美国海关需要伙伴

一直以来,美国海关都面临着行政资源紧缺的压力。特别是在“9・11”之后,美国海关除了传统的职能,比如贸易管制、征税、贸易便利化等,还增加了保障国家安全的任务,压力越来越大。这促使美国海关转而寻求私人部门的帮助。美国海关为此在成文法和实践方面进行了诸多尝试。

在美国,直到上世纪90年代中期,都只有极少数进口商受到稽查。而且这些稽查往往与美国海关执行相关调查时同步进行,或者是应进口商事先披露(PD)的要求,进行验证稽查。随着进口量的大幅增加,美国海关在寻求一个彻底的转变,其核心是“海关现代化和知悉合规法案”。美国海关宣布与进口团体建立合作伙伴关系,并声明责任共担。进口商必须符合“知悉合规”和“合理注意”这两个标准,而美国海关应告知进口商他们所承担的责任。

稽查改革的第一步建立合规评估小组(CAT)。CAT项目促使进口商开始主动进行内部审计,但该项目依然受到美国海关资源紧缺的约束。接下来自愿实行的进口商合规监控计划(ICMP)也面临同样挑战。而且进口商普遍认为这一项目并没有带来任何特别利益。于是,CAT和ICMP项目被叫停。

之后美国海关推出了集中评估(FA)审计项目。FA的特点在于对控制环境的关注。美国海关将重点放在初步审查阶段,即所谓的预评估调查(PAS),同时美国海关还强调控制因素以及一些样本。在预评估调查中,美国海关会设置一些基本的问题。FA数据库中包含各种测试领域中的典型案例,从而美国海关的审查十分清晰,并且具有很强的针对性。在预审阶段发现的问题将在下个阶段――评估合规测试(ACT)中继续跟踪。如果在评估合规测试阶段发现问题还需要进一步深入分析,海关会通知进口商,进入合规改善计划(CIP)。

即使通过FA项目缩小了审查范围,但美国海关仍面临着内部资源不足的挑战。因而作为美国海关与进口商合作的一部分,进口商自我评估(ISA)提上日程。在进口商自我评估中,进口商必须建立内部控制机制,进行年度测试,并将结果报告给美国海关。作为交换,美国海关将进口商排除在稽查范围之外,并给予“加分”,当进口商违反海关法应被处罚时,这可以作为减轻处罚的依据。

CBP Needs a Partner: Customs Compliance

The U.S. CBP has been facing the constant strain: trade growth with constrained resources. This strain becomes more severe when national security added to CBP post 9/11. It have driven CBP to look for some help from the private sector. This column points to examples of resource constraints driving the law and regulations in the statutes and practice governing customs compliance.

Until the mid-1990s, only a very few importers were subjected to audits. With the ramped-up increase in import volumes, CBP looked to a radical shift. The centerpiece of this effort was the Customs Modernization and Informed Compliance Act. CBP announced a partnership with the import community and spoke about a sharing of responsibility. Importers have to meet the twin standards of “informed compliance” and “reasonable care”. CBP was to inform the importer of importers’ responsibilities.

CAT(Compliance Assessment Team) was CBP’s first thrust into the audit game post-Mod Act. CAT program spurred importers to take the initiative and begin their internal audits, but led to another problem: CBP’s resource constraints. Then CBP met this challenge with the voluntary ICMP(Importer Compliance Monitoring Program). And importers pervasively felt that this program did not bring any special benefits. Then CAT and ICMP were stopped.

CBP introduced the FA(Focused Assessment) audit program. The new with FA was the attention on the control environment. CBP focus in the initial review phase, called pre-assessment survey(PAS), on the controls as well as on some sampling. In the PAS, CBP would pose some fundamental questions. The FA Kit contained examples of red flags for the various tested areas, so there was clear, upfront visibility of the bullet points that CBP would follow. Problem areas uncovered in the PAS would then be pursued in a follow-on phase, the Assess Compliance Testing(ACT). If the drill-down in the ACT phase revealed the need for improvements, the importer would be called on to propose and then act on Compliance Improvement Plan(CIP).

Even with its narrowed focus under FA, the adequacy of internal resources was still a challenge for CBP. Then ISA(Importer Self Assessment) was billed as a partnership between the trade community and CBP. Under ISA, the importer must have internal controls in place and undertake annual testing and report the results to CBP. In exchange, CBP was to take the importer out of the audit pool and to credit the importers with “extra points” as mitigating factors in the context of the levy of penalties in the event of violations of the customs laws.

来源:Journal of International Taxation; Jul 2007

作者 : Mark K Neville加利福尼亚大学伯克利分校哈斯商学院副教授,是海关与贸易杂志的通讯记者和顾问委员会成员。