A Warning for Importers: A CBP Prior Disclosure Does Not Count for DOJ

On October 1, 2026, DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division issued Directive 26-12, which makes trade fraud a corporate enforcement priority and lists ten factors prosecutors must weigh in deciding whether to charge a company. In recent remarks, a government official added a point every importer should hear: a prior disclosure filed with CBP does not count as a voluntary self-disclosure for DOJ purposes. Importers, their executives, and the companies that buy from them, now face a dedicated DOJ trade fraud section, data-driven lead generation, and a sharp focus on country of origin. 

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division issued Directive 26-12 on October 1, 2026, listing customs-related fraud as one of four corporate investigation priorities and naming ten factors prosecutors must place great weight on when deciding whether to charge a company. 
  • A CBP prior disclosure is not a voluntary self-disclosure to DOJ. DOJ’s Corporate Enforcement Policy states that disclosures made only to regulatory agencies generally do not qualify. 
  • Country of origin fraud is the leading pattern. The government official said more than half of the trade fraud cases over the past year involved country of origin. 
  • Never filing an entry with CBP is not a defense. Earlier this year, a company pleaded guilty and paid a $6,382,000 fine for buying imported plywood it knew(or was willfully blind to the fact […]
By |2026-10-09T11:15:19-04:00October 8, 2026|U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|0 Comments

DOJ and DHS Publish Comprehensive Trade Fraud Enforcement Guide: What Importers Need to Know 

Short summary: The DOJ and DHS have jointly published a new Resource Guide to Trade Fraud Enforcement, highlighting the government’s coordinated approach to combating customs fraud and strengthening import compliance. The guide explains key enforcement authorities, common trade fraud schemes, and the government’s expectations for importers, customs brokers, and others participating in global supply chains.


The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have released a new 31-page Resource Guide to Trade Fraud Enforcement, providing one of the clearest public statements yet on how the federal government views customs fraud, enforcement priorities, and importer compliance obligations. The guide was developed by the Trade Fraud Task Force, a partnership that includes DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and other federal agencies. 

While much of the guide summarizes existing laws and enforcement authorities, its significance lies in the government’s messaging. It makes clear that customs violations are no longer viewed as merely technical or administrative issues. Instead, DOJ and DHS repeatedly characterize trade fraud as a threat to economic security, national security, public safety, and human rights, signaling that aggressive enforcement will continue across multiple agencies. 

Combatting Trade Fraud Is a Priority for the Federal Government 

One of the report’s primary themes is that trade fraud extends far beyond the underpayment of duties. According to the guide, fraudulent import practices undermine domestic manufacturers, deprive the government of […]

By |2026-07-21T12:47:51-04:00July 21, 2026|Import, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on DOJ and DHS Publish Comprehensive Trade Fraud Enforcement Guide: What Importers Need to Know 

The Largest Customs Fraud Settlement from the DOJ Trade Fraud Task Force: $549.5 Million and What This Means for Importers 

On May 12, 2026, the Department of Justice announced one of the largest customs fraud settlements in U.S. history. Perfectus Aluminum Inc., Perfectus Aluminum Acquisitions LLC, and four affiliated warehousing companies (“the Defendants”) agreed to pay $549.5 million to resolve False Claims Act (“FCA”) allegations that they knowingly evaded antidumping and countervailing duties on aluminum extrusions imported from China. 

The Scheme: Pallets That Weren’t Pallets 

The underlying conduct was relatively simple. According to the Settlement Agreement, between July 2011 and June 2014, the Defendants knowingly made false statements on CBP Form 7501 Entry Summaries, misrepresenting more than 2.2 million aluminum extrusions as finished merchandise not subject to antidumping and countervailing duties. The mechanism? The extrusions were spot-welded together to make them appear to be functional pallets — and there were no actual customers for these “pallets.” So, no merchandise was ever actually sold. 

Criminal Conviction Came First 

This civil settlement did not arise in a vacuum. In August 2021, a jury in the Central District of California convicted the Defendants of conspiracy to defraud the United States, wire fraud, and passing false or fraudulent documents through a customs house. Following sentencing, the defendants were ordered to pay restitution of approximately $1.83 billion to CBP. The May 2026 FCA settlement resolves the parallel civil litigation arising from the same conduct. Importantly, this civil resolution does not absolve the defendants from any criminal liability outlined in […]

By |2026-05-22T15:16:31-04:00May 22, 2026|AD/CVD, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on The Largest Customs Fraud Settlement from the DOJ Trade Fraud Task Force: $549.5 Million and What This Means for Importers 

FinCEN Issues NPRM to Fully Implement Whistleblower Program

Authors:

Jennifer Diaz, President, Diaz Trade Law

Amber Pirson, Attorney, Diaz Trade Law


FinCEN’s March 30, 2026, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) marks a major step toward fully operationalizing the agency’s whistleblower program, designed to incentivize reporting of Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), sanctions, IEEPA, and other illicit finance violations. The proposal outlines how whistleblowers can securely submit information, how awards will be determined, and what protections will be available.  

