PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 8, 2003
Illegal Transshipments Enforcement Act of 2003 - Amends the Tariff Act of 1930 to authorize the appropriate customs officer to destroy textile or apparel products that have been forfeited by reason of a violation of the customs laws.
Revises the authority of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection of the Department of Homeland Security to seize merchandise introduced or attempted to be introduced into the United States contrary to law if the importer has received written notices that previous importations of merchandise from the same supplier were found to have been marked in violation of country-of-origin marking requirements. (Current law limits such condition to identical merchandise from the same supplier marked in violation of such requirements.)
Changes the monetary penalties for specified violations by customs brokers from $30,000 in total for a violation or violations to $100,000 for each violation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the Federal criminal code to repeal the requirement of specific intent to convert to personal use from the prohibition against theft or fraudulent acquisition of goods or chattels in an interstate or foreign shipment of cargo. Adds to the list of vehicles or facilities involved any trailer, air cargo container, intermodal container, trailer, container freight station, warehouse, or freight consolidation facility. Increases from one to three years the prison term for any such felony involving less than $1,000. States that goods and chattel shall be construed to be moving as an interstate or foreign shipment at all points between the point of origin and the final destination (as evidenced by the waybill or other shipping document of the shipment), regardless of any temporary stop while awaiting transshipment or otherwise.
Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for such felonies and promulgate any appropriate amendments.
People & committees
Rep. Hayes, Robin [R-NC-8] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3661 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3661 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3661 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3661 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.