Advocating for Strengthened Seafood Regulations

The primary objective of this advocacy toolkit is to provide importers with the knowledge and resources necessary to advocate for robust and well-enforced seafood regulations. Effective advocacy involves understanding existing regulations, identifying areas for improvement, and engaging in ongoing dialogue with policymakers and other stakeholders. 

Key Benefits of Using This Toolkit:

1. Mitigating risk and liability: By advocating for and championing robust seafood regulations, especially import control rules, importers can reduce the risk of IUU products entering their supply chains, protecting their businesses from potential legal and reputational harm.
2. Enhancing traceability and transparency: Adoption of electronic traceability systems, alignment with existing seafood traceability standards, and working towards traceability and transparency best practices can support improved supply chain transparency and facilitate regulatory compliance while reducing impacts on trade flow.
3. Promoting standardization: Advocating for standardized data requirements across U.S. seafood regulations and trade monitoring programs supports more efficient and streamlined data collection and reporting.

This toolkit is structured to guide importers through the various aspects of key U.S. seafood regulations and how to advocate for more effective implementation of existing policies and design of future policies:

• An Overview of U.S. Import Control Rules: Explanations of existing U.S. import control measures and their significance for seafood importers 
• Advocacy Guidance: Strategies and tips for advocating for stronger seafood import regulations
• An Overview of the FDA Food Traceability Final Rule (FSMA 204): An in-depth look at the FSMA 204 and its implications for seafood importers
• Importer FAQs: Answers to common questions seafood importers may have regarding seafood import controls and advocacy opportunities 

This toolkit serves as a resource for U.S. importers committed to ensuring the sustainability and legality of their seafood supply chains. By leveraging the information and strategies provided, U.S. seafood importers can play a pivotal role in advocating for effective seafood policy, thereby combatting illegal fishing and promoting the long-term health of the seafood industry.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) oversees four seafood import control programs: the Seafood Import Monitoring Program, the Tuna Tracking and Verification Program, the Atlantic Highly Migratory Species International Trade Program, and the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Program. These programs are designed to support sustainable fisheries, promote food security, complement other policy efforts, and prevent products that do not meet U.S. market admissibility criteria—such as those resulting from illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing—from entering the country.

Transparency around program implementation

Concerns have been raised about SIMP’s effectiveness in deterring illegal seafood trade, citing uncertainty around enforcement, auditor subjectivity, and a lack of transparency on data use and program efficacy. To address these concerns, importers can advocate for greater government transparency in how regulations are implemented and enforced, especially when importers are the party responsible for compliance. Regular reporting by government agencies (e.g., CBP, NOAA) on enforcement actions, updates to guidance materials, and sharing aggregated data trends could help businesses strengthen compliance and responsible procurement efforts. Additionally, importers have stressed the importance of industry inclusion in regulatory design and updates to ensure policies remain ambitious yet practical, reflecting real-world supply chain challenges and opportunities.

Capacity building for overseas supply chains 

U.S. seafood importers have emphasized the need for greater capacity building in overseas supply chains to help companies comply with import control rules and trade regulations. Importers rely on data exchanges and cooperation from foreign suppliers (e.g., exporters), but challenges such as inconsistent regulatory frameworks and privacy concerns can make it difficult to secure accurate and timely information. To address this, importers can advocate for expanded training programs, multilingual resources, and clearer guidance materials to help overseas exporters understand and adhere to U.S. regulatory and data expectations. Additionally, greater inter-and intra-governmental collaboration is needed to provide technical assistance to companies, strengthen chain of custody documentation, and encourage global adoption of electronic traceability systems, all of which can support a more consistent and fair regulatory landscape across all seafood imports.

Role of regulations in combatting IUU fishing and human rights abuses

While not all U.S. seafood importers actively advocate for import control rules and robust seafood trade programs, many recognize the potential benefits these programs can offer in keeping IUU products out of seafood supply chains. Additionally, robust food safety regulations are essential in maintaining the quality and safety of seafood, ensuring that consumers receive products that meet high health and hygiene standards. Importers who see the value in these regulations emphasize the need for strong enforcement, including penalties for non-compliance, to protect consumers from fraudulent or unsafe products and support the long-term sustainability of global fisheries. These importers also recognize the importance of traceability requirements and supply chain transparency to ensure that seafood entering the U.S. market is safe, legal, and ethically sourced.

Improved U.S. government interagency collaboration across import regulations 

The majority of U.S. seafood importers strongly advocate for improved interagency collaboration across import regulations to better combat IUU fishing, seafood fraud, and human rights abuses. Import control rules, which regularly collect large amounts of data for recordkeeping, permitting, and reporting purposes, can be a powerful tool to facilitate interagency data exchange. Agencies such as NOAA, which addresses IUU fishing, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Labor (DOL), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which focus on food safety, human rights, and enforcement efforts, are critical to sharing and leveraging these datasets. By advocating for the government to adopt a whole-of-government approach, these regulations (and the data they generate) can more effectively address IUU fishing, seafood fraud, and labor abuses, benefiting both consumers and the seafood industry.

