FMCSA Broker Transparency: Where Physical Operations Data Fits

Originally published 12-28-2024. Substantially updated 08-06-2026.

FMCSA’s proposed broker-transparency rule focuses on transaction records, charges, payments, claims, and timely disclosure. Physical operations data can strengthen those records, but it does not replace them.

Originally published [ORIGINAL DATE]. Substantially updated August 6, 2026.

Freight brokers operate between the commercial agreement and the physical movement of freight.

Their systems may contain the shipper’s payment, the carrier’s rate, accessorial charges, claims, penalties, bills of lading, and settlement information. At the same time, many disputes depend on something that happened outside the financial record:

• When did the trailer arrive?

• Which container was picked up?

• Was the equipment present at the stated location?

• When did the asset leave the facility?

• Does the physical event support the detention, delay, or charge-back claim?

• Does the asset identified in the documentation match the asset that was actually moved?

FMCSA’s proposed broker-transparency rule does not require real-time asset tracking. It focuses on the broker’s transaction record and the right of parties to receive that information.

Physical operations data serves a different role. It can provide evidence of the asset events behind the transaction.

What Is the Status of FMCSA’s Broker-Transparency Proposal?

On November 20, 2024, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled Transparency in Property Broker Transactions.

FMCSA reopened the comment period in February 2025, and the extended comment period closed on March 20, 2025.

As of August 6, 2026, the proposed amendments have not been incorporated into the current version of 49 CFR § 371.3. The electronic-record and 48-hour provisions therefore remain proposed requirements, not effective regulations.

Brokers should continue following the current regulation while monitoring FMCSA for a final rule or another agency action.

What Does the Current Broker Recordkeeping Rule Require?

The current version of 49 CFR § 371.3 requires a broker to keep a record of each transaction.

The record must show:

• The consignor’s name and address

• The originating motor carrier’s name, address, and registration number

• The bill of lading or freight bill number

• The broker’s compensation and the name of the payer

• Information about non-brokerage services and related compensation

• Freight charges collected by the broker and the date the carrier was paid

The broker must retain the required records for three years.

Each party to the brokered transaction currently has the right to review the transaction record.

The current regulation does not specify that the record must be stored electronically. It also does not impose the proposed 48-hour deadline for providing an electronic copy.

What Would the Proposed Rule Change?

FMCSA proposed four principal changes to § 371.3.

1. Electronic transaction records

Brokers would be required to keep the covered transaction records electronically.

FMCSA has not proposed requiring one specific software platform. The rule is focused on the availability, content, and electronic delivery of the required record rather than mandating a particular broker-management system.

2. Revised record contents

The proposal would revise the information included in the transaction record.

For each shipment, the proposed record would include compensation connected to the shipment, including:

• Freight charges

• Surcharges

• Accessorial fees

• Payment dates

• Payer information

• Penalties assessed in connection with the shipment

The NPRM also discusses including claims connected to a shipment, such as claims involving damage or delay.

3. A clearer broker obligation to provide records

The current regulation describes the parties’ right to review the record.

The proposal would reframe disclosure as a regulatory obligation placed on the broker.

A broker would be required to provide the record when a party to the transaction requests it.

4. Electronic delivery within 48 hours of a request

Under the proposed language, a broker would have to provide the transaction record electronically within 48 hours after receiving a request from a party to the brokered transaction.

This point is frequently misstated.

The proposal does not require brokers to send every transaction record automatically within 48 hours after completing a load. That was part of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association’s original petition.

FMCSA’s proposed rule is request-based. The 48-hour period would begin when the broker receives the request.

What the Proposed Rule Does Not Require

The proposed broker-transparency rule does not require brokers to:

• Track every trailer or container continuously

• Install GPS devices on freight equipment

• Maintain real-time yard inventory

• Monitor equipment outside a warehouse

• Create a continuous location history for each load

• Use computer vision

• Use SiteTrax.io or another specific technology

• Automatically send records after every completed shipment

• Publicly disclose transaction information

The required broker record is primarily a commercial and transactional record.

Asset location, pickup evidence, delivery evidence, and gate activity may be relevant to the transaction, but they are not substitutes for the required financial and shipment information.

Where SiteTrax.io Data Fits

SiteTrax.io creates physical operations records from camera-observed asset activity.

