The bill establishes the Land Port of Entry Modernization Trust Fund in the U.S. Treasury and directs specific portions of existing customs and immigration-related fees — including a capped transfer of Merchandise Processing Fees and set surcharges on certain immigration and visa fees — into that fund beginning in fiscal year 2026. The Secretary of the Treasury will invest idle balances in U.S. obligations, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may use amounts from the Trust Fund for construction, expansions, technology procurement, major repairs, and hiring at land ports of entry, but only as provided in advance by appropriation acts.
The Act creates a nine-member Land Port of Entry Modernization Oversight Board to advise DHS on project prioritization and review expenditures, requires annual reporting to appropriations committees and the Board, and amends existing customs fee statutes to route specified shares into the new Trust Fund. The package centralizes a new financing stream for U.S. land-port modernization while preserving congressional appropriation control over outlays and adding a formal stakeholder advisory body.
At a Glance
What It Does
Establishes a Treasury trust fund seeded by 25% of certain express-consignment fees, up to $1.6 billion of Merchandise Processing Fees, and 25% of new surcharges on three immigration/visa fees; invests idle balances in U.S. obligations; and limits DHS to obligating Trust Fund amounts only as appropriated. It also creates an oversight board to advise on priorities and review spending.
Who It Affects
DHS and Customs and Border Protection operations at land ports of entry, the General Services Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as construction partners, importers subject to Customs fees, visa applicants and cross-border travelers facing new surcharges, and industry stakeholders (trucking, state transportation authorities) with representation on the Board.
Why It Matters
This law would create a dedicated, fee-based funding stream aimed at reducing congestion and upgrading border infrastructure and technology, shifting some user-fee revenue into a single account specifically for LPOE projects while leaving final spending decisions to Congress via appropriations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act creates a new Treasury account called the Land Port of Entry Modernization Trust Fund and specifies three revenue sources for it: a quarter share of certain express-consignment fees, up to $1.6 billion drawn from existing Merchandise Processing Fee (MPF) receipts, and a quarter share of new surcharge revenue tied to three immigration and visa fees. Deposits begin in fiscal year 2026 and recur annually; interest and proceeds from investments of idle balances will be credited back to the Trust Fund.
The Treasury must invest excess balances in interest-bearing or government-guaranteed obligations.
Crucially, the Trust Fund does not bypass Congress: DHS can only obligate and spend Trust Fund balances to carry out specified purposes—construction, expansion, technology for inspections, major repairs, and hiring CBP/agricultural/professional staff—if Congress provides appropriation language in advance. The bill also forbids DHS, the Treasury, and State from raising other fees to offset the deposits into the new Trust Fund, while authorizing explicit surcharges (a $40 surcharge on the immigrant user fee, $6 on the land border inspection fee, and $20 on the machine-readable visa fee) that feed the Fund.To guide investment of the fund and spending priorities, the bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a nine-member Land Port of Entry Modernization Oversight Board composed of cabinet-level designees (DHS, GSA, Commerce, State, Transportation) and appointed representatives from trucking, land-port/rail sectors on both the northern and southern borders, and a state/local transportation authority.
The Board must advise on prioritization and review expenditures, hold an initial meeting shortly after appointments, produce an annual prioritization and expenditure recommendation report to DHS, and the Secretary must deliver annual status reports to the relevant appropriations committees and the Board.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Trust Fund will receive 25% of fees collected under the express-consignment fee provision (19 U.S.C. 58c(b)(9)(A)(ii)(I)) beginning FY2026.
Congress authorizes up to $1.6 billion of Merchandise Processing Fee receipts to be deposited into the Trust Fund, with a separate immediate transfer of up to $1.6 billion from the Customs User Fee Account within 60 days of enactment.
The Secretary of Homeland Security must charge a $40 surcharge on the immigrant user fee and a $6 surcharge on the land border inspection fee, while the Secretary of State must charge a $20 surcharge on the machine-readable visa fee; 25% of those surcharge collections flow to the Trust Fund.
Trust Fund balances must be invested in U.S. interest-bearing or guaranteed obligations and credited with interest, but DHS may obligate or expend Trust Fund amounts only when Congress provides funding in advance through appropriations.
The oversight Board has nine members (five federal designees and four appointed industry/state representatives), is chaired by the DHS Secretary, must meet at least annually, and must deliver its first report to the Secretary by January 31, 2026, and annually thereafter.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Creation, sources, and investment of the Trust Fund
These subsections establish the Land Port of Entry Modernization Trust Fund in the Treasury and identify the revenue streams that will feed it: 25% of certain express-consignment fees, up to $1.6 billion of Merchandise Processing Fee receipts, and 25% of the designated surcharge collections. They also require the Treasury to invest idle Fund balances in U.S. interest-bearing or guaranteed obligations and to credit interest and sale proceeds back into the Fund. For implementers, this means receipts are quarantined into an account with routine federal investment rules rather than left as general Treasury receipts.
