Overview
The U.S. border doesn’t just move at the desert. It moves at airports—quietly, through paperwork. CBP’s latest technical amendment rewrites who gets on the “user-fee airport” list: five airports get customs access they can pay for, and one airport (Ontario, California) gets off the tab.
This sounds small until you realize what’s really being traded. Airports aren’t buying a sign—they’re buying time, access, and the right to bring international passengers and cargo straight into their local economy without detouring to bigger hubs. The provided story slug was too narrow to track the real arc here: an ongoing, pay-to-expand CBP footprint that keeps reshaping where “international arrival” is even possible.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
CBP decides where international arrivals can be processed—and who pays when appropriations won’t.
NATA tracks the real-world implications for business aviation and airport operators.
A large Southern California airport that moved from paying-for-service to a different CBP designation.
TLH is trying to turn a domestic-focused airport into a credible international gateway.
Timeline
-
Industry groups broadcast the new map to operators
IndustryNATA summarizes the operational takeaway: five new airports offer customs services under the user-fee model; Ontario no longer does.
-
CBP’s technical amendment takes effect: five added, Ontario removed
Rule ChangeCBP updates 19 CFR 122.15’s user-fee airport list to reflect signed MOAs for five airports and the withdrawal of Ontario’s user-fee designation.
-
Hillsboro signs a user-fee airport MOA
AgreementCBP signs an MOA designating Hillsboro Airport as a user-fee airport, later reflected in the regulatory list update.
-
Business aviation media spotlights Vero Beach CBP availability
IndustryAviation trade media reports CBP services are available at Vero Beach for international arrivals, detailing operating windows for the facility.
-
Colorado Springs launches scheduled international flights
OperationsCOS announces its first scheduled international route and highlights its new Federal Inspection Station enabling CBP passenger processing on arrival.
-
Tallahassee says its international facility is 80% built
InfrastructureThe City of Tallahassee announces a state matching grant and reiterates plans for a CBP-approved international processing facility and FTZ work.
-
Vero Beach customs facility pitch gets local spotlight
Local ReportingLocal reporting describes a CBP-capable facility aimed at capturing private international arrivals without detours to other airports.
-
Vero Beach gets its user-fee MOA
AgreementCBP signs the agreement that enables Vero Beach Regional Airport to host reimbursed customs services for international arrivals.
-
Colorado Springs and Tallahassee get user-fee MOAs
AgreementCBP signs MOAs designating both airports as user-fee airports, putting future international processing on a reimbursement footing.
-
Santa Maria secures a CBP user-fee agreement
AgreementCBP signs an MOA designating Santa Maria Public Airport District as a user-fee airport, a precursor to the later regulatory list update.
-
CBP announces Ontario’s pivot to landing-rights processing
StatementCBP says Ontario will transition from user-fee to landing-rights status, positioning the airport for expanded international cargo and passenger operations.
-
Ontario asks to end its user-fee status
DecisionCBP later discloses that Ontario’s airport authority requested termination of its user-fee designation, starting the off-ramp from the program.
-
Congress invents the “pay-for-customs” airport model
LegalFederal law authorizes customs services at certain small facilities if users reimburse the full cost, with a governor’s approval required for designation.
Scenarios
More Airports Follow: User-Fee List Keeps Growing Through 2026
Discussed by: CBP public-private partnership program materials; business aviation associations tracking customs access
If demand for international access keeps rising faster than CBP staffing budgets, more airports will choose the same trade: reimburse CBP for the privilege of becoming an international arrival point. The trigger is local economic development pressure—especially from business aviation, seasonal leisure routes, and niche cargo—plus governors willing to sign support letters. The result is a rolling expansion of customs-capable nodes that look “small” in rulemaking but big in routing behavior.
Ontario Becomes the Template: Big Airports “Graduate” Out of User-Fee Status
Discussed by: CBP’s Ontario announcement; airport cargo-development circles
Ontario’s shift signals a second path: airports that outgrow the user-fee model will push toward designations better suited for higher volumes and larger cargo projects. If CBP continues approving these transitions, airports will treat user-fee status as a stepping stone—prove demand, build facilities, then renegotiate into a different category that better fits sustained passenger and cargo operations.
Sticker Shock: Local Sponsors Balk at the True Cost of CBP Presence
Discussed by: Operator and FBO associations (including NATA); airport finance advisors
User-fee status can look like a fast lane—until sponsors internalize the recurring bills: staffing, IT, compliant facilities, and the operational overhead of running a mini border checkpoint. If utilization underperforms projections, some sponsors will either restrict hours, raise fees (hurting demand), or terminate MOAs and revert to landing-rights routing through other airports.
Congressional Pressure Builds: “Stop Making Airports Pay for Basic Border Services”
Discussed by: Trade and travel stakeholders citing CBP staffing constraints; broader debates over user fees and appropriations
A political shift—especially if regional airports argue the model disadvantages smaller communities—could drive attempts to expand non-reimbursable CBP staffing or cap certain charges. The trigger would be a coalition of local governments, airports, and business groups tying customs access to regional competitiveness. The likely outcome is modest reform rather than reversal: more flexibility, not the end of alternative funding.
Historical Context
Trade and Tariff Act creates the “user-fee airport” concept
1984What Happened
Congress authorized a way for smaller airports and facilities to get customs services without tapping general appropriations. The bargain was strict: the facility must justify that volumes don’t merit free staffing, the governor must approve, and the users must fully reimburse costs.
Outcome
Short term: CBP gained a scalable tool to extend services without expanding baseline budgets.
Long term: The U.S. effectively created a parallel, pay-to-access border footprint inside aviation.
Why It's Relevant
Today’s list update is the living, moving edge of a 1984 funding decision.
Creation of DHS/CBP consolidates border authorities under one agency
2002–2003What Happened
After 9/11, border inspection functions were reorganized into DHS and CBP, centralizing policy and operational control of ports of entry. That consolidation made standardized airport designations, facility requirements, and funding models more enforceable at scale.
Outcome
Short term: CBP became the single choke point for lawful entry processing at airports.
Long term: A unified agency could expand partnerships while keeping standards and security centralized.
Why It's Relevant
User-fee airports work because CBP can say “yes” (or “no”) across the entire system.
Reimbursable Services Program (RSP) expands “pay for more CBP” beyond user-fee airports
2013–2016What Happened
CBP launched reimbursable agreements that let public and private partners pay for added inspection capacity and hours at ports of entry. Over time, Congress expanded authorities and CBP scaled the model into hundreds of agreements.
Outcome
Short term: CBP could surge capacity where demand spiked, without permanent appropriations growth.
Long term: Alternative funding normalized: service location and service level increasingly follow who can pay.
Why It's Relevant
The user-fee airport list is one branch of a larger, entrenched alternative-funding ecosystem.