Why You Should Comment on the CPSC Certificate of Compliance Filings at Entry
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.17.14
On September 18th, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) held a public workshop on its proposed rule on Certificates of Compliance (certificates). The proposed rule, first published on May 13, 2013, requires certificates for regulated imported consumer products to be electronically filed with U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) at the time of entry. The proposed changes to the certificates were summarized in a May 15th Crowell news alert.
The workshop focused on logistical, operational and administrative concerns raised by importers and other stakeholders with requiring the certificates at the time of entry for each and every shipment. Currently, certificates are required to "accompany" the shipment either physically with the goods or be electronically available and provided to the CPSC upon request. By altering the requirement such that the certificate must be provided with the goods results in exponential duplicative submissions and slowing down the administrative entry process. In consideration of the numerous comments received by the CPSC, several CPSC staff members introduced the idea of a pilot program with CBP and importers to better understand the technical and logistical challenges the proposed rule in its current state would impose. Staff members indicated that the parameters of the pilot program were currently in development.
As importers know, certificates and other government entry documents can only be uploaded as pdfs in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). As several stakeholders noted during the workshop, a single entry could contain several regulated products and each product could have several individual item numbers or multiple production batches, with each item number and/or production batch requiring a separate certificate. The resulting impact could be a single entry requiring hundreds of certificates so that even the simple task of uploading the pdfs of each certificate would create substantial delays and increase costs. Other issues raised by stakeholders included: requiring the certificates as a "condition" of entry under 19 U.S.C. §1509(a)(1)(A); requiring certificates to be submitted by the importer of record, regardless of the importer of record's relationship with the goods or sales transaction; and the proposed penalties associated with the provision or nonprovision of the certificates.
Interested parties can and should submit written comments through October 31, 2014, docket number CPSC-2013-0017.
Crowell & Moring attorneys have handled numerous cases in this regard.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 07.09.26
EU Steel Overcapacity Regulation: New Permanent Measure in Force from 1 July 2026
The EU’s steel safeguard under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/159 expired on 30 June 2026 and has been replaced by a new permanent instrument — the EU Steel Overcapacity Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2026/1384) (the Regulation”). It imposes tariff-rate quotas and an out-of-quota duty, similarly to the steel safeguard measures that expired. The out-of-quota duty has been raised from 25% to 50% to minimize the risk of trade diversion. The Regulation reduces duty-free imports of 26 categories of steel products into the EU by an average of 47% compared with the quotas under the until recently applicable safeguard measures.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 07.09.26
Made in the USA? Prove It: FTC Marks America's 250th with Crack Down on Domestic Origin Claims
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.09.26
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.08.26
CAS Board Publishes Final Rule Rescinding CAS 404, 408, 409, and 4117

