On Wednesday, the Health Subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce is scheduled to hold a hearing (“Healthier America: Legislative Proposals on the Regulation and Oversight of Food”) that covers the Safer Shrimp Imports Act (H.R. 3324).
The Safer Shrimp Imports Act is bipartisan legislation introduced by Congressman Mike Ezell (R-MS), Congressman Troy Carter (D-LA), Congresswoman Julia Letlow (R-LA), Congressman Randy Weber (R-TX), and Congressman Daniel Webster (R-FL) that requires trading partners to enter into an arrangement or agreement with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) through which they must establish that their food inspection system is equivalent to the FDA’s by providing “staffing that ensures uniform enforcement of applicable laws and regulations” and “enforcement of laws and regulations that address the conditions under which shrimp is raised and transported to processing establishments.” If a foreign government does not enter into an arrangement or agreement with the FDA or if the food inspection system administered by that government fails to meet the “equivalent” criteria, shrimp “manufactured, processed, packer, or held” in that country “shall be refused admission into the United States.”
The proposed legislation was originally developed and introduced in the Senate (S. 667) by Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS).
Under current law, the FDA does not require that foreign countries supplying shrimp to the United States maintain a food inspection system that is “equivalent” to what is imposed on U.S. food producing systems. Instead, the FDA explains that it depends upon its inspection activities at the border to determine whether foreign merchandise offered for sale in the United States market meets the requirements of U.S. law:
“Typically, imported shipments of FDA-regulated food products are reviewed by FDA to determine whether imported food products are ‘admissible’ into the U.S. market. FDA may refuse entry to any imported foods that violate or appear to violate applicable food provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
Most imported food products must comply with FDA requirements to be admitted entry into the United States. However, some foods are permitted into the U.S. market, even if they do not comply with U.S. requirements, as long as the FDA has made a determination of equivalence. This means that the imported food products are produced in accordance with safety controls that achieve at least the same level of public health protection as U.S. law and regulatory requirements.”
However, the FDA does minimal inspections of foreign food entering the United States, with the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) reporting that the federal agency examines just 2.2 percent of imported seafood entry lines, samples just 0.4 percent of these entry lines, and conducts tests for veterinary drug residues of just 0.1 percent of entry lines.
The FDA’s laissez-faire approach to seafood imports stands in stark contrast to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (“USDA”) regulatory oversight of foreign siluriformes (catfish, tra, basa, swai). Under the USDA’s approach, a foreign government must demonstrate that it administers a food safety system that is equivalent to that imposed on U.S. producers. Both the foreign government and individual exporters must receive prior approval from the USDA in order to ship siluriformes to the United States. At present, only three countries – China, Thailand, and Vietnam, , Thailand, and Vietnam – are authorized by the USDA to export siluriformes to this market. A total of thirty (30) Vietnamese seafood processing plants are currently authorized to export raw and processed siluriformes to the United States, while just ten (10) Chinese seafood processing plants may ship raw siluriformes to this country, and only three (3) Thai only three (3) Thai seafood processing plants are allowed to export raw siluriformes to the U.S. Our foreign trading partners routinely engage with the USDA to demonstrate equivalence and the agency is currently considering active equivalence requests for siluriformes from Brazil, Guyana, Nigeria, the Republic of Korea, and Suriname.
In the absence of meaningful inspections at the border or any equivalence determinations, the FDA’s regulatory oversight of imported shrimp largely depends upon the efforts of the U.S. importer sourcing the merchandise to ensure that the foreign product meets U.S. requirements. However, our laws currently allow foreign companies to act as the official importers of goods – called “non-resident” importers – who are then responsible for the legal requirements of the imported goods but are not subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. federal regulatory authorities. Moreover, despite the fact that under NOAA Fisheries’ Seafood Import Monitoring Program (“SIMP”) shrimp may only be imported by U.S. entities that hold an International Fisheries Trade Permit (“IFTP”), that federal agency has not imposed that requirement on the importers of record provided that the ultimate consignee holds a valid IFTP. Even in these circumstances, foreign entities may simply establish a U.S. shell company subsidiary and obtain an IFTP from NOAA Fisheries that meets the SIMP requirement.
A recent filing before the U.S. Department of Commerce in an antidumping duty administrative review illustrates how foreign shrimp is imported into the United States entirely through foreign entities. Specifically, Aadhya Sea Foods Private Limited (“Aadhya”), an Indian shrimp processor and exporter of shrimp, sought to refute the Commerce Department’s conclusion that Aadhya had not shipped shrimp to the U.S. market during the review period of the administrative review (Feb. 1, 2025 through Jan. 31, 2026). On the public record of the administrative proceeding, Aadhya submitted documentation related to an import entry of its shrimp, including the entry summary filed with U.S. Customs and Border Protection. These documents show that an Indian company, Dwaraka Sea Foods of Santhanuthalapadu, India, acted as the importer of the record for Aadhya’s shrimp, while Green Asia Corp of Newark, New Jersey was identified as the ultimate consignee. NOAA Fisheries reports that Green Asia Corp holds an IFTP that expires on January 22, 2027. The incorporation documents for Green Asia Corp filed with the state of New Jersey indicate that the incorporator, agent, and director for the company is the founder and managing director of India’s Green Asia Impex Private Limited, Pasupuleti Venkata Ramarao.
In sum, a private Indian seafood processor exported shrimp to the United States with another Indian seafood entity acting as the official importer of record and a third Indian seafood company standing in as the consignee and IFTP-holder. No U.S. entity was involved. Accordingly, the Aadhya example demonstrates how the FDA’s oversight of imported shrimp means that the health and safety of American consumers has been, as a practical matter, outsourced to foreign private companies that may not be subject to any meaningful food inspection system in their home country. The Safer Shrimp Imports Act directly addresses this massive gap in federal law.
“There is no justification for continuing to apply different standards to U.S. and foreign producers selling shrimp in our market,” said Blake Price, Director of the Southern Shrimp Alliance. “American consumers should not have to rely on the empty promises of foreign seafood companies to ensure the health and wholesomeness of shrimp they purchase. The Safer Shrimp Imports Act eliminates the favorable treatment afforded to foreign shrimp companies by the FDA and puts the U.S. shrimp industry on level terms with our competitors.”
Review the April 27, 2026 public submission from Aadhya Sea Foods Private Limited to the U.S. Department of Commerce here: https://shrimpalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Aadhya-Sea-Foods-Private-Limited-Submission.pdf
Review the incorporation documents for Green Asia Corp from the state of New Jersey here: https://shrimpalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Green-Asia-New-Jersey-Corporate-Docs.pdf
Review the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Hearing Memo here: https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/04_29_2026_HE_Hearing_Memorandum_1_df44d52185.pdf