(a) Acceptance as surety when in default as principal on another CBP bond. No person will be accepted as surety on any CBP bond while in default as principal on any other CBP bond.
(b) Acceptance as surety when in default as surety on another CBP bond. A surety on a CBP bond which is in default may be accepted as surety on other CBP bonds only to the extent that the surety assets are unencumbered by the default.
(c)(1) Nonacceptance of single transaction bond by port director. A port director may refuse to accept a single transaction bond secured by an individual or corporate surety when the surety, without just cause, is significantly delinquent either in the number of outstanding bills or dollar amounts thereof. If the port director believes that a substantial question of law exists as to whether a breach of bond obligation has occurred he should request internal advice under the provisions of § 177.11 from the Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, CBP Headquarters.
(2) Non-acceptance of bond upon instruction by Commissioner of CBP orDirector, Revenue Division. The Commissioner of CBP, or the Director, Revenue Division, may issue instructions to CBP officers not to accept a bond secured by an individual or corporate surety who, without just cause, is significantly delinquent with respect to either the number or dollar amounts of outstanding bills.
(3) Notice of surety. The appropriate CBP officer may take the above actions only after the surety has been provided reasonable notice with an opportunity to pay delinquent amounts, provide justification for the failure to pay, or demonstrate the existence of a significant legal issue justifying further delay in payment.
(4) Review and final decision. After a review of any submission made by a surety under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, if an appropriate CBP officer is still of the opinion that bonds secured by the surety should not be accepted, written notice of the decision will be provided to the surety at least five days before the date that CBP will no longer accept the bonds of the surety. Copies of the notice will also be provided to the Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade and, if the notice does not originate from the Revenue Director, to the Director, Revenue Director. Notice will be given to the public by publishing the decision in the Customs Bulletin.
(5) Duration of decision. Any decision not to accept a given surety's bond shall remain in effect for a minimum of five days or until all outstanding delinquencies are resolved, whichever is later.
(6) Actions consistent with requirements. Any action not to accept the bonds of a surety under paragraphs (c) (1) and (2) of this section shall be consistent with the requirements of this section.
[T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41171, Oct. 19, 1984, as amended by T.D. 91-77, 56 FR 46115, Sept. 10, 1991; T.D. 95-77, 60 FR 50020, Sept. 27, 1995; T.D. 99-27, 64 FR 13675, Mar. 22, 1999; T.D. 99-64, 64 FR 43266, Aug. 10, 1999; CBP Dec. 15-15, 80 FR 70166, Nov. 13, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Am. Motorists Ins. v. Villanueva, 706 F. Supp. 923 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).
· cites it 32× “(1982) to write bonds, moves for injunctive relief against enforcement of 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 . Defendants oppose and cross-move to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may he granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5) of the Rules of this Court.”
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1435 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).
· cites it 6× “, filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 , violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
Am. Motorists Ins. v. United States, 737 F. Supp. 648 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).
· cites it 2× “In seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent Customs from refusing to accept new bonds from it, the surety essentially argued that it had not received sufficient notice under 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 (c)(4) (requiring that a surety be provided notice of delinquency and opportunity…”
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 951 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).
· cites it 6× “Intercargo filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 (1994), violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 936 F. Supp. 1049 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).
· cites it 6× “In-tercargo filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 (1994), violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
United States v. Sentry Ins., 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 1073 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).
“Thereafter, on June 7,1988, pursuantto 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 (c)(4) (1988), Customs notified Sentry that: (1) liquidation of the entry had occurred; (2) $1,005,258.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 113.38(c) — 1 case
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1435 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).
“, filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 , violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 113.38(c)(4) — 3 cases
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1435 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).
“, filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 , violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
Am. Motorists Ins. v. Villanueva, 706 F. Supp. 923 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).
“(1982) to write bonds, moves for injunctive relief against enforcement of 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 . Defendants oppose and cross-move to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may he granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5) of the Rules of this Court.”
Intercargo Ins. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 951 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).
“Intercargo filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, the United States Customs Service regulation regarding delinquent sureties, 19 C.F.R. § 113.38 (1994), violates due process and is subject to the statute of limitations.”
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.