Executive Summary CBP’s published trade statistics show a clear increase in audit-related activity between fiscal year (FY) 2024 and FY 2025. Completed audits rose from 417 to 465 (+11.5%), collections as a result of importer audits rose from $117.7 million to $235.5 million (+100.1%), trade penalties issued rose from 2,204 to 2,432 (+10.3%), and trade liquidated damages rose from 22,399 to 53,052 (+136.8%). Collections from trade penalties and liquidated damages rose from about $26.2 million to $46.0 million (about +75.7%). Partial-year data for FY 2026 point in a similar direction. CBP’s audits are carried out by its Trade Regulatory Audit field offices and take several forms: targeted audits, comprehensive Focused Assessments of an importer’s internal controls, and Risk Analysis and Survey Assessments (RASAs), which CBP does not treat as audits but which can lead to further action. Importers also have a statutory option, prior disclosure under 19 U.S.C. 1592(c)(4), that can limit penalties for violations disclosed before a formal investigation begins. This analysis summarizes the statistics, explains how the audit programs differ, describes how prior disclosure works, and sets out considerations that practitioners commonly raise for importers.
Customs Audit Activity Is Rising: How CBP’s Audit Programs Work and What Importers Commonly Consider
(海关审计活动增加：CBP审计项目如何运作，进口商通常考虑哪些事项)
1 · What CBP’s Statistics Show
The Core Figures
CBP publishes trade enforcement statistics on its Trade Statistics page. The table compares FY 2024 and FY 2025 (October 1 through September 30) and shows the most recent partial-year figures available at the time of writing.
| Metric | FY 2024 | FY 2025 | Change | FY 2026 (partial, through late July) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Audits completed | 417 | 465 | +11.5% | 262 |
| Collected as a result of importer audits | $117.7 million | $235.5 million | +100.1% | $204.2 million |
| Trade penalties issued | 2,204 | 2,432 | +10.3% | 2,193 |
| Trade liquidated damages | 22,399 | 53,052 | +136.8% | 50,333 |
| Collected from trade penalties and liquidated damages | $26.2 million | $46.0 million | about +75.7% | $70.6 million |
Source: CBP Trade Statistics (cbp.gov). FY 2026 figures are partial-year and may have been updated since; readers should check CBP’s page for the current figures. Trade press reported the FY 2024 penalty-and-liquidated-damages collection figure as $26.3 million (+74.9%); CBP’s current page shows $26.21 million.
Reading the Numbers Carefully
- Collections are not the same as findings in the same year. CBP’s monthly updates show that duties identified in audits completed in a month and amounts collected in that month are different figures; collections can include amounts from audits assigned in prior fiscal years. For example, CBP’s February 2025 update reported that 28 audits completed that month identified $2.9 million in duties and fees owed, while over $74.5 million was collected from that month’s findings and prior years’ assignments combined.
- Liquidated damages and penalties are different instruments. Trade penalties are typically assessed under statutes such as 19 U.S.C. 1592, while liquidated damages are typically claims for breaches of bond conditions. The large jump in the count of liquidated damages does not by itself indicate how much revenue they generate: collections from penalties and liquidated damages together were about $46 million in FY 2025.
- Year-over-year comparisons depend on the baseline. Audit counts have been in a broad range in recent years (for example, 442 in FY 2021 and 430 in FY 2022 per CBP’s statistics), so FY 2025’s 465 is the highest of the years shown.
⚠️ Critical Takeaway: CBP’s own figures show more audit activity and higher collections in FY 2025, and partial FY 2026 data are consistent with that direction. They do not by themselves show how any individual importer is selected for audit.
2 · How CBP’s Audit Programs Differ
Trade Regulatory Audit
According to CBP, Trade Regulatory Audit (TRA) is made up of field offices throughout the United States that conduct audits, provide other professional services, and serve as subject-matter experts in specialized areas. TRA uses a risk-based approach to assess compliance with trade laws and regulations.
CBP describes its audits as generally having targeted objectives and being compliance-driven. They involve data analysis and risk-assessment procedures to determine scope. Depending on the objective, an audit may or may not include an assessment of the importer’s internal controls over compliance.
