Importers’ Custody Over Products Allows Unsafe Products to Enter Domestic Commerce

Unscrupulous importers bypass FDA inspections of imported food shipments or circumvent requirements for reexporting or destroying food shipments that were refused entry, according to Customs and FDA officials at the ports we visited. Officials began this procedure after periodic examinations found that some importers had substituted garbage for the refused shipments that were being reexported. A number of factors contribute to FDA’s and Customs’ problems in ensuring that targeted shipments are actually inspected and that refused entries are properly disposed of. We believe that FSIS’ controls over import shipments—requiring unique markings on each carton, retaining custody of shipments until they are approved for release or properly disposed of, and stamping “U.S. Current Penalties Are Not Effective Deterrents

Customs’ penalties for failure to redeliver refused shipments do not effectively deter violations because they are either too low compared with the value of the product or not imposed at all, according to Customs and FDA officials at the ports we reviewed. Opportunities Are Available to Improve Controls Over Imported Foods

Customs and FDA officials and importer association representatives suggested ways to strengthen controls over imported foods as they move through Customs’ and FDA’s import procedures. Each of these suggested approaches has advantages and disadvantages, costs, or limitations that would have to be considered before any changes are made. Targeted Shipments Could Be Marked in Order to Trace Them Throughout the Import Process

Customs and FDA could take steps to better ensure that importers with a history of violations are not substituting products before inspection and are not returning the actual refused cargo for destruction or reexport by adopting variations on controls used by FSIS for meat and poultry imports. To help ensure that shipments refused entry are destroyed or reexported, FDA could stamp “refused entry” on each carton/container in shipments that it finds do not meet U.S. food safety requirements.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO discussed: (1) the extent to which federal controls ensure that food importers present shipments for inspection when required and that shipments refused entry are destroyed or reexported; and (2) ways to strengthen these controls.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) controls provide little assurance that shipments targeted for inspection are actually inspected or that shipments found to violate U.S. safety standards are destroyed or reexported; (2) because importers, rather than FDA, retain custody over shipments throughout the import process, some importers have been able to provide substitutes for products targeted for inspection or products that have been refused entry and must be reexported or destroyed, according to Customs Service and FDA officials; (3) moreover, Customs and FDA do not effectively coordinate their efforts to ensure that importers are notified that their refused shipments must be reexported or destroyed; (4) Customs' penalties for violating inspection and disposal requirements may provide little incentive for compliance because they are too low in comparison with the value of the imported products or they are not imposed at all; (5) as a result of these weaknesses, shipments that failed to meet U.S. safety standards were distributed in domestic commerce; (6) because the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) requires unique identification marks on, and maintains custody of, each shipment of imported foods under its jurisdiction, GAO did not find similar weaknesses in FSIS' controls over the shipments reviewed, although GAO did identify some coordination problems between FSIS and Customs; (7) federal controls would be strengthened by consistently implementing current procedures and by adopting new procedures; (8) Customs and FDA officials and representatives of importer and broker associations identified a number of ways to improve agencies' controls over incoming shipments, strengthen interagency coordination, and provide stronger deterrents against repeat violators; and (9) each of these approaches has advantages and disadvantages that should be considered before making any changes.