Tariff Train, CBP Disclosures, Affiliates Rule: The 2027 Compliance Load

The Supreme Court ruled in late February that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not grant the President authority to impose the tariffs that had kept the trade industry scurrying for nearly a year, and importers have been re-ticketing ever since. That single ruling set off twelve months of near-constant regime changes across tariffs, customs enforcement and export controls, and Evelyn Bernal, director at BPE Global, says 2027 will reward only the companies that can pivot at regulatory speed.

What actually happened to tariffs in 2026?

The sequencing matters. After IEEPA seating closed, the administration opened Section 122 to address what was deemed a problem with international payments. That lasted exactly 150 days. Section 122 closed when additional Section 301 seating opened in response to 60 economies' alleged failure to impose and effectively enforce prohibitions on imports of goods produced with forced labor.

In early April, the Section 232 car added seats after a major restructuring of the steel, aluminum and copper regime. New semiconductor duties arrived alongside additional Section 232 actions covering pharmaceuticals and polysilicon. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the U.S. Department of Commerce both have open investigations that could add or expand tariffs further — Bernal's read: new tracks are still being laid, some to destinations unknown.

The commercial consequence stacks quickly. A classification error or incorrectly reported tariff provision affects not only ordinary duties but the additional duties layered on top of them.

What should importers do about broker data now?

Bernal's least glamorous recommendation is also her most valuable one: review the data coming back from the customs broker. The broker is a compliance partner, but the importer retains responsibility for reasonable care.

Her checklist is concrete:

• Spot-check commercial invoices against entry data reported to Customs to validate HTS classifications, entered values and country of origin
• Scrutinize the Chapter 99 provisions reported at entry
• Give brokers written guidance in advance when products clearly don't qualify for a provision — for example, goods with no copper, iron or steel content — so the broker isn't left guessing on duty applicability

What is CBP planning for supply-chain visibility?

On June 3, the President signed Executive Order 14411, "Strengthening Customs Enforcement," which called for customs reform to "remedy systemic inefficiencies, loopholes, insufficient enforcement mechanisms, and outdated processes."

CBP's answer arrived Sept. 1: an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled "Heightened Import Disclosures for Supply Chain Visibility." The ANPRM flags four areas under active consideration:

• Foreign export documents — whether importers should submit them for all goods entering the U.S., who collects and maintains them, and which export categories might pose a national security risk
• Party identification — whether to redefine or replace the Manufacturer's Identification Code (MID), which is inconsistent and not always indicative of the true manufacturer, and what alternative identifiers could work
• Technical tracing solutions — what supply-chain visibility technologies importers already use and whether those systems could integrate with CBP systems to transmit data and add transparency
• Economic impact — the potential costs, time expenditures or savings from the proposals

CBP's next steps after reviewing comments remain unknown. Bernal argues importers shouldn't wait. Her preparation steps:

• Map the parties, production locations, materials and processes behind imported goods
• Prioritize the highest-risk products: complex manufacturing, multiple countries, related parties, substantial assists, royalties or license fees, transfer pricing, or frequent supplier changes
• Build documentation beyond the commercial invoice — purchase orders, bills of materials, supplier declarations, manufacturing records, freight documentation, payment records
• Close supplier-data gaps and set a process for getting updated information when suppliers or production processes change
• Run a "show me" exercise on representative entries: could you substantiate what was declared to CBP and explain how each key customs determination was reached?

Gaps found now get fixed cheaply. Gaps found during a CBP inquiry don't.

How did export controls shift?

The year's most dramatic export-control changes didn't touch the broader exporting community, but they shared one theme: increased complexity demands greater diligence in vetting shipments, and both the rules and the compliance systems must be monitored constantly.

In January, the Bureau of Industry and Security shifted from presumption-of-denial to case-by-case review for certain advanced semiconductor chips — with conditions requiring protections for the U.S. semiconductor supply, additional compliance procedures for Chinese purchasers, and independent U.S. testing of the products' performance and security.

In May, BIS clarified that certain advanced-computing items still require a license when destined for an entity headquartered in Macau or a Country Group D:5 destination — or whose ultimate parent is headquartered there — even if the immediate customer sits elsewhere. That added another screening layer.

In June, the UAE moved out of the EAR's D:3 and D:4 Country Groups and into A:5, dropping Chemical & Biological and Missile Technology control reasons and unlocking license exceptions previously unavailable for Emirati exports.

Why does the Affiliates Rule matter at year-end?

The BIS Affiliates Rule is due for reimplementation at the end of 2026 after a one-year suspension. It expanded screening beyond the names actually appearing on restricted-party lists: a foreign entity at least 50% owned — directly or indirectly, individually or in aggregate — by one or more Entity List or Military End-User List entities can itself become subject to the applicable restrictions, even if never separately named.

Bernal's takeaway: never let an ERP or export-control determination harden into a permanent yes/no answer when shipping. BIS enforcement actions increasingly show compliance failures originating in operational processes, not just in the compliance team's screening and licensing decisions.

Her recommended controls: implement processes that continually monitor rules and update automated screening and export-control tables promptly when BIS changes Country Groups, Entity List entries or License Exception eligibility; build escalation points for changes in customers, end users, end uses or routing that could trigger a new export-control review; and establish notification processes so supply chain and logistics teams are alerted to changes in sourcing, manufacturing locations or foreign production that could alter the export-control analysis at the last minute and delay the movement of goods.

The through-line for 2027 is simple. The Tariff Train keeps rolling, supply-chain mapping keeps evolving, and the export-control terrain keeps shifting — and the companies best positioned are the ones whose compliance processes bend with them.