Depending on the asset, capture method, and configuration, a SiteTrax.io record can include:

• Detected asset type

• Asset identification number

• Capture timestamp

• GPS coordinates or a configured camera location

• Asset imagery

• Direction of movement

• Detection status

• Capture-device information

• Associated asset information

SiteTrax.io can push this structured data to compatible downstream systems through an API.

That data does not replace the broker’s transaction record. It can supplement the transaction file with evidence of what physically occurred.

The distinction is important:

A broker-management or accounting system records the commercial transaction.

SiteTrax.io records an observed physical asset event.

Connecting the two can create a stronger record than either one provides independently.

1. Supporting Proof of Pickup

A broker may receive documentation stating that a load was picked up at a particular time.

SiteTrax.io Mobile or SiteTrax.io Snap can be incorporated into a pickup workflow to capture the visible asset, its identification number, the time of capture, the mobile device’s location, and supporting imagery.

The resulting record may help establish:

• Which trailer or container was observed

• Where the capture occurred

• When it occurred

• Whether the asset ID matches the shipment record

• Whether visual evidence exists for later review

SiteTrax.io does not independently verify the freight inside a closed trailer or container. The asset event must be connected to the bill of lading, shipment number, rate confirmation, or another transaction identifier in the broker’s system.

2. Supporting Proof of Delivery

Proof-of-delivery disputes are not always caused by the absence of a document. They may arise because the document and the physical event do not clearly align.

A SiteTrax.io capture at delivery can provide an additional record of:

• Asset presence

• Asset identity

• Time

• Location

• Supporting imagery

This evidence can supplement a signed proof of delivery, electronic delivery record, bill of lading, or receiver documentation.

It does not establish that the shipment contents were complete, undamaged, or accepted unless the surrounding workflow captures and verifies those facts separately.

3. Adding Context to Detention and Delay Claims

Detention disputes often depend on arrival, release, loading, unloading, and departure times.

SiteTrax.io Gate can create timestamped records when supported trucks, trailers, containers, or chassis pass a configured entrance or exit. Mobile and vehicle-mounted capture methods can create additional observations within the facility.

These records may help a broker, carrier, or shipper compare:

• Scheduled arrival time

• Reported arrival time

• Observed gate-in event

• Dock or yard observations

• Release time

• Observed gate-out event

• Detention or accessorial charge

The physical record does not calculate or approve the detention charge. It provides evidence that may help the parties evaluate whether the submitted times and charges align with observable events.

4. Reviewing Charge-Backs and Claims

FMCSA’s proposal specifically addresses greater transparency around charges, payments, penalties, and claims connected to a shipment.

SiteTrax.io does not create or itemize those financial entries.

It can provide supporting evidence when a dispute concerns physical facts, such as:

• Whether an asset arrived

• Which asset was involved

• Whether the recorded asset matched the dispatched equipment

• When an asset was observed entering or leaving

• Where a pickup or delivery capture occurred

• Whether visible condition imagery was retained

The broker’s transaction record would still need to contain the applicable charge, penalty, claim, payer, payment date, and other required information.

SiteTrax.io provides evidence for evaluating the event. It does not serve as the broker’s accounting ledger.

5. Reconciling Transaction Records with Physical Events

A strong transparency process should make it possible to compare what the transaction record says with what physically occurred.

For example:

Transaction record	Physical operations record
Bill of lading or freight bill number	Observed asset ID
Carrier assigned to the shipment	Truck, trailer, container, or chassis observed
Scheduled pickup	Timestamped pickup capture
Scheduled delivery	Timestamped delivery capture
Detention charge	Gate and yard event timestamps
Claim or penalty	Supporting asset imagery and event history
Carrier payment date	Not created by SiteTrax.io
Broker compensation	Not created by SiteTrax.io
Accessorial amount	Not created by SiteTrax.io

This comparison shows where SiteTrax.io can add value and where another system must remain the source of record.

Building a Broker-Transparency Data Workflow

Brokers preparing for possible regulatory changes should begin with their required transaction data, not with asset-tracking technology.

A practical readiness process includes the following steps.

Identify the system of record

Determine where the complete § 371.3 transaction record resides.

This will typically be a transportation management, brokerage, accounting, document-management, or settlement system rather than SiteTrax.io.

Confirm required data fields

Verify that each transaction record contains the information required under the current regulation.

Then assess whether the system could support the additional charges, payment dates, payer information, penalties, and claims described in the proposed rule.

