[Cindy’s Version]: I Can Do It With A Broken Heart

Machine Operated Script:

Cindy Allen Cindy, Hello. Today is September 12, 2025 I’m Cindy Allen, CEO of trade force multiplier, which is an international trade consulting firm. Welcome to simply trade Cindy’s version, where I take a Taylor Swift song and base an international trade update on it. So today I can do it with a broken heart from Taylor’s tortured poets department album. Yesterday was the 24th anniversary of 911 so I’ll go into that detail a little bit later. As far as trade goes, today was kind of a quiet week on the trade front, but it is trade action Friday, so don’t fret. There may be something coming out later this afternoon. This week, we heard that the IEEPA court case, which is the reciprocal tariffs that were challenged by several states and a few companies in the international trade court and then the appeals court, we did hear that the Supreme Court is has accepted, and they will likely hear the IEEPA challenge in November. Treasury Secretary Bessette did indicate that if the government is unsuccessful in their appeal, that the duty will be refunded. He did outline what a what an impact that would have on the Treasury and the deficit of the United States, and he did not give any details about how that duty would be refunded, but we can expect, based on his comments, that if the government is unsuccessful in their appeal, that importers will get refunds in some way, shape or form. There has also been discussion this week about legislation to address the duty and to legislate the additional increases in duty during using normal methods of duty assessment. However, no drafts have been introduced. We haven’t seen any text that could possibly be discussed. So we do know this is very preliminary discussions, and we do think it is in response to the decision of the lower court and now going into the supreme court because legislation is so difficult and timely to pass, it does take a lot of time to get language through both houses of Congress and signed by the President. In the meantime, there is section 122 which does allow the administration to assess up to 15% duty for six months that may be used as a bridge to to address the duty rates between any court decision and eventually what will happen in in so the fight is not over. We do expect duty to be assessed on an ongoing basis, just in some different way, shape or form. And it’s important to note that these court cases only involve IEEPA. They only involve IEEPA reciprocals. Section 232, section 301, duties and some of the fentanyl duties have not been challenged by this court case. So we’re only talking about somewhere between 40 and 50% of the duty paid, and that’s broadly what I’ve been seeing reported in the press as the duty assessments under IEEPA reciprocal. So it’s not all of the duty, and if you are in one of the targeted or affected industries under Section 232, you’re still going to owe duty, and you will not be getting a refund of those duties. Those 232, and 301, actions are pretty clear that the President has the authority to utilize those so we don’t see a positive outcome coming from any challenge for those. Those are duties that we’re going to live with moving forward as well. We do know that the administration continues to look at other areas of products to assess the 232 duties on. So stay tuned in that regard. But pretty quiet week, this week in trade. So I wanted to talk about 911 for several reasons. One, I had an opportunity to be with and talk with some folks who were actually in DC, less than a mile from pentagon, when 911 happened. And it was really a poignant discussion about how even to this day, they remember that they could feel the plane hitting the Pentagon and that they could smell the smoke from the fires all the way until the time that they left that it continued, and what an impact they had on them. The government was holding trade support networks and discussions, and there were about 200 individuals that had gathered in Crystal City, Virginia, very close to the Pentagon, to discuss how ace was going to move forward. And it was a discussion with both the government and the trade folks, and remarkably, many in the trade remember that all of the government employees, phones their BlackBerrys at the time, went off at the same time, and almost all of them stood up and just left, and the session was immediately concluded, and the participants were told to stay. In the hotel for their own safety, because they believed that there was another plane headed towards DC, and they weren’t sure where that was going to land, so they advised all of the participants to stay in the hotel. We later found out that that plane went down in Pennsylvania, but the lasting impression of that act has has really affected those who were in DC at the time, and as well, this action sparked many trade actions, if you think about it, the programs that were born on that day really included CT Pat. CTPAT didn’t exist before 911 the container Security Initiative was forwarded. The importer security filing was established after 911 to look at and understand what was coming in containers. There was a huge concern that a container was going to have a weapon of mass destruction on it. So importer security filing was was established. The Transportation Security Administration was born on 911 and developed the biggest change, I think, in international trade that we can talk about is the formation of the Department of Homeland Security itself that brought all of the security focused agencies into one department, and That was really as a result of the 911 commission that happened in the later years that identified missed opportunities in intelligence and missed opportunities to have pieces of the puzzle come together that would have given a more comprehen comprehensive picture to understand the threat that was happening. So a lot of different agencies had a little piece of the puzzle but didn’t understand the overall picture. And the Department of Homeland Security was established to bring those disparate intelligence agencies and disparate offerings together so that that information could be shared and then act upon, acted upon in a comprehensive manner. So what it initially did was bring together the US Customs Service, which had been around since 17, you know something. It’s one of the oldest agencies in the United States. At the time it was established, US Customs Service. It brought together the Border Patrol. It brought in the Transportation Security Administration, TSA. It brought in Secret