Permitted uses, appropriation requirement, consultation, and reporting
The Act limits allowable spending to five purposes: constructing new ports of entry, expanding and improving existing land-port infrastructure, procuring inspection technology and related infrastructure, funding major repairs/alterations, and hiring CBP/agricultural/professional staff tied to trade and revenue missions. Importantly, the statute makes those uses contingent on advance appropriations: the Trust Fund is a source, not an automatic spending vehicle. The Secretary must consult multiple executive branch partners, state/local/tribal governments, commerce organizations, and advisory committees and deliver an annual status report by March 10 describing obligations, planned obligations, remaining balances, and expected completion dates.
Land Port of Entry Modernization Oversight Board
This subsection creates a nine-member Board to advise DHS on prioritization and review Trust Fund expenditures. Membership mixes federal agency designees (DHS, GSA, Commerce, State, Transportation) with appointed stakeholders: a trucking industry representative, representatives of land-port or rail sectors on the southern and northern borders, and a state or local transportation authority appointee. Members serve two-year terms for appointed seats, the DHS Secretary chairs the Board, and a quorum is four members. The Board must hold an initial meeting promptly after appointments and issue a prioritization/expenditure recommendation report to the Secretary annually (first due January 31, 2026).
Customs fee adjustments, statutory amendments, and surcharges
This provision directs an immediate transfer (within 60 days) of up to $1.6 billion from the Customs User Fee Account into the new Trust Fund, amends the express-consignment fee statute to route 25% of specified collections into the Fund, clarifies what constitutes an individual bill of lading or airwaybill for fee purposes, and authorizes specific surcharges: $40 on the immigrant user fee and $6 on the land border inspection fee (collected by DHS) and $20 on the machine-readable visa fee (collected by State). The subsection also states those transferred amounts remain available only as appropriated, preserving congressional control over actual outlays.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) operations — the Fund expressly authorizes money for construction, repairs, technology, and hiring that align with CBP’s trade and inspection mission, creating a targeted capital resource for capacity upgrades.
- Commercial cross-border freight and trucking industry — Board representation for the trucking sector and authorized investments in throughput infrastructure and inspection technology aim to reduce congestion and dwell time at land ports that directly affect carriers’ operating costs.
- State, local, and tribal transportation authorities and border communities — the consultative requirement and a dedicated funding source improve prospects for regionally coordinated bi-national transportation master plans and infrastructure projects.
- General Services Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — the bill anticipates GSA and Corps roles in project delivery and makes Trust Fund dollars a potential revenue source for construction and major repairs.
- Trade and agricultural inspection stakeholders (importers, agricultural specialists) — investments in inspection technology and staffing are intended to speed commercial processing and agricultural inspections, which can lower delays for perishable cargo and reduce risk of supply-chain disruption.
Who Bears the Cost
- Travelers and visa applicants — the bill authorizes new flat surcharges ($40 immigrant user fee, $6 land border inspection fee, $20 visa fee) that raise the cost of immigration filings, border crossings, or visa applications for individuals.
- Importing businesses — portions of MPF receipts and express-consignment fee collections (including a required deposit of up to $1.6B MPF) will be redirected into the Trust Fund, potentially changing the effective allocation of fees historically used for other Customs priorities.
- Departmental budgets lacking offsetting appropriations — because Trust Fund dollars are available only as appropriated, DHS and partners may need to continue competing for Congress’ discretionary dollars; project planning could be delayed if appropriations lag receipts.
- Consular and visa-processing operations at State — the Secretary of State is required to collect an added surcharge (and forward revenue), which may create administrative burdens and political friction for consular services.
- Federal agencies and Appropriations Committees — earmarked fee streams increase oversight and reporting responsibilities and may constrain flexible use of fee revenues across agencies.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between creating a dedicated, user-fee–backed capital vehicle that can incentivize long-overdue land-port upgrades and preserving congressional control and fiscal flexibility: the Trust Fund pools fees to target LPOE needs, but spending still requires annual appropriations and the revenue redirections constrain how existing fee receipts are used—trading predictable project financing for retained legislative oversight and the risk of fragmented implementation if appropriations do not follow deposits.
Two implementation features drive the most consequential uncertainties. First, the Trust Fund is supply-side limited: deposits are set by statute (percentages and a capped MPF transfer), but actual investment in ports of entry requires a separate appropriations action each year.
That split—automatic dedicated receipts but non-automatic outlays—creates timing and predictability challenges for multi-year construction projects and for state or local partners expecting predictable cashflows. Second, the bill earmarks portions of existing fee streams and authorizes new surcharges while forbidding DHS, Treasury, and State from raising other fees to ‘‘offset’’ deposits.
That preserves political cover against fee hikes but may shift burdens between traveler/visa applicants and importer communities, and it leaves open how trade-retained fee uses will be reprioritized inside Treasury and Customs accounting.
There are procedural and governance trade-offs as well. The Board combines cabinet-level agency designees with industry and state appointees, but the statute exempts the Board from certain advisory committee rules, potentially reducing transparency about deliberations.
The bill also provides only minimal prioritization criteria and no clear project selection formula or metrics for return on investment, so stakeholders will need to watch how DHS and the Board translate high-level purposes into specific projects. Finally, the cap on MPF transfers and the fixed surcharge amounts mean the Fund’s long-term scale will depend on trade volumes, visa and crossing activity, and future legislative choices, not solely on identified infrastructure backlogs.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.