logo
Addressing the CDL issue takes cooperative regulation and multigroup efforts

Addressing the CDL issue takes cooperative regulation and multigroup efforts

Yahoo11-05-2025

Parts 1 and 2 of this series looked at legislative and law enforcement efforts in Arkansas and Texas to grapple with a sharp rise in CDL fraud by non-U.S. citizens. Part 3 looks at the ease with which fraudsters have exploited a loophole to obtain a Mexican document that essentially grants them the privileges of a U.S. CDL holder.
How did we get here? For that I needed a digital issue of the Texas Trucking Association magazine, The Steering Wheel, and more specifically the Fall/Winter edition from 2023 with an article titled, 'Texas, the Mexican LFC, corruption and its threat to America.'
Our next windmill takes us to Nov. 19, 1991 when the United States and Mexico signed a memorandum of understanding allowing the reciprocal recognition of CDLs and allowing CDL holders to operate commercial motor vehicles in each other's territory. By March 1994, Canada and Mexico entered a memorandum of understanding allowing for CDL reciprocity.
In the early days of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexican carriers were restricted to operating in a clearly defined border zone. This zone was explained to me as the counties that were on the border, meaning the restrictions limited Mexican carriers to 'day crosser' status; in other words they couldn't leave the border counties.This is also the central theme of cabotage: When a Mexican or Canadian carrier delivers a load in the U.S., it must find a load directly back to its home country or the driver must deadhead back home. It's explicit that these carriers cannot haul loads from one U.S. location to another domestically. So there's no double dipping for freight, but under NAFTA, the area where these drivers could operate was about to expand past the border counties.
Fast forward a few years and change was on the horizon courtesy of the U.S. Congress. Between 2011 and 2015, a congressionally approved pilot program was implemented by the U.S. Department of Transportation and FMCSA to look at Mexican carriers' safety and compliance levels to examine whether they could escape the confines of their border counties and do long-haul operations in the U.S. In 2015 the data was reported to Congress, and a limited number of Mexican carriers got the expanded authority.
What struck me was there was more concern over the Mexican LFC than a non-domiciled CDL. If the social media conversation of outrage over perceived roadway safety due to foreign CDL holders was real, the worry should be about the disruptive implications of foreign labor lawfully in the U.S. on work visas and how that will drive down my wages.
What I learned instead was that it was much easier for fraudsters to simply exploit the Mexican LFC loophole, since the non-domicile route requires fraudsters to first try to forge I-94 documents, which show lawful presence in the U.S. The LFC route is much easier: An email selfie and $2,500, and a driver gets a Mexican LFC that is recognized in U.S. CDL enforcement databases via reciprocal agreements.For someone living in any country other than Mexico, this is where a Non-Domiciled CDL comes into play.
For example, let's take a person living in Ireland who wants to get a CDL in a state that allows a non-domiciled CDL to be issued. The first thing the applicant needs is an I-94 form. It can come in the form of a work visa or type of work authorization. Next comes a trip to the DMV office with that document and proof of local residency (think a utility bill), as well as an application to take the written and practical exam. The person still must meet all the requirements to get a CDL but just doesn't have a domicile in the state.
To fix this problem and untangle the web we have woven so far requires a multipronged approach. The main goal is to remove the reciprocal recognition of Mexican and Canadian CDLs for intrastate commerce outside of a driver's jurisdiction of domicile. By changing the wording, drivers would have to go the same route as a non-domiciled CDL holder from the rest of the world and get proper work authorization and legal standing to operate on American roads.
In a petition to the FMCSA from Dec. 16, 2024, the Texas Department of Public Safety released a letter recommending specific changes to the regs. Below are some of the highlights; the first change involves amending Title 49 CFR § 383.23 to remove the reciprocal recognition, while the second requires those Mexican and Canadian CDL holders to have a non-domiciled CDL like every other country.
The key term is intrastate commerce outside of the driver's jurisdiction or domicile. To put it more plainly, under the current reciprocal status, Mexican or Canadian CDL holders can operate in the United States doing intrastate commerce. They can work for a U.S.-based motor carrier without needing a non-domiciled CDL and work authorization to be here. The clever loophole companies can use is to hire these foreign drivers and pay them significantly less while avoiding the pesky problem of a Mexican or Canadian motor carrier needing to either haul a load back or deadhead to its country of origin.
The second part targets enforcement via amending the Q&A under the regs.
All the marked out red text mentions the loophole under which the U.S. recognizes Mexican or Canadian CDLs as reciprocal when in Part 2 I illustrated I can pay $2,500 for a fraudulent Mexican CDL. I cannot pay $2,500 for a fraudulent U.S. CDL.
The addition, 'who is domiciled within the U.S.' fixes the loophole by which these foreign CDL holders can live in the United States without needing work authorization like a green card. By making them establish residency and go through the proper documentation channels to get a non-domicle CDL, the FMCSA at least has some idea of how many there are.The third and final part involves the non-domicile verbiage.
FreightX and social media are awash in claims that non-domicled drivers may be used to undercut wages or dump labor. In the eyes of the government, these CDL holders still require a form of work authorization, or documents showing they're allowed to be here for a time. Additionally, a non-domiciled CDL holder must still pass the CDL test like everyone else.
The real issue is, with the current reciprocal CDL loophole, why would a carrier worry about a non-domicled CDL holder when it can commit fraud and snag a fake Mexican or Canadian CDL and avoid the entire hassle?
The short answer: We wait for a large-scale federal effort to untangle the web of state-by-state regulation AND wait for a federal system of enforcement. For the nearly 1,100-strong staff at the FMCSA, this task is easier said than done. Current media attention has been on the decaying and crumbling infrastructure of airlines, but the 45,000 people who work for the Federal Aviation Administration have magnitudes more resources to handle air safety than the FMCSA does for road safety.
To put this issue in its proper context, the White House notes that over 120 people are killed every day as a result of motor vehicle crashes. This is roughly the equivalent of a Boeing 737-700 crashing each day. Yet pilots and the air traffic controllers who guide them are thoroughly vetted through rigorous federal standards. For the nation's truck drivers, the inconvenient truth is that their licenses and certifications do not follow such rigorous standards and are prone to abuse and fraud.
It took decades for this fraudulent system to develop under the auspices of good intentions. It may take years for the full extent of this shadow labor to be known. With the executive order mandating English proficiency, a 'commonsense rules of the road' must be established. But there is no clear verbiage on how the secretary of transportation must establish or enforce these rules.
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance has issued new guidance for out-of-service placements for drivers who don't meet English proficiency. It goes into effect June 25. While the FMCSA has the responsibility of setting regulation, the CVSA has the authority to determine what will ultimately end up putting a driver out of service. In the end, enforcement will be left up to the folks who make up the CVSA's membership base: highway patrols, local law enforcement, etc. In other words, it's back to the states.
Ultimately, we have come full circle with the states being the front lines, with slightly new marching orders.
Now we ask, 'If English language proficiency is at the center of this battle, what is actually making our roads less safe?'
The post Addressing the CDL issue takes cooperative regulation and multigroup efforts appeared first on FreightWaves.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Implied Volatility Surging for Allegiant Travel Company Stock Options
Implied Volatility Surging for Allegiant Travel Company Stock Options