Service, and it brought in the National Guard, and as part of the Border Patrol, national Coast Guard, I’m sorry, the Coast Guard. And as part of those, the Air and Marine Division became the kind of the third leg of CBP. Most people don’t know about Aaron Marine. There are three divisions within CBP. One is the custom service. The blue shirts who deal with international trade, who welcome us at the border, do the screening, they handle the trade and and individuals coming in, and then the Border Patrol. The green shirts are the guys who work in between the ports and handle immigration services, together with with us, Customs and Border Protection, and then Air and Marine really are the tan shirt guys, and they’re the ones who assist CBP with interdictions in the air and marine environment. And the thought was that the interior of the United States would be protected if we could protect the exterior. So they looked at the physical borders around the United States and said, what agencies actually oversee the introduction of goods, people and services through through that border environment? It was a very transformational time in the United States, and I think it’s timely, not just because of the 24th anniversary of the 911 but it’s timely because there is an ongoing effort within the administration, an ongoing discussion about reorganizing DHS, and specifically reorganizing Customs and Border Protection. The focus of this new reorganization would be to ensure duty collection is happening, and that those enforcement efforts that ensure a proper duty collection is given the time and resources that it needs to be effective. And that’s being called the external revenue service, where this agency Cindy Allen will reside, how it will function, what it will be called, what components of CBP and or border patrol and, or Air and Marine would actually become a part of the external revenue services all up in the air. There is not any set decisions that have been made, but we do know this is an ongoing discussion and that each of those agencies and the components within the agencies have been asked for their concerns, their recommendations, their input into not just should this be formed, but how and how it would function and how it would move forward. So lots to discuss and. And for those of you who aren’t aware, kind of since nine you know, justifiably, the agency focused on security. They focused on making sure that that that border was tight in that the United States citizens were protected, and there was great support for that. After in the years after 911 there is still support for that main goal. But what we’ve seen over the past 10 or so years is that when a commissioner comes into customs, 90% of his time is focused on border patrol, and that has left only 10% for of the leadership time really dedicated to trade. They continue to communicate that trade is important, that they support it, and we have seen that, however, it is a bifurcated mission in many regards, keeping the United States safe from immigration and understanding all the complexities there, while also understanding that duty collection that people coming lawfully into the United States via the border points in the ports and the enforcement and collection of those commercial side of us, custom service, we have great, great folks within the Office of CBP, within the Office of Field Operations, known as Ofo, or the office of trade known as OT, who have continued that mission to a great degree. But those of us in the trade have begun to ask, Is there too much focus on border patrol? Not enough on CBP? And I think that’s been hurt with this discussion. Will Ofo and ot get the time attention and resources that it really needs? Because when we look at the budget, we also see that most of the CBP budget goes to people, which is important because there’s 60,000 folks who who work for CBP, but it leaves very little funding for new and different things that can help the agency, and also the trade in ensuring that we have lawful traffic, lawful trade in the United States. Within that discussion also is, will there be an internal reorganization with 10 CBP. So back before DHS was stood up, there wasn’t an office of trade and there wasn’t an Office of Field Operations. It was just one department, and you had two kind of lower leaders that one that focused on trade and one that focused on more of the enforcement activity. However, with DHS, those two offices being split has created a lot of internal strife, and that has impacted our ability in the trade to effectively communicate with both sides of the coin at CBP. So there is an open question, Will Office of Field Operations and office of trade be merged in that reorganization, I personally think that that might be a good thing. Even though I was part of the Office of trade, I was the executive director of the ACE Business Office and the Office of trade, I witnessed firsthand some of the communication difficulties that those agents, that each of those departments had within CBP. And although I have great, great respect and regard for the two executive assistant commissioners in Ofo and OT, Diane Sabatino and Susan Thomas. They work fantastically together, which hasn’t always been the case in the past. Within Ofo and OT, they work fantastically together, and we see an alignment that I haven’t personally witnessed in a long time with with those two EAC. So I do believe that no matter what decision is made, we’re in good hands with CBP moving forward with that leadership. However, I think from a policy perspective, what ot has become, which is essentially a policy shop for trade, and then Ofo has become a policy shop for enforcement activities, but also to carry out the trade policy. It’s awkward and it never settled down quite to be what it what it was intended to be. So I am encouraged that there is a possibility that we can move forward, but I’m also encouraged that both EAC Sabatino and EAC Thomas are going to carry forward, and we’ll have a great result no matter what happens. So as well, I would be remiss if I didn’t say we were still mourning de minimis little more than two weeks after the the demise of de minimis, and our thoughts are with the companies who are who are navigating the loss of de minimis in a shorter time period than than what they had originally intended. But I do want to say I’m still mourning the in my thoughts are with those who experienced 911 and who had lost on 911 and I want to know that’s why we can still do it with a broken heart as a customs broker. We’ll see you all next week. You.