Focused Assessment
The Focused Assessment (FA) Program is CBP’s most comprehensive audit. CBP describes it as an assessment of an importer’s internal control over its import activities, used to determine whether the importer poses an acceptable risk for complying with CBP laws and regulations. An FA can proceed in up to three phases:
| Phase | Purpose (general description) |
|---|---|
| Pre-Assessment Survey (PAS) | Reviews the importer’s processes and internal controls to understand how imports are managed |
| Assessment Compliance Testing (ACT) | Tests a sample of the importer’s entries in the areas of greatest risk identified earlier |
| Follow-Up Audit | Checks whether previously identified issues have been addressed |
Risk Analysis and Survey Assessments (RASAs)
CBP also conducts Risk Analysis and Survey Assessments. CBP’s description is that a RASA is a collaborative process based on cooperation, information sharing, and joint decision making between the Office of Trade, other CBP components, and, as appropriate, other DHS entities or partner government agencies. Trade press and practitioner commentary describe a RASA as a way for CBP to gain information about a company’s import activities in a particular trade area or on a particular issue. A RASA is not performed as an audit, but it uses techniques similar to an audit’s, and practitioners note that issues surfaced in a RASA can lead to a Focused Assessment or an enforcement action. Practitioner commentary also indicates that a RASA typically concludes with a letter rather than a formal audit report.
A Comparison
| Feature | Targeted audit | Focused Assessment | RASA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | A specific issue, product line, or program claim | Broad: importer’s internal controls and import activities | Specific trade area or issue |
| Treated by CBP as an audit? | Yes | Yes | No (non-audit professional service) |
| Typical focus | Compliance with identified requirements | Whether the importer is an acceptable risk | Understanding import activities and risk |
| Possible follow-on | Duty assessments; penalties depending on culpability | Further testing, follow-up audit, enforcement | Audit, Focused Assessment, or other action |
Descriptions are summarized from CBP’s audit program pages and general practitioner commentary; the actual process varies by case.
⚠️ Critical Takeaway: The three channels differ in scope and formality, but the practical common thread is that CBP uses data analysis and risk assessment to decide where to look.
3 · Prior Disclosure: The Statutory Option
What the Statute Provides
Under 19 U.S.C. 1592(c)(4) and 19 CFR 162.74, if a person discloses the circumstances of a violation before, or without knowledge of, the commencement of a formal investigation of that violation, merchandise is not seized and any monetary penalty is capped. Under the statute:
| Violation resulted from | Penalty ceiling without a valid prior disclosure | With a valid prior disclosure |
|---|---|---|
| Negligence | Up to the lesser of the domestic value or two times the lost duties, taxes, and fees (20% of dutiable value if the violation did not affect duties) | Interest on the lost duties, taxes, and fees, if the unpaid amount is tendered as required |
| Gross negligence | Up to the lesser of the domestic value or four times the lost duties (40% of dutiable value if the violation did not affect duties) | Interest on the lost duties, taxes, and fees, if the unpaid amount is tendered as required |
| Fraud | Up to the domestic value of the merchandise | 100% of the lost duties, taxes, and fees (10% of dutiable value if the violation did not affect duties), if the unpaid amount is tendered as required |
Summarized from 19 U.S.C. 1592(c) and (c)(4). The statute also provides that a formal investigation is considered commenced on the date CBP records in writing as the date it discovered facts and circumstances leading it to believe a violation may exist, and that the person asserting lack of knowledge of a commenced investigation bears the burden of showing it.
Points That Practitioners Commonly Emphasize
- Timing is the threshold issue. The reduced penalty exposure is available only if the disclosure comes before, or without knowledge of, a formal investigation of the violation. Once CBP has commenced a formal investigation and the importer knows of it, the prior disclosure option generally is not available for that violation.
- The lost duties must still be paid. Prior disclosure limits penalties; it does not eliminate the underlying duty liability, which must be tendered as the regulation requires (at the time of disclosure, or within 30 days after CBP notifies the importer of its calculation).
- A disclosure covers the violations it names. Scope matters, which is one reason importers often have the review done before a disclosure is filed.
- It addresses civil penalty exposure under section 1592. Other legal regimes, including False Claims Act exposure, are separate considerations that some counsel evaluate alongside a disclosure decision.
