These new USPS requirements are, apparently, in response to EU custom law changes and strike me as being invasive and I'm curious for the reason behind them.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I would think this new requirement could significantly impact US businesses that regularly ship to the EU.

[Note: file photos and multiple hyperlinks found at linked website article.]

=================

USPS Is Making New Changes to Your Mail, Starting Tomorrow

CUSTOMERS WILL NEED TO FOLLOW NEW RULES WHEN SHIPPING CERTAIN PACKAGES.

By
KALI COLEMAN

FEBRUARY 28, 2023

If you've noticed your mail is costing you more money or you've found yourself waiting longer for packages lately, you're not alone. The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is in the middle of a major decade-long transformation that started back in 2021. With this initiative, the agency is trying to become a more efficient and financially healthy organization, but in order to do so, it has to make changes for customers. We've already seen higher prices and longer service standards—and now, the USPS is gearing up to make even more adjustments. Read on to find out what new changes the agency has in store for your mail, starting tomorrow.

Mailing requirements for shipping to Europe are changing in March.

The new month is bringing new changes for postal customers. New customs rules for shipping packages to Europe are going into effect starting March 1, according to the Postal Service. These regulations will make it mandatory for you to list each item in your package with a "specific, accurate description" on the customs declaration form.

"Acceptable goods descriptions must include complete, detailed information, explaining the precise nature of the goods in plain language," the USPS explains on its website, adding that it must also give "an indication of what the goods are, what they are made of, and what purpose they serve."

The USPS says the new postal regulations apply to nearly 30 countries.

The new customs regulations will apply to any packages shipped to countries that follow European Union (EU) customs rules, according to the Postal Service. This covers nearly 30 different countries, including France, Italy, and Spain. Under the new regulations, you can't list broad descriptors like "clothes" or "medicine" on the customs forms for these countries.

"For each item's description: You can't just name a general category; your description must be specific. For example, you can't just say 'electronics'; you have to be specific about the type of electronics, like 'computer,' 'mobile phone,' or 'television,'" the USPS further explains.

The agency provides more examples of acceptable and non-acceptable descriptions on its website.

Your package could be destroyed if you don't follow these rules.

This isn't simply a suggestion for those shipping to these European countries—there are serious consequences if you don't abide by the new rules.

"If you don't provide more-detailed content descriptions on your customs forms, your packages may be returned or refused," the USPS says.

And a returned item may be the least of your worries. Not following the rules can result in "delayed, discarded, or destroyed packages," according to the Postal Service.

If you run a business, you may also experience loss of international revenue and receive fines or penalties for noncompliance.

"Outbound U.S. shippers send tens of millions of packages to EU countries each year," the USPS said. "However, if you don't comply with new requirements in EU customs rules, your shipments will be at risk. Don't jeopardize your packages, revenue, and customer satisfaction!"

There's another shipping change happening this summer.

The Postal Service is planning even more changes to your shipments after next month.

On Feb. 10, the agency filed a proposal with the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) to get rid of its First-Class Package Service (FCPS) shipping category and replace it with a new offering called USPS Ground Advantage.

"The filing streamlines and simplifies package shipping options for customers and enhances the Postal Service's ground product offering," the USPS explained, noting that Retail Ground, Parcel Select Ground, and First-Class Package Service will all be incorporated into this new shipping option.

USPS Ground Advantage "will feature two-to five day service standards for packages up to 70 pounds," according to the agency. In its filing, the Postal Service said it expects that its retail and commercial customers will all benefit from this consolidated ground package offering," starting July 9.

Sources referenced in this article

1) https://www.usps.com/internati...eu-customs-rules.htm

2)
https://about.usps.com/newsroo...icing-simplicity.htm

Just more bullshit. Changing the name of the service from this to that is meaningless, unless the culture of incompetence and laziness is rooted out. It's not the service name but the customer service that matters.

If the USPS is “making changes”, it very rarely benefits the customer. I’m sure these will be no exception to that rule.

The need to fix something. I mailed a package from my local P.O. just north of Baton Rouge. It was to go to Pace, FL. Well it got to Baton Rouge then New Orleans then Mobile then Pensacola. Then it went to Mobile then New Orleans then Baton Rouge. Then they tried again. BR to NOLA to Mobile to Pensacola. It got there finally and was broken.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
With this initiative, the agency is trying to become a more efficient and financially healthy organization…

Hooded Sweatshirt, Brand: Champion Men's, Black, Long sleeve, size Large. For wear during protests, riots and overthrowing fascist regimes.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Just more bullshit. Changing the name of the service from this to that is meaningless, unless the culture of incompetence and laziness is rooted out. It's not the service name but the customer service that matters.