Harmonization and standardization of regulations

Many U.S. seafood importers advocate for the harmonization and standardization of seafood-related regulations to reduce the complexity and cost of compliance. There is often a concern about the burden of compliance, particularly the complexity and expense of collecting and verifying required data, which can be amplified when dealing with products subject to multiple programs. Importers seek to avoid duplicate efforts when complying with multiple traceability or sustainability programs and generally want clearer, more streamlined rules. Additionally, data reporting challenges, such as inconsistent formats and increased paperwork, require more of a company’s time and resources, making it harder to comply with disparate regulations. Harmonizing these efforts would improve efficiency, reduce administrative burdens, and enable importers to better focus on ensuring that seafood is legally sourced and sustainably managed.

Communications and feedback

Importers recognize the potential impact of future regulatory changes, such as the expansion of SIMP to additional species or the introduction of stricter food traceability requirements, on their procurement and import strategies.  They also advocate for the creation of regular forums where industry stakeholders can discuss challenges, practical solutions, bottlenecks, and opportunities, allowing all parties to take a more proactive approach to regulation rather than a reactive one. Various forms of support from the U.S. government (e.g., pilot programs, detailed guidance materials, individual meetings with program implementors) are critical in helping companies navigate the complexities of these regulations and can ensure smoother compliance.

Cost of seafood regulations

The cost of seafood regulations remains a primary concern for many U.S. seafood importers. Companies subject to more regulations or those importing products affected by multiple trade programs often expend additional resources—including time, money, and staff capacity—to ensure compliance. While enforcement and verification are critical to the success of these programs, when importers are audited, they generally shift resources away from daily operations as staff are reassigned to handle government inquiries. Similar to program implementation, when importers advocate for more effective verification and targeted enforcement, this could allow companies to focus resources on addressing sustainability, legality, and traceability within their supply chains, rather than solely on regulatory compliance. As new regulations are developed or existing ones updated, it is crucial that importers use feedback loops to understand the true financial burden that regulations can place on companies and to capture these learnings to create more effective policies moving forward.

The Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) is a program designed to prevent illegally caught and fraudulently labeled seafood from entering the U.S. market. Importers must comply with specific reporting and recordkeeping requirements to ensure traceability in seafood supply chains from harvest to import. In November 2024, NOAA outlined potential updates to the program in their SIMP Action Plan which aims to strengthen the program through expanded traceability requirements, improved risk detection, and enhanced compliance support.

Reporting Requirements

Importers must submit key data at the time of entry to verify the legality of seafood products.

• Chain of Custody Documentation: Records detailing the movement of seafood after landing must be transferred through the supply chain with the product and maintained by the importer of record.
• Harvest and Landing Data Submission: Importers must submit harvest and landing data through the International Trade Data System (ITDS) “message sets” at the time of entry into the U.S.
• Small-Scale Harvesters: For small-scale fisheries, the first aggregator can collect and pass along the required information. However, the International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP) holder is ultimately responsible for electronically entering and submitting the data to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) via ITDS.
• NOAA’s planned Global Seafood Data System (GSDS) will allow for pre-entry screening, shifting away from the current post-entry review process to a more proactive risk-based approach to screening and enforcement.

Recordkeeping Requirements

Importers must maintain documentation to verify the legality and traceability of covered seafood products.

• Retention Period: The importer of record must retain all records for at least two years and be able to provide them for audits if requested.
• Permit Requirements: The importer of record must hold a valid International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP) issued by NOAA Fisheries.
• Vessel or Farm Data Submission: Owners of fishing vessels or aquaculture farms may submit harvest and landing data directly to the IFTP holder or transfer it along the supply chain.

• Expanded Scope of SIMP: NOAA plans to expand SIMP to all U.S. seafood imports, creating a two-tiered system. The first tier will include high-risk species, requiring the full set of SIMP key data elements (KDEs), while the second tier will have reduced reporting requirements for lower-risk species. The species lists for each tier will be periodically reviewed and adjusted based on risk analysis.
• Increased Compliance Scrutiny: NOAA plans to implement pre-entry risk screening for SIMP imports, requiring importers to submit data before entry into U.S. commerce rather than at the time of entry. This will allow NOAA to identify high-risk shipments earlier and work with CBP to prevent IUU and fraudulent products from entering the market.
• Additional Data Collection: NOAA is considering expanding the required KDEs for certain species, including fishing vessel trip dates and more detailed information about transshipment activities, to increase transparency and improve risk detection for IUU fishing and forced labor.
• Updated Permitting and Reporting Requirements: NOAA plans to clarify the responsibilities of IFTP holders, standardize reporting procedures, and modernize the National Permit System to improve the efficiency of SIMP compliance.
• Voluntary Government-to-Government Data Sharing: NOAA is exploring a pilot program that would allow partner nations to share harvest data in near real-time, enabling more accurate entry data verification and faster risk screening and audits.
• Enhanced Compliance Support: NOAA is committed to improving industry outreach, compliance materials, and training for importers, brokers, and foreign exporters. These efforts aim to increase industry understanding of SIMP requirements and reduce reporting errors.
• Potential Exemptions for Non-Commercial Imports: NOAA is considering a de minimis exemption, which would allow small-value, non-commercial seafood imports (e.g., research specimens, trade show samples, personal-use products) to enter the U.S. without full SIMP reporting requirements.

