CBP HIGHLIGHTS AVAILABILITY OF MOETY AWARD TO CRACK DOWN ON TRADE FRAUD & DUTY EVASION

 By Caitlyn Quinn, Zachary Walker, and Nathan Maandig Rickard, of Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP, Washington D.C.

As U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) and the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) continue to intensify enforcement efforts targeting customs fraud and tariff evasion, CBP is bringing renewed attention to a key statutory mechanism that incentivizes private reporting of trade violations.

The “Moiety Statute,” codified at 19 U.S.C. § 1619, authorizes an award of compensation to private actors who provide original information regarding customs law violations that leads to the recovery of customs duties, fines, penalties, or forfeited property.  Although the Moiety Statute was first enacted as part of the Tariff Act of 1930, it has taken on renewed significance as CBP has prominently identified it on its e-Allegation website, signaling an effort to incentivize the reporting of trade violations as the current high-tariff environment has created incentives for parties to cheat and avoid paying amounts owed to the Government.

A “moiety” is traditionally defined as a portion or share of something, particularly when divided into parts.  In the customs enforcement context, the Moiety Statute allows qualifying informants to receive a percentage of the proceeds recovered by the government as a result of their information.  Implemented through CBP’s regulations at 19 C.F.R. Part 161, Subpart B, the statute reflects Congress’s intent to encourage private individuals, who are often best positioned to detect customs fraud that would otherwise go undetected, to assist in uncovering violations of the customs and navigation laws.

Under 19 U.S.C. § 1619, any person who is not an employee or officer of the United States may request compensation if they furnish original information concerning fraud on the customs revenue or violations of the customs or navigation laws.  If that information leads to the recovery of duties withheld, or the imposition of fines, penalties, or forfeitures, the Secretary of the Treasury may award the informant up to 25 percent of the net amount recovered, with a statutory cap of $250,000 per case.  The information provided must be original, non-public, and sufficiently specific to aid CBP’s investigation.  Information already in the government’s possession, as well as speculative or generalized reporting, does not qualify.  In practice, the statute rewards actionable information that results in concrete customs enforcement outcomes.

The Moiety Statute operates alongside other reporting mechanisms administered by CBP where private parties can identify trade law violations, including Enforce and Protect Act (“EAPA”) claims and e-Allegations.  EAPA provides a formal process for interested parties to allege evasion of antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duties (“CVD”) where a final order is in effect.  CBP’s e-Allegation system allows reporting of a broader range of trade violations, including non-AD/CVD duty evasion, quota violations, forced labor violations, merchandise or shipping irregularities, among other violations.  A moiety claim may be submitted after an EAPA claim or e-Allegation has been filed and can be linked to the claim or allegation through CBP’s issued case number.

EAPA and e-Allegations have increased significantly in recent years.  Since its enactment in 2016, CBP has initiated approximately 450 EAPA investigations and identified roughly $2 billion in AD/CVD duties owed to the U.S. government.  Moreover, between January 20 and December 15, 2025, CBP investigated “nearly 1,200 revenue-focused e-Allegations . . . to ensure a level playing field for law-abiding U.S. businesses.” 

CBP’s private reporting mechanisms are being increasingly encouraged as tariff revenue continues to rise and the number of AD/CVD orders increase, thereby heightening incentives for non-compliant actors to evade duties.  Federal prosecutors have publicly acknowledged the heightened risk of duty evasion.  The DOJ has identified tariff evasion and trade fraud as key priorities for its Criminal Division’s white-collar enforcement efforts in 2025, and both CBP and the DOJ have indicated that investigative activity in this area is expected to increase substantially in the coming years.

Against this backdrop, the Moiety Statute stands out as a practical way for CBP to align private financial incentives with its enforcement objectives.  Federal litigation has clarified the potential scope of moiety recoveries.  In White & Case LLP v. United States, a law firm sued CBP for compensation under the Moiety Statute after an informant provided CBP with original information identifying 98 separate fraudulent invoices that facilitated the evasion of a 43.32 percent duty on imported Chinese brake rotors.  The court held that the reported violations constituted eleven separate moiety cases under 19 U.S.C. § 1619, rather than a single claim subject to the $250,000 statutory cap, significantly expanding the potential recovery available to qualifying informants.

As customs enforcement intensifies and duty recoveries grow, the Moiety Statute will likely play an increasingly important role in the detection and prosecution of trade fraud.  By offering financial incentives to individuals with actionable knowledge of customs violations, the Moiety Statute advances CBP’s and DOJ’s enforcement objectives while substantially increasing the risks faced by parties seeking to circumvent U.S. duties.

We express our appreciation to Caitlyn Quinn, Zachary Walker, and Nathan Maandig Rickard, of Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP, for allowing us to reproduce their article in whole under the CSUSTL Blog.

Further information on this issue can be obtained by contacting CSUSTL’s Director for Policy Advocacy, Caroline Vilchez, at cvilchez@genesisgroupllc.com.