Yes.
I've had good luck with UPS. Sometimes it costs a little more for UPS ground service. Sometimes it's less convenient than having it picked up at my mailbox. But it's usually efficient.

Which gets me to the issue of subsidies...
If USPS has a monopoly on so-called 1st class mail ...
Why are they allowed to compete with UPS and FedEx?
And why do we (taxpayers) continue to subsidize USPS?
Either compete in ALL markets, or get out.

As inefficient as USPS may be, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to establish post offices and post roads and to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper in the execution of this function.

^^^ Yes, of course.
Congress the power to establish post offices and for a long time it worked out OK.
But Congress DOES NOT have the obligation to establish post offices, or to continue them, or to subsidize them.
It's inertia. Once established, hard to get rid of.

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny 3eagles:
Hooded Sweatshirt, Brand: Champion Men's, Black, Long sleeve, size Large. For wear during protests, riots and overthrowing fascist regimes.

The description was not good enough; the package was returned...

What materials were used in making this so-called sweatshirt?
Were the materials sustainably sourced?
What country was it made in?
What labor law protections exist in the country of origin?
What is the carbon footprint (measured in tons) of the process to make this product?
What is the ESG score of the product's manufacturer and seller?

Maybe they could spend more money on efficient service if they stopped paying for and airing BS commercials trying to tell us how great they are!

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Just more bullshit. Changing the name of the service from this to that is meaningless, unless the culture of incompetence and laziness is rooted out. It's not the service name but the customer service that matters.

Yes.
I've had good luck with UPS. Sometimes it costs a little more for UPS ground service. Sometimes it's less convenient than having it picked up at my mailbox. But it's usually efficient.

Which gets me to the issue of subsidies...
If USPS has a monopoly on so-called 1st class mail ...
Why are they allowed to compete with UPS and FedEx?
And why do we (taxpayers) continue to subsidize USPS?
Either compete in ALL markets, or get out.

First off, UPS and FedEx are being allowed to compete with the USPS, not the other way around. Second, the USPS does not use taxpayer money for their operations. Third, if UPS and FedEx were allowed to deliver first class mail you can bet your ass that some people in the country would either receive no mail delivery or it would be prohibitively expensive. Making a profit would supersede universal mail delivery.

quote:

First off, UPS and FedEx are being allowed to compete with the USPS, not the other way around.

The USPS actually has two legally enforced monopolies, as per Title 39 of the US Code. One is over the delivery of anything defined as a “letter,” which is within certain size and weight limits. The second is over the use of your mailbox. That is correct: there are criminal violations if anyone puts anything in your mail box that is not US government approved “mail.” The US is the only country that I know having that latter monopoly, while most countries (including all 27 member EU countries) have done away with the first, the delivery monopoly.

Thus, parcels were never subject to the delivery monopoly. Indeed, UPS was in that business first, and USPS entered afterwards. Thus we have a case of the government competing directly with the private sector in a market where there is no, and never was, a “market failure.” This is why DHL, FedEx, Amazon (see e.g.http://www.creativelogistics.com/blog/what-are-the-implications-of-amazon-entering-the-package-delivery-business), and others are free to enter and exit the parcel business. It is defined as a different market.

https://fee.org/articles/an-ex...the-postal-monopoly/

quote:

Second, the USPS does not use taxpayer money for their operations.

For years the United States Postal Service has added the following statement to most of its news releases, “The Postal Service receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.”

Recently it has become increasingly evident that the self-financed federal agency might have to modify that claim.

Two actions make clear that the financially troubled USPS is having to turn to taxpayer resources to reduce its sea of red ink.

First, on April 9, President Joe Biden’s administration threw its support behind funneling more tax dollars to fund the agency’s new next generation mail delivery fleet.

Second, the Postal Service acknowledged on April 2 that it has accepted $8.64 billion of taxpayer funds to offset some of its losses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Both steps seem to reflect the reality that the USPS cannot make it on its own without taxpayer support.