This development reflects the Treasury Department’s broader strategy to strengthen financial system integrity and encourage actionable tips that support enforcement efforts. For financial institutions, compliance professionals, and potential whistleblowers, the NPRM provides long‑awaited clarity on program structure and expectations. 

Overview of the Proposed Rule 

FinCEN’s NPRM proposes a comprehensive framework for administering whistleblower submissions and awards. Key elements include: 

  • Secure submission procedures for individuals reporting suspected violations of the BSA, OFAC sanctions, and related laws. 
  • Eligibility criteria for whistleblower awards, including documentation requirements and timelines. 
  • Award ranges of 10–30% of monetary penalties collected when a whistleblower’s information leads to a successful enforcement action. 
  • Robust protections for individuals who provide information, including confidentiality and anti‑retaliation safeguards. 

These provisions aim to encourage early, detailed reporting while ensuring whistleblowers are shielded from adverse consequences. 

Why FinCEN Is Prioritizing Whistleblower Incentives 

The NPRM aligns with Treasury’s broader […]

By |2026-04-03T10:52:11-04:00April 3, 2026|Enforcement, International Law, Trade Policy, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)|Comments Off on FinCEN Issues NPRM to Fully Implement Whistleblower Program

Compliance Mistakes Can Turn Criminal: Don’t Let This Happen to You

Many importers assume that customs compliance issues are purely administrative and can be easily resolved. In reality, customs law and criminal law intersect far more often than most companies realize. What begins as a civil customs matter can escalate quickly into a criminal investigation when regulators suspect fraud, evasion, or willful misconduct.

When Customs Issues Cross the Line

Most customs violations start as a civil enforcement matter. Errors involving classification, valuation, country of origin, or admissibility are often addressed through a request for information (CBP 28), notice of action (CBP 29), protest, prior disclosure, or penalty proceeding. However, when patterns emerge or when agencies believe false statements or deliberate schemes are involved, the enforcement posture can change dramatically.

Federal agencies, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and the Department of Justice (DOJ), routinely collaborate to investigate potential criminal violations tied to import activity. These investigations may focus on:

  • Undervaluation or misclassification to avoid duties
  • False statements or omissions in entry documentation
  • Evasion of import restrictions or regulatory requirements
  • Coordinated schemes involving suppliers, brokers, or intermediaries

Once criminal intent is suspected, importers may face subpoenas, search warrants, asset seizures, or even criminal charges.

Increased Focus on Enforcement

The recent volatile tariff environment has created increased incentives to cheat the system. The U.S. government has made clear that it is

By |2026-01-30T10:24:53-05:00January 30, 2026|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on Compliance Mistakes Can Turn Criminal: Don’t Let This Happen to You

ICYMI: Electronics Company Pays $11.8M to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

The Department of Justice announced that Harman International Industries, Inc., an audio electronics company, agreed to pay $11.8M to settle allegations of evading duties on goods made of aluminum from China.

What Happened

For a period of over ten years, from June 2011 to March 2023, Harman knowingly imported heat sinks that contained extruded aluminum from China without paying the required antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD).

The settlement also reveals that when Harman discovered its failure to pay AD/CVD, the company concealed this fact and decided not to disclose it to the U.S. government. 

This case arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in a portion of the government’s recovery. The whistleblower in this case will receive over $2M of the settlement proceeds.

Enforcement is a Top Priority for the U.S. Government

High tariffs in the current trade environment have created a higher incentive to cheat. The U.S. government has made clear that enforcing customs laws is a top priority. 

For example, on May 12, 2025, Matthew Galeotti, the Head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, sent a memo to all criminal division personnel highlighting the focus areas of the division for white-collar crime.

The memo included a […]

By |2025-12-12T09:10:11-05:00December 12, 2025|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on ICYMI: Electronics Company Pays $11.8M to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

ICYMI: Technology Company Pleads Guilty to Export Control Violations, Agrees to $140M Fine

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California and the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES) of the Department of Justice’s (DoJ) National Security Division announced that Cadence Design Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California, agreed to plead guilty to resolve criminal violations of export controls. 

As part of the plea agreement, Cadence will pay criminal penalties of nearly $118 million. 

In addition to the charges, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) also announced the resolution of a civil enforcement action against the company in which Cadence agreed to pay over $95 million in civil penalties. 

The DoJ and BIS have coordinated the resolution of the parallel investigation, and each agreed to a partial credit against their fine for payments made to satisfy the other agency’s fine. Under the coordinated agreement, Cadence will pay criminal and civil penalties of more than $140 million.

