Page 181 - "Green Investments and financial technologies: opportunities and challenges for Uzbekistan" International Scientific and Practical Conference

“Yashil investitsiyalar va moliyaviy texnologiyalar: O‘zbekiston uchun imkoniyatlar va muammolar” mavzusida xalqaro
ilmiy-amaliy anjuman materiallari to‘plami (Toshkent, JIDU, 2025-yil 7-may)

The Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programs in the United States,
European Union, and China reflect a shared commitment to balancing trade
facilitation with supply chain security, yet their operational philosophies, scope, and
strategic focus vary significantly. The U.S. C-TPAT program is rooted in
counterterrorism and emphasizes voluntary participation among a select group of
trade actors—primarily importers and carriers—underscoring its post-9/11 origins.
In contrast, the EU AEO framework adopts a broader and more integrated approach
by offering tiered certifications that address both customs simplifications and
security across all sectors of the supply chain, from manufacturers to brokers. This
inclusive model is supported by a harmonized legal framework across 27 member
states and a strong network of mutual recognition agreements (MRAs), enhancing
interoperability and cohesion across European borders. Meanwhile, China’s model
is deeply embedded within its risk-based enterprise classification system,
positioning AEO status as a performance-driven reward for high compliance and
operational maturity. With a strong emphasis on digitalization and bilateral MRAs
covering over half of its trade volume, China strategically uses its AEO system as a
lever to streamline trade while boosting global competitiveness.

Despite these differences, all three programs align with the World Customs
Organization’s SAFE Framework and share core principles such as compliance
validation, risk management, and international collaboration through MRAs. Where
the U.S. model favors security-centric vetting and bilateral MRAs, the EU
showcases regulatory uniformity and widespread participation, while China blends
stringent classification with digital innovation and rapid MRA expansion. Together,
these programs illustrate how nations can tailor the AEO concept to fit their
geopolitical, economic, and administrative contexts while contributing to a safer,
more efficient global trade environment. As global supply chains become
increasingly complex, the evolution and convergence of AEO programs will remain
central to future trade resilience and customs modernization.

References:
1. U.S. Customs and Border Protection – C-TPAT Overview
https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry/cargo-security/ctpat
2. World Customs Organization – SAFE Framework of Standards
https://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/facilitation/instrument-and-
tools/tools/safe_package.aspx
3. CBP C-TPAT Minimum Security Criteria (MSC)
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020-Mar/ctpat-
minimum-security-criteria-importers-508.pdf

181