Test electronic retrieval

Determine whether staff can retrieve a complete transaction record without searching through disconnected emails, folders, paper files, and spreadsheets.

If the proposal becomes final in its current form, the broker may need to provide that record electronically within 48 hours after receiving a request.

Establish a request process

Define:

• Who receives a request

• How the request is authenticated

• Who assembles the record

• Who reviews it before release

• How confidential information is protected

• How delivery is documented

• How the response deadline is tracked

Connect supporting operational evidence

Where disputes regularly involve pickup, delivery, detention, equipment identity, or facility activity, connect relevant SiteTrax.io records to the shipment or transaction identifier.

The integration should make the asset evidence easy to locate without treating it as a substitute for the complete broker record.

Separate facts from conclusions

An asset capture may establish that a trailer was observed at a location and time.

It does not automatically establish:

• Who was contractually responsible

• Whether a fee was valid

• Whether cargo was damaged

• Whether a seal remained intact

• Whether delivery obligations were satisfied

• Whether a carrier should be paid a particular amount

• Whether the broker complied with every applicable rule

Those conclusions require the full transaction record, contract terms, shipment documents, and surrounding facts.

Why Good Data Still Matters

FMCSA’s proposal is fundamentally about reducing information gaps among brokers, shippers, and motor carriers.

Good data helps when it is accurate, retrievable, connected to the correct transaction, and clear about what it proves.

Financial data explains how the transaction was settled.

Shipment documents explain what the parties agreed to move.

Physical operations data provides evidence of identifiable asset activity.

When those records are connected, brokers can respond to requests more efficiently, investigate disputes with stronger evidence, and communicate more clearly with shippers and carriers.

That is a more credible role for SiteTrax.io than claiming the platform independently creates compliance.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is FMCSA’s 48-hour broker-transparency requirement currently in effect?

No. As of August 6, 2026, the 48-hour electronic-delivery requirement remains part of a proposed rule. It has not been added to the current text of 49 CFR § 371.3.

What does the current broker-transparency rule require?

The current rule requires brokers to retain specified records for each transaction for three years. Each party to a brokered transaction has the right to review the required transaction record.

Would the proposed rule require automatic disclosure after every load?

No. FMCSA proposed requiring a broker to provide the record electronically within 48 hours after receiving a request. The proposal does not require automatic disclosure after every completed shipment.

Does SiteTrax.io create the complete FMCSA broker transaction record?

No. SiteTrax.io creates physical asset records containing information such as an asset ID, timestamp, location, and imagery. It does not independently maintain broker compensation, freight charges, payment dates, accessorial amounts, penalties, or complete transaction documentation.

How can SiteTrax.io help with broker disputes?

SiteTrax.io records can provide supporting evidence for physical events involving asset identity, pickup, delivery, gate activity, location, and timing. Those records can be connected to the broker’s transaction file when the physical facts are relevant to a detention charge, claim, penalty, or payment dispute.

Connect the Transaction to the Physical Event

Broker transparency depends on complete commercial records.

Dispute resolution often depends on reliable evidence of what physically occurred.

SiteTrax.io helps connect those two worlds by turning observable asset activity into structured physical operations data that can be delivered to the systems brokers, carriers, and shippers already use.

Talk with SiteTrax.io about capturing the pickup, delivery, gate, and asset events that are missing from your current transaction record.

References

1. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, November 20, 2024 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/11/20/2024-27115/transparency-in-property-broker-transactions

2. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions,” Reopening of Comment Period, February 18, 2025 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/18/2025-02707/transparency-in-property-broker-transactions

3. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR § 371.3, Records to Be Kept by Brokers https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-III/subchapter-B/part-371/subpart-A/section-371.3

4. SiteTrax.io, Full Payload JSON Documentation https://docs.sitetrax.io/books/sp-service-portal/page/full-payload-json-

5. SiteTrax.io, API Output JSON Documentation https://docs.sitetrax.io/books/sitetraxio-api/page/sitetraxio-api-output-json

6. SiteTrax.io, Snap Documentation https://docs.sitetrax.io/books/sitetraxio-snap/page/sitetraxio-snap-android-ios-windows

Regulatory note: This article provides general information and does not constitute legal or regulatory advice. Brokers should monitor FMCSA and the Federal Register for further rulemaking and consult qualified counsel regarding their obligations.