Cadence committed criminal violations of the export control laws by selling hardware, software, and semiconductor design intellectual property to the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) in China. NUDT was added to the Department of Commerce’s Entity List in February 2015. The university was involved in the development of supercomputers with applications for military and nuclear explosive simulations. 

Cadence and its Chinese subsidiary engaged in a conspiracy to commit export control violations by exporting this technology to NUDT without obtaining the requisite licenses from […]

By |2025-08-07T11:02:35-04:00August 7, 2025|EAR, Enforcement, Export, International Trade, U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on ICYMI: Technology Company Pleads Guilty to Export Control Violations, Agrees to $140M Fine

ICYMI: Patio Furniture Company Agrees to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

On July 24, 2025, the Department of Justice (DoJ) announced that Grosfillex, Inc., a Pennsylvania furniture company, agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD).

Grosfillex submitted false forms to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claiming that furniture parts made of extruded aluminum from China were not subject to AD/CVD. The company attempted to hide the aluminum extrusions by falsely packing them as sham “furniture kits.” Additionally, for a different subset of extrusions, the company failed to correct customs forms it had submitted previously, even after learning that the forms contained false information.

The investigation arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act by a former employee of Grosfillex. Under the False Claims Act, private citizens can sue on behalf of the government and share in any recovery. In this case, the whistleblower will receive $962,662.74.

Duty Evasion is on the Rise

This case is just one example of the growing incentive to cheat that comes with higher tariffs. Whether it’s through misclassifying goods, undervaluing imports, or using deceptive transshipment routes, some companies think they are being creative, but, instead, are participating in outright illegal strategies to reduce their tariff liability.

Higher tariffs have even contributed to the emergence of a cottage industry of “tariff reduction” companies that suggest ways to cut import costs. However, many of these so-called strategies amount to evasion, […]

By |2025-08-01T10:52:13-04:00August 1, 2025|AD/CVD, Enforcement, Import, International Trade, Penalty, Reasonable Care, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on ICYMI: Patio Furniture Company Agrees to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

CIT Hands Down $3.4M Penalty for Duty Evasion

On July 18, 2025, the Court of International Trade (CIT) granted the government’s motion for default judgment against importer Rayson Global and its owner, Doris Cheng, for negligently failing to pay duties. 

The Case

The government’s case was filed in 2023, alleging that the importers had falsely declared that Chinese-origin goods as Thai origin to evade duties. The government asserted this false declaration avoided payment of ordinary 6% duties, Section 301 duties ranging from 10% to 25%, and 234.51% antidumping duties. 

The government asked the court to impose a penalty for negligence. The penalty amount is twice the loss of revenue or the domestic value, whichever is lower. After the importer failed to answer the complaint (a huge mistake), the U.S. moved for summary judgment.

The CIT granted the government’s motion and ordered the importer to pay a nearly $3.4 million penalty as well as all unpaid duties, taxes, and cash deposits on the unliquidated entries in question.

Duty Evasion is on the Rise

This case is just one example of the growing incentive to cheat that comes with higher tariffs. Whether it’s through misclassifying goods, undervaluing imports, or using deceptive transshipment routes, some companies are turning to creative or outright illegal strategies to reduce their tariff liability.

These incentives have even contributed to the emergence of a cottage industry of “tariff reduction” companies that suggest ways to cut import costs. However, many of these so-called strategies amount […]

By |2025-07-25T10:16:56-04:00July 25, 2025|Enforcement, Import, International Trade, Penalty, Reasonable Care, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on CIT Hands Down $3.4M Penalty for Duty Evasion

ICYMI: USDA Plan Calls for Stronger Enforcement of Agricultural Imports

On July 8, 2025, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), along with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DoJ), and the Department of Defense (DoD), released a National Farm Security Action Plan to elevate American agriculture as a key element of the country’s national security. 

Plan Details

The action plan will enable USDA to work closely with governors, state legislators, and federal partners to further integrate agriculture into the broader national security efforts over the coming months and years.

The USDA and its government partners will take “aggressive action” across seven critical areas:

  1. Secure and Protect American Farmland – Address U.S. foreign farmland ownership from adversaries head-on. Total transparency. Tougher penalties.
  2. Enhance Agricultural Supply Chain Resilience – Refocus domestic investment into key manufacturing sectors and identify non-adversarial partners to work with when domestic production is not available. Plan for contingencies.
  3. Protect U.S. Nutrition Safety Net from Fraud and Foreign Exploitation – Billions have been stolen by foreign crime rings. That ends now.
  4. Defend Agricultural Research and Innovation – No more sweetheart deals or secret pacts with hostile nations. American ideas stay in America.
  5. Put America First in Every USDA Program – From farm loans to food safety, every program will reflect the America […]
By |2025-07-17T09:41:31-04:00July 17, 2025|Enforcement, Food, Import, International Trade, Supply Chain, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)|Comments Off on ICYMI: USDA Plan Calls for Stronger Enforcement of Agricultural Imports
Go to Top