**This action plan serves as a roadmap that NOAA Fisheries will use to strengthen SIMP. It reflects the extensive stakeholder engagement and feedback collected during NOAA’s comprehensive review of SIMP but is not a formal rulemaking and is subject to change.

Through discussions with seafood importers from 2019-2025, FishWise identified several key challenges and opportunities for improving SIMP compliance. NOAA’s SIMP Action Plan directly addresses some of these concerns, providing potential solutions and improvements to facilitate compliance and enhance program effectiveness.

1. Clarity on Requirements

   • Importers emphasized the need for clearer guidance on required documentation, particularly regarding chain of custody records, which vary widely across different fisheries and supply chains.
   • Many importers suggested that standardized, fillable forms—available in multiple languages—would reduce confusion and streamline compliance.

NOAA Action Plan Update: NOAA plans to improve SIMP compliance materials, including updated training resources and guidance on supply chain documentation. Additionally, NOAA is working to clarify the responsibilities of IFTP holders and standardize reporting procedures, making compliance expectations clearer for importers.

2. Technology and Data Management Challenges

   • Importers highlighted the burdens of manual data entry and recordkeeping, stating that many supply chains still rely on outdated systems, making compliance time-consuming and costly.
   • Many importers expected that digitized traceability would become more widespread over time, but foundational challenges in data collection and records management persist across supply chains. Some companies are still “dealing with early 90’s processes,” indicating that technological adoption has not progressed as anticipated.
   • The lack of standardized documentation formats across different fisheries and supply chains creates additional challenges, as records are often inconsistent and difficult to interpret. Importers suggested that NOAA could help by providing clearer guidance on what types of records are acceptable for compliance.

NOAA Action Plan Update: NOAA is working to increase analytical capacity by leveraging its Global Seafood Data System (GSDS) to automate data analysis, risk screening, and reporting. Additionally, expanding the IT infrastructure for SIMP will allow NOAA to process pre-entry screenings and move away from manual post-entry reviews. Further, NOAA has proposed a government-to-government pilot program which could alleviate some of the data sharing burden on importers because it would enable partner nations to share harvest data on U.S. imports directly in near real time.

3. Understanding SIMP’s Impact and Effectiveness

   • Importers expressed frustration over the lack of visibility into how SIMP data is used to prevent IUU fishing. Many requested that NOAA publish regular updates on enforcement actions, risk trends, and program effectiveness.
   • Strong support was given to risk-flagging tools that would allow regulators to focus on high-risk imports rather than non-substantive reporting errors.

NOAA Action Plan Update: NOAA is enhancing risk detection by implementing pre-entry screening for SIMP imports and utilizing GSDS, allowing real-time identification and risk-screening of high-risk products before they enter U.S. commerce. Additionally, NOAA has communicated a desire to expand industry engagement and increase transparency on SIMP enforcement and effectiveness by strengthening partnerships through its government-to-government pilot program. 

4. Capacity Building and Government Support

   • Importers called for more outreach and training from NOAA, particularly on navigating compliance challenges with small-scale and foreign fisheries that may struggle with documentation and supply chain traceability.
   • Many suggested that NOAA should work more closely with foreign governments to gather standardized supply chain documentation rather than placing the burden on U.S. importers.
   • Importers also expressed interest in a formalized industry input forum, similar to CBP’s Trade Support Network, to provide ongoing feedback and facilitate communication between government agencies and industry.

NOAA Action Plan Update: NOAA is considering establishing a voluntary government-to-government import data program, which would allow partner nations to share harvest data in near real-time. This initiative would improve traceability and enhance transparency and data verification efforts between governments and industry. Additionally, NOAA is working to expand SIMP staff capacity to support program growth and provide better outreach and training for industry stakeholders.

These planned improvements from NOAA address many of the concerns raised by importers and provide a pathway toward a more streamlined, efficient, and transparent SIMP compliance process. As NOAA moves forward with its Action Plan, importers have an opportunity to engage in public comment periods to help shape these improvements to ensure they balance traceability goals with industry realities.

