HB7224, titled the Secure Revenue Clearance Channel Act of 2026, would create a new informal customs entry process for certain low-value shipments of merchandise imported by express consignment carriers. For shipments valued at $600 or less, a carrier could satisfy entry requirements by submitting an approved electronic advanced manifest to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, rather than using the standard formal entry process under the Tariff Act of 1930. The bill refers to this streamlined process as the “Secure Revenue Clearance Channel.”
The bill excludes shipments subject to antidumping or countervailing duties, tariff-rate quotas, certain taxes collected by other federal agencies, and fees imposed by other agencies that are not waived. It also defines the kinds of express consignment operators that may use the process, including carriers with closely integrated administrative control and those that have narcotics information-sharing and enforcement agreements with CBP and ICE. The bill would also amend the Tariff Act to add merchandise qualifying under this new process to the list of entries eligible for informal treatment.
Impact
The bill would amend federal customs law, specifically section 498(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to authorize a new informal entry category for qualifying express shipments and to create a related fee structure. It would shift some low-value imports from formal entry procedures to a faster electronic manifest-based process, while requiring carriers to collect a fee from importers equal to either 20 percent ad valorem, the equivalent formal tariff rate, or other applicable country-of-origin duty rates. Those fees would replace certain customs charges and duties and be remitted quarterly to CBP for deposit into the Treasury’s general fund. The bill would affect importers, express consignment carriers, Customs and Border Protection, and potentially other federal agencies that collect duties or fees on imported goods.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript and no votes, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge broader sentiment. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears aimed at improving customs processing efficiency and revenue collection for express shipments, suggesting a technocratic, trade-administration purpose rather than a highly partisan one. The bipartisan sponsorship by Representatives Miller and Beyer may indicate some cross-party interest in customs modernization and enforcement.
Contention
The main policy tension in the bill is between streamlining low-value import processing and preserving customs enforcement and revenue safeguards. Supporters would likely favor faster clearance for express shipments and a more predictable fee system, while critics may question whether the $600 threshold and manifest-based entry create opportunities for undervaluation, evasion, or weaker oversight. Another possible point of contention is the fee design, which allows importers to choose among different charge calculations and substitutes the new fee for other duties, including MFN and section 232 duties, which could affect domestic industry and trade enforcement interests. The bill also relies on carrier eligibility conditions tied to narcotics-sharing and enforcement agreements, which may raise operational or compliance concerns for carriers.