable and ascertainable risks, but those risks are controlled in large part by the penal amount of the bond, plus any controlling requirements.” Def.’s Br.”
Kwo Lee, Inc. v. United States, 2015 CIT 56 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).
· cites it 4× “” 19 C.F.R. § 113.13 (d). Because “the statute is silent on the specific method,” and “expressly delegate[s] broad authority to Customs to prescribe all regulations necessary,” these resultant regulations are entitled to “controlling weight,” Chrysler Corp.”
Kwo Lee, Inc. v. United States, 24 F. Supp. 3d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).
“11 This includes 19 C.F.R. § 113.13 (d) (2014) under which Customs makes enhanced bonding determinations.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 113.13(b) — 1 case
Info. Sciences Corp. v. United States, 85 Fed. Cl. 195 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, however, has issued a ruling governing the disposition of Count I.”
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.