In an April 9 request to Congress, Biden sought $600 million for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure for 18 federal agencies.

The request specified that funds would be used by the General Services Administration “for other agencies and for United States Postal Service charging infrastructure.”

In testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Feb. 24, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy conceded that only 10 percent of the initial next generation delivery vehicles the USPS is ordering will be electric powered.

Separately the Postal Service confirmed that it has begun drawing emergency COVID-19 relief from a $10 million appropriation.

“ … We have been reimbursed for such expenses in the cumulative amount of $8.64 billion,” the Postal Service said in a brief statement. It did not offer any details of what expenses it had charged as COVID-related damages.

The lack of detail troubled Paul Steidler, a senior fellow at the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., who has followed postal issues.

Steidler said in an April 6 statement that the USPS “owes Congress … and the American public an explanation about this...

https://www.linns.com/news/pos...tal-service-s-rescue

quote:

Third, if UPS and FedEx were allowed to deliver first class mail you can bet your ass that some people in the country would either receive no mail delivery or it would be prohibitively expensive.

I'd be willing to take that risk.

quote:

Thus, parcels were never subject to the delivery monopoly. Indeed, UPS was in that business first,

Wrong. Wells Fargo was first.

In 2006 a law approved by congress and signed by President Bush required that the Postal Service pre-fund future Postal Service retirees 75 years in advance. No other company or industry is required to do that. Consequently the Postal Service lost 54.8 Billion dollars from 2007 to 2016. The Postal Service was doing relatively well prior to that and of course the congress critters needed their share of the pie.

"I'd be willing to take that risk." It isn't all about you. Others would disagree.

At any rate these types of discussions devolve into stories that are either factually wrong on their face, or they have been embellished to the point of absurdity.

quote:

Originally posted by Ogie:Third, if UPS and FedEx were allowed to deliver first class mail you can bet your ass that some people in the country would either receive no mail delivery or it would be prohibitively expensive. Making a profit would supersede universal mail delivery.

In my town the USPS does not deliver to physical addresses. Everyone must have a PO box to receive mail. Something about it being too hard to deliver to homes and businesses.

To get my mail I must go to the post office.

But UPS and FedEx do deliver to our front door. So it obviously is easily possible to deliver, the USPS just doesn't want to.

I would happily have the US mail handled by either UPS or Fedex here.

I agree with Fly-Sig. My local PO keeps waffling on our rural mail delivery route. They keep threatening to make all residents get a PO box at our expense ($94/yr) so they can "efficiently" deliver the mail....So what is efficient about this system? It damn sure isn't efficient for the customers to drive their vehicle to a post office with 3 parking spaces from 10 miles away with limited window hours to get anything that doesn't fit into the 3"x5.5" box. Better still is the post master for the area keeps wanting to shut this post office and a few of other smaller ones down, which means that if they shut down rural delivery, I'd be required to drive at least 20 miles one way to get my mail Never mind the $94 a year I'd have to pay to them for that privilege. For a government agency that is trying to cut it's carbon footprint, they'd sure be contributing lots more CO2 by doing it that way


As to the article above, well, I can't say I am surprised at any of it. A couple of observations that I can make. 1. The government wants to know exactly what is being sent and by whom. It doesn't matter if things may be personal in nature and nobody's business, they just want to show you that they're in control (and maybe put you on a list for sending specific things). If you don't meet the standard, regardless of them taking money to ship an item, they'll just destroy it or dump it. 2. Gives them plenty of cover when an item is "lost or damaged" in shipping (which is mostly just code for stolen by a USPS employee). See, with this new system, the employees will now be able to target specific packages that contain goods they want instead of rifling through all of them to find that new PS5 to sell for dope money.

quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:
It damn sure isn't efficient for the customers to drive their vehicle to a post office with 3 parking spaces from 10 miles away with limited window hours to get anything that doesn't fit into the 3"x5.5" box.

Parking is a problem in this town whenever tourists are here. The half dozen spots clearly posted as for postal patrons only are always full. Street parking is paid, and very inconvenient in having to use an app on my phone and pay for an hour minimum. So I go inside the post office to find no patrons whatsoever in there, or maybe one or two, meaning all the cars parked in the posted reserved spots are NOT in the post office.

So after driving down to the post office I either risk getting a parking ticket on the street or I illegally park in the handicapped spot.

The small box here costs $200 per year, btw.