Overview
Title
To extend the customs waters of the United States from 12 nautical miles to 24 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States, consistent with Presidential Proclamation 7219.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make the area where the U.S. can check and control ships bigger, from 12 to 24 miles out in the ocean, to help keep the country's waters safe and protect against sneaky activities at sea.
Summary AI
H. R. 1268 aims to expand the extent of the United States' customs waters from 12 nautical miles to 24 nautical miles beyond the country's baselines, aligning with a specific Presidential Proclamation. This bill proposes amendments to the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Anti-Smuggling Act to redefine "customs waters" according to international law. It outlines how these changes affect the territorial sea and contiguous zone of the U.S., establishing new limits as permitted by international law. The changes would take effect the day after the bill is enacted.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "Extending Limits of U.S. Customs Waters Act" aims to modify how the United States defines its "customs waters." Currently, these waters extend up to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the U.S. The proposed legislation seeks to extend this boundary to 24 nautical miles, aligning with prior Presidential Proclamations. This extension would update relevant sections in both the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Anti-Smuggling Act, impacting how the U.S. enforces its customs and border protection laws.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the major issues with the bill is its legalistic language, particularly in Section 2, which could make it challenging for laypeople to comprehend the changes and their implications. This complexity might lead to misinterpretations and implementation challenges. Furthermore, the bill references Presidential Proclamations (5928 and 7219) without explanation, necessitating additional research for those unfamiliar with these documents. This approach could hinder public understanding and engagement, as interested parties would have to seek out these references independently.
Additionally, the bill’s effective date is tied to its enactment date, which is unspecified. This vagueness could result in delays in implementation and varying interpretations about when the new measures should take effect.
Potential Broad Impact on the Public
On a broad scale, extending the United States customs waters could enhance the country's ability to control and monitor activities such as smuggling and unauthorized fishing within the newly defined boundary. This extension might contribute to improved national security and better protection of the country's interests along its coastlines. However, the lack of clarity and complexity of the bill may lead to confusion among the general public, affecting their understanding and engagement with the legislative process.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The bill is likely to have specific impacts on various stakeholders, including governmental agencies, international maritime businesses, and environmental groups. Governmental entities like U.S. Customs and Border Protection would be directly involved in implementing the extended jurisdiction, requiring additional resources and possibly new strategies for effective enforcement.
Maritime businesses operating within this extended zone could face altered regulations, impacting their operations. For instance, shipping companies might need to adapt to new compliance and reporting requirements, which could increase operational costs.
Environmental organizations could see this as an opportunity for better enforcement of environmental protection measures in U.S. waters, which might align with conservation goals. However, how effectively these goals are met would depend on the clarity and enforcement of the new regulations.
In summary, while the legislation aims to bolster U.S. control over its nearshore waters, its current form has issues of complexity, lack of clarity, and effective communication that need addressing to ensure the intended benefits are realized and widely understood.
Issues
The language in Section 2, amendments to the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Anti-Smuggling Act, is highly legalistic and complex, making it difficult for non-legal experts to understand, which could lead to misinterpretations and challenges in implementation.
The bill references specific Presidential Proclamations (5928 and 7219) in Section 2 without summarizing their contents, requiring readers to look up these documents to fully understand the implications, which may hinder informed public engagement and comprehension.
Section 1, providing only the short title of the Act, lacks detail on the purpose and scope of the 'Extending Limits of U.S. Customs Waters Act,' potentially leading to ambiguity about its overall impact and implementation, making it difficult to assess for specific concerns like financial implications or favoritism.
The effective date of the amendments in Section 2 is vague as it is contingent upon the date of enactment, which could result in interpretative and implementation delays, affecting stakeholders and enforcing agencies.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill gives it the official name "Extending Limits of U.S. Customs Waters Act."
2. Definition of customs waters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section updates the definition of "customs waters" in the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Anti-Smuggling Act by describing them as waters within the United States' territorial sea and contiguous zone, according to international law and related presidential proclamations. These changes are set to take effect the day after the law is enacted.