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Implied Volatility Surging for Allegiant Travel Company Stock Options

Investors in Allegiant Travel Company ALGT need to pay close attention to the stock based on moves in the options market lately. That is because the July 18, 2025 $120 Call had some of the highest implied volatility of all equity options today. Implied volatility shows how much movement the market is expecting in the future. Options with high levels of implied volatility suggest that investors in the underlying stocks are expecting a big move in one direction or the other. It could also mean there is an event coming up soon that may cause a big rally or a huge sell-off. However, implied volatility is only one piece of the puzzle when putting together an options trading strategy. Clearly, options traders are pricing in a big move for Allegiant Travel Company shares, but what is the fundamental picture for the company? Currently, Allegiant Travel Company is a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) in the Transportation – Airline industry that ranks in the Top 19% of our Zacks Industry Rank. Over the last 60 days, no analyst increased the earnings estimates for the current quarter, while five have dropped their estimates. The net effect has taken our Zacks Consensus Estimate for the current quarter from $2.28 per share to 84 cents in that period. Given the way analysts feel about Allegiant Travel Company right now, this huge implied volatility could mean there's a trade developing. Oftentimes, options traders look for options with high levels of implied volatility to sell premium. This is a strategy many seasoned traders use because it captures decay. At expiration, the hope for these traders is that the underlying stock does not move as much as originally expected. Check out the simple yet high-powered approach that Zacks Executive VP Kevin Matras has used to close recent double and triple-digit winners. In addition to impressive profit potential, these trades can actually reduce your risk. Click to see the trades now >> Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Allegiant Travel Company (ALGT) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Lockheed Martin shares sank as much as 7% after a report that the Pentagon is halving F-35 requests for the Air Force
Lockheed Martin shares sank as much as 7% after a report that the Pentagon is halving F-35 requests for the Air Force