Updated March 11, 2025

Within the United States, a couple of changes are anticipated for U.S. businesses. First is NOAA’s Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) Action Plan, which plans to expand seafood traceability at all imports via a two-tiered approach based on risk level, introduce pre-entry screening of products, and pilot a government-to-government data sharing program. Second, the FDA Food Traceability Rule (Rule 204) will require enhanced traceability records for certain foods, including most seafood, to facilitate faster identification and removal of potentially contaminated products from the market and improve food safety and recall efficiency. 

Initially established under an Executive Order in 2022 (and expanded in 2023 to address circumnavigation issues) the U.S. currently maintains a ban on Russian seafood. This includes seafood harvested in Russian waters or by Russian-flagged vessels, even if processed in third countries (e.g., China). Given the Trump Administration’s evolving international policies, the data required by U.S. importers are subject to change or could be removed altogether.

SIMP requires detailed harvest-level data, including vessel identity, to ensure the legality of seafood imports (subject to change given NOAA’s intention to collect additional data as a condition of entry outlined in its SIMP Action Plan). This contrasts with the FDA’s Food Traceability Rule, which focuses on critical tracking events (CTEs) and requires a Traceability Lot Code for certain seafood products to facilitate rapid tracebacks in case of foodborne illness. While SIMP and The FDA Food Traceability Rule have different focuses, aligning an importer’s data collection practices across these regulations can help achieve end-to-end traceability, improving both compliance and supply chain transparency.

It is important to note that some importers might not be subject to the Food Traceability Rule, depending on whether they manufacture, process, pack, or hold any food traceability list (FTL) foods. If an importer is subject to the rule, they are only responsible for complying with the portions of the rule that apply to them, based on the CTEs within their supply chains.

U.S. seafood regulations provide a framework to help importers combat IUU fishing while enhancing traceability and food safety. Programs such as SIMP, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Russian seafood ban enhance chain-of-custody requirements to ensure seafood is legally sourced, level the playing field for marine mammal protection standards, discourage destructive fishing practices and limit IUU-sourced seafood. The FDA’s Food Traceability Rule (Rule 204) and Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) support supply chain transparency, traceability, and transparency efforts through enhanced chain of custody and labeling requirements. These types of regulations not only reduce the risk of IUU fishing but also seafood fraud and foodborne illness while simultaneously promoting responsible sourcing.

While these programs can provide a foundational layer of compliance by requiring specific information to verify the legality of products, regulations should not be the only tool importers rely on.  Effective seafood regulations can enhance a company’s due diligence policies by reinforcing traceability efforts, but they work best when integrated into a broader strategy that includes robust internal controls and proactive supply chain transparency, ensuring a more comprehensive approach to mitigating risks and safeguarding the integrity of a company’s products.

The three largest market states, the EU, the U.S., and Japan, currently lead in designing and implementing unilateral import control schemes, while other countries like Canada, South Korea, and Australia are exploring or strengthening their own seafood traceability and import control systems. This reflects s global trend and commitment to enhanced seafood import rules to ensure product safety, legality, and traceability, supporting efforts to combat IUU fishing. As more countries adopt similar measures, harmonization and standardization of import control rules become increasingly important for streamlined data requirements and stronger global enforcement efforts. U.S. importers and exporters should stay informed about these evolving requirements for compliance, maintain market access, and support sustainable, legal fisheries.

Importers can stay updated on U.S. seafood regulations by monitoring key government agency websites and subscribing to news alerts from agencies such as NOAA Fisheries, FDA, CBP, and USDA, which oversees regulations related to seafood and seafood imports. Attending government webinars and industry trade shows, and participating in public comment sessions allows businesses to stay informed and engaged with evolving regulations. Additionally, working with customs brokers, trade consultants, and regulatory monitoring services (e.g., government alerts and databases) can help importers track and stay informed about changes in laws, regulations, and compliance requirements affecting their business. Additionally, subscribing to industry news and trade associations and joining industry working groups focused on IUU fishing, food safety, traceability, and/or import compliance can help companies stay abreast of the legal landscape.

Advocating for robust seafood trade policies benefits importers by improving regulatory clarity, reducing trade barriers, enhancing supply chain efficiency, and ensuring fair competition. Streamlining import control rules (e.g., advocating for harmonization across market states requirements), can lower compliance costs and simplify documentation. Digitizing traceability systems (including trade monitoring programs) and modernizing policies can improve product traceability, reduce paperwork, and facilitate faster customs clearance, ensuring the quality of fresh products and reducing disruptions to trade flow. Additionally, stronger enforcement against IUU fishing prevents unfair competition and labeling laws enhance the transparency of products. Supporting policies aligned with sustainability and food safety standards can expand market access and build consumer trust. Engaging in policy discussions ensures that regulations address current industry challenges but also provide practical, yet effective solutions.