CBP Focused Assessments in 2026

If you're a US importer moving goods across the northern border, Focused Assessments are no longer an abstract risk. CBP has expanded the program, refined its selection algorithms, and increased the depth of documentation review. What was once a rare event for most mid-size importers is becoming a realistic probability.

Here's what's changed, what CBP expects, and how to prepare.

What a Focused Assessment Actually Is

A Focused Assessment (FA) is CBP's primary compliance audit mechanism for importers. Unlike a quick review or a routine verification, an FA is a structured, multi-week examination of your import operations, documentation practices, and internal controls.

The FA process has three phases:

1. Pre-Assessment Survey (PAS). CBP reviews your internal controls documentation. They're looking for written procedures, organizational structure, and evidence that your compliance program is systematic rather than ad hoc.
2. Assessment Compliance Testing (ACT). CBP tests your actual transactions against your stated procedures. They pull entry samples, review documentation, verify classifications, and check valuations. This is where documentation quality matters most.
3. Follow-Up and Resolution. If issues are found, CBP issues findings and requires remediation. This can include duty recovery, penalty assessment, and mandatory compliance improvements.

3–6 months — the typical duration of a Focused Assessment from PAS to resolution, consuming significant internal and external resources.

What's Expanding in 2026

Broader Selection Criteria

CBP's Trade Risk Assessment division has expanded the data inputs that feed selection algorithms. Beyond traditional factors (filing error rates, penalty history, industry risk), the selection model now incorporates:

• Cross-reference analysis: comparing your declared values against industry benchmarks and known supplier pricing
• Classification consistency: tracking whether the same product is classified differently across entries
• Origin certification gaps: identifying shipments where preferential treatment was claimed without adequate supporting documentation
• Temporal patterns: looking for classification changes that coincide with tariff rate changes

Deeper Documentation Review

The ACT phase now routinely requests documentation that many importers don't systematically retain:

• Supporting workpapers for classification decisions. Not just the HS code — the analysis that led to it. Which General Rules of Interpretation were applied? Were binding rulings consulted? Is there a classification rationale on file?
• Valuation methodology documentation. If you're using transaction value, where's the evidence that the price paid is the actual price? Are there related-party considerations? Assists? Royalties?
• Origin calculations. For USMCA preferential claims, CBP expects to see the Regional Value Content or Tariff Shift analysis — not just the certificate.
• Reconciliation records. Evidence that your import records match your financial records. Purchase orders, invoices, payment records, and entry summaries should tell a consistent story.

The Five-Year Look-Back

This is where most importers get caught.

CBP's authority to review entries extends back five years. During an FA, they don't just look at recent shipments. They pull samples across the entire look-back period. If your documentation practices improved last year, that's good — but it doesn't help with the entries from three years ago.

What CBP Expects to Find

The gap between "what CBP expects" and "what importers have" is where penalties originate. And the gap is widest for documentation that was never systematically generated in the first place.

How to Prepare

1. Audit Your Evidence Trail — Now

Don't wait for a PAS notification. Pull a random sample of 20 entries from the past three years and ask:

• Can I produce every document CBP would request for this entry within 48 hours?
• Does the classification have a written rationale on file?
• If USMCA preference was claimed, can I produce the underlying calculation?
• Do the quantities, values, and descriptions match across all documents?

If the answer to any of these is "no" for more than 2 of 20 entries, you have a systemic documentation gap.

2. Implement Continuous Validation

The most effective FA defense isn't post-hoc document reconstruction. It's continuous evidence generation — validating every shipment against a consistent rule set at the time of shipment, not months or years later.

When evidence is generated at each step:

• Every validation check produces a timestamped record
• Inconsistencies are flagged and resolved before filing
• The resolution is documented (why the flag was raised, what was corrected, who approved the correction)
• The resulting audit trail is continuous, not reconstructed

3. Score Your Readiness Continuously

A readiness score that tracks documentation quality over time gives you:

• Early warning: declining scores indicate emerging problems before they become penalties
• Pattern detection: recurring issues with specific suppliers, commodities, or corridors
• Audit defense: evidence that your compliance program is systematic and continuously improving

Importers with continuous pre-validation processes experience 73% fewer findings during Focused Assessments compared to those relying on point-in-time compliance reviews.

The Bottom Line

Focused Assessments are not random. They are targeted, data-driven selections based on risk indicators that accumulate over time. Every documentation error, every inconsistency, every gap in your evidence trail increases your probability of selection.

The best time to prepare for a Focused Assessment is before you're selected for one. The second-best time is now.

Peregon generates continuous evidence trails across every shipment. See how it works →