Yahoo

time32 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Lockheed Martin shares sank as much as 7% after a report that the Pentagon is halving F-35 requests for the Air Force

Lockheed Martin shares initially fell 7% after a report that the US is reducing its F-35 requests. The Defense Department has reportedly dropped its ask from 48 fighters for the Air Force to 24, The request isn't final, but it could signify changing priorities within the Pentagon under Trump. Lockheed Martin shares dropped as much as 7% on Wednesday after news that the Pentagon is asking for half of the F-35s it initially forecast for the Air Force. The defense contractor's shares recovered to $456 at market close, or about 4.2% lower from $476, the price at the end of Tuesday's trading day. Bloomberg reported on Wednesday that a procurement document sent to Congress indicated the Defense Department is requesting only 24 F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters for the Air Force, down from 48 that officials projected in the last fiscal year. Per the outlet, the document also proposed 12 F-35s for the Navy and 11 for the Marine Corps, down from 17 and 13 fighters, respectively. Business Insider could not independently verify Bloomberg's report. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment sent outside regular business hours. The US is by far Lockheed Martin's biggest customer for the F-35, with plans to buy 2,456 of the aircraft over several decades. The Air Force is supposed to eventually receive 1,763 of that total. When asked to comment on a possible reduction of local F-35 purchases this year, a Lockheed Martin spokesperson told BI in a statement that the fighter is "combat proven, offers the most advanced capability and technology, and is the most affordable option to ensure the US and allies remain ahead of emerging threats." "We will continue to work closely with the Administration, Congress, and our customers to deliver this game-changing capability as the budget process continues in the months ahead," the spokesperson added. A reduced ask for F-35s can potentially be changed by Congress, which is still deliberating on official defense funding for the 2025 fiscal year ending on September 30. Lawmakers have shown they're willing to fund the advanced stealth fighter beyond the Pentagon's requests. When the Air Force requested 48 F-35s from Congress last year, it was instead offered money for 51 of the planes. Doubling the requested budget, however, would be a huge jump from that smaller boost. The reported change could also signify an internal reshaping of the Pentagon's spending priorities under the Trump administration. In February, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth asked officials to slash 8% of expenses from existing programs over the next five years so the money could be directed to Trump-favored initiatives. His announcement highlighted 17 categories protected from cuts, and the F-35 was not one of them. All of this comes as those in Trump's circles have publicly criticized the F-35 for its cost and relevance amid the rise of drone warfare. Right-wing commentator Laura Loomer, for example, slammed the F-35 program in April as a "scandal that's been quietly draining our nation's resources." And last month, Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz posted on X that the fighter program was a "$1.7 trillion disaster." While some, like Elon Musk, have suggested that drones make crewed fighters obsolete, the US military says it wants to marry the two concepts instead of abandoning the latter. The Air Force has said combining crewed fighters with drone wingmen is a key priority for the F-47, its next-generation air dominance fighter. Lockheed was in the running to produce that fighter, but lost out to Boeing. However, Lockheed CEO Jim Taiclet has said that his firm wants to enhance the F-35 using the tech it created for the failed bid. Taiclet said that plans include automating the sixth-generation fighter and juicing it up to provide most of the capabilities of the F-47 for a fraction of the cost. Read the original article on Business Insider

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store