⚠️ Critical Takeaway: Prior disclosure is a statutory mechanism with specific conditions, and whether and how to use it is a legal judgment that depends on the facts. It is one of several tools; it is not a substitute for accurate entries in the first place.
4 · Implementation Considerations
The following considerations draw on CBP’s descriptions of its audit programs and on general commentary from customs practitioners. They are informational rather than prescriptive.
Before an Audit
| Area | Commonly Raised Consideration |
|---|---|
| Knowing the import data | Understanding an organization’s own import profile—products, classifications, origins, values, programs claimed—gives context for how CBP’s risk analysis may see it |
| Internal reviews and risk assessments | Regular internal reviews can identify problem areas before the government does, and may reveal opportunities as well as errors |
| Documented procedures | Because a Focused Assessment evaluates internal controls, documented classification, valuation, origin, and recordkeeping procedures are what the assessment examines |
| Prior disclosure readiness | If a review identifies an actual or potential violation, an importer may evaluate whether a prior disclosure fits, and on what timeline |
During an Audit or RASA
| Area | Commonly Raised Consideration |
|---|---|
| Initial contact | Treating the first contact from CBP as significant, because a RASA that is not handled carefully can lead to a fuller review |
| Understanding the objective | Identifying early what CBP is trying to learn, so that responses are scoped to the request |
| Advisors | Engaging customs counsel or other qualified advisors early to help interpret the request and represent the importer |
| Review before submission | Having qualified service providers review information before it goes to CBP, which practitioners suggest can reduce the time and cost of an audit |
| Consistency | Information supplied to CBP should be consistent with what appears on entries and in underlying records |
Roles of Brokers and Service Providers
Customs brokers, consultants, and other service providers often hold the entry data CBP examines. Their own recordkeeping and review practices can bear on how smoothly an audit proceeds.
5 · Conclusion: More Activity, Several Channels, One Statutory Option
CBP’s published statistics show more audits, higher audit collections, and more penalties and liquidated damages in FY 2025 than in FY 2024, with partial FY 2026 data consistent with that direction. CBP uses more than one channel—targeted audits, Focused Assessments, and RASAs—and importers have a statutory prior disclosure option for violations disclosed before a formal investigation begins.
Key Takeaways
| Factor | Detail |
|---|---|
| Audits Completed | 417 (FY 2024) → 465 (FY 2025); 262 through late July FY 2026 |
| Collected from Importer Audits | $117.7 million → $235.5 million (+100.1%); $204.2 million through late July FY 2026 |
| Trade Penalties Issued | 2,204 → 2,432 (+10.3%) |
| Trade Liquidated Damages | 22,399 → 53,052 (+136.8%) |
| Penalties + Liquidated Damages Collected | |
| CBP Audit Channels | Targeted audits; Focused Assessment (PAS, ACT, Follow-Up); RASA (non-audit service) |
| Prior Disclosure | 19 U.S.C. 1592(c)(4); 19 CFR 162.74; must precede or be without knowledge of a formal investigation |
| Penalty Ceiling With Valid Disclosure | Interest only (negligence, gross negligence); 100% of lost duties (fraud), with duties tendered as required |
The Bottom Line
The numbers describe the level of audit activity; they do not describe any particular importer’s risk. How an organization positions itself—its internal reviews, documentation, and readiness to evaluate a prior disclosure—is a matter of its own import profile. Organizations that would like an outside perspective on such a review may find it worthwhile to work with a trade compliance partner familiar with CBP’s audit programs.
The message is clear: CBP’s audit activity and collections increased in FY 2025, and the statistics are best read alongside an understanding of how the audit programs work and what the statutory prior disclosure option provides.
This analysis reflects CBP’s Trade Statistics, CBP’s pages on Trade Regulatory Audit and the Focused Assessment Program, 19 U.S.C. 1592 and 19 CFR 162.74, CBP’s February 2025 monthly update. Statistics are CBP-published figures and may be updated; FY 2026 figures are partial-year. Penalty and prior disclosure provisions are summarized and depend on the facts of each case. Organizations should consult with customs counsel and trade compliance professionals for guidance tailored to their specific circumstances.
