20-0630 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

20-0630 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share 
this subscription link
Tuesday, 30 June 2020

  1. Defense Department: “Federal Acquisition Regulation — Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition-Related Thresholds”
  2. State Department: “30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection”
  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)
  3. State/DDTC: (No new postings)
  4. EU Council Updates
  5. EU Journal Updates
  6. UK DIT: “Existing UK Trade Agreements With Non-EU Countries”
  1. EU Sanctions: “US Bans Arms & Sensitive Tech Exports to Hong Kong”
  1. Nicholas Turner: “Sanctions Top-5 for the Week Ending 26 June”
  2. Steptoe: “Developing — US Announces Tightened Export Controls on Hong Kong”
  3. Thompson Hine: “Department of Commerce Partially Delays Electronic Export Information (EEI) Filing Requirements for Certain Shipments to China, Russia, and Venezuela”
  4. Thomsen and Burke: “BIS Publishes FAQs Related to New Military End User and End Use Rule”
  1. ECS Presents: 15-17 Sep; Annapolis, MD, USA; “3nd Annual ITAR/EAR Symposium and Managing ITAR/EAR Complexities”
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Find the Latest Amendments Here. 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 
  4. Submit Your Job Opening and View All Job Openings 
  5. Submit Your Event and View All Approaching Events 

Are You Keeping Up to Date with the Latest Regulations?

Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR and Bartlett’s Annotated FTR are Word documents to down-

load to your laptop to keep you updated on the latest amendments, and contain over 800 footnotes of section history, key cases, practice tips & tricks, and extensive Tables of Contents.
The ITAR amendments to the ITAR that took effect on 9 March and 25 March are included in the current edition of the BITAR.  Subscribers receive updated editions every time the regulations are amended (usually within 24 hours) so you will always have the current versions of the regulations. Subscribe to the BITAR now to guarantee you have an up-to-date ITAR!    

Price: $300
Offer: $275

Buy Here


Price: $200


  Price: $100


85 FR 39146: Proposed rule
* AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
* ACTION: Proposed rule.
* SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to further implement the statute which requires an adjustment every five years of statutory acquisition-related thresholds for inflation. The adjustment uses the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, and does not apply to the Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute (Davis-Bacon Act), Service Contract Labor Standards statute, and trade agreements thresholds. DoD, GSA, and NASA are also proposing to use the same methodology to adjust nonstatutory FAR acquisition-related thresholds in 2020.
* DATES: Interested parties should submit written comments at the address shown below on or before August 31, 2020 to be considered in the formation of the final rule.
* ADDRESSES: Submit comments in response to FAR case 2019-013 to https://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for “FAR Case 2019-013”. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with FAR Case 2019-013. Follow the instructions provided at the “Comment Now” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “FAR Case 2019-013” on your attached document. If your comment cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the points of contact in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR Case 2019-013, in all correspondence related to this case. Comments received generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check https://www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202-208-4949, or by email at michaelo.jackson@gsa.gov, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755 or GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite FAR case 2019-013.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

EXIM_a22. State Department: “30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection”

85 FR 39256: Public notice
* ACTION: Notice of request for public comment and submission to OMB of proposed collection of information.
* SUMMARY: The Department of State has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this Notice is to allow 30 days for public comment.
* DATES: Submit comments up to July 30, 2020.
* ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently
for Public Comments” or by using the search function.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct requests for additional information regarding the collection listed in this notice, including requests for copies of the proposed collection instrument and supporting documents, to Andrea Battista, who may be reached at BattistaAL@state.gov or 202-663-3136.
* Abstract of Proposed Collection: The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State, in accordance with the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts 120-130), has the principal missions of taking final action on license applications and other requests for defense trade transactions via commercial channels, ensuring compliance with the statute and regulations, and collecting various types of reports. By statute, Executive Order, regulation, and delegation of authority, DDTC is charged with controlling the export and temporary import of defense articles, the provision of defense services, and the brokering thereof, which are covered by the U.S. Munitions List.
122.4 and 129.8 requires registrants to notify DDTC in the event of a change in registration information or if the registrant is a party to a merger, acquisition, or divestiture of an entity producing or marketing ITAR-controlled items. Based on certain conditions enunciated in the ITAR, respondents must notify DDTC of these changes at differing intervals-no less than 60 days prior to the event, in the event that a foreign person is acquiring a registered entity, and/or within 5 days of its culmination. This information is necessary for DDTC to ensure registration records are accurate and to determine whether the transaction is in compliance with the regulations (e.g., with respect to ITAR §
126.1); assess the steps that need to be taken with respect to existing authorizations (e.g., transfers); and to evaluate the implications for U.S. national security and foreign policy.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  


(Source: Federal Register)
* Defense Department: NOTICES; Arms Sales [Pub. Date: 1 Jul 2020] (PDF)
* DHS/CBP: RULES; Implementation of the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada Uniform Regulations Regarding Rules of Origin [Pub. Date: 1 Jul 2020] (PDF)
* DHS/CBP: RULES; Modification of the National Customs Automation Program Test Regarding Reconciliation for Filing Post-Importation Claims Arising under the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada [Pub. Date: 1 Jul 2020] (PDF)
* Treasury: RULES; Implementation of the Agreement Between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada Uniform Regulations Regarding Rules of Origin [Pub. Date: 1 Jul 2020] (PDF)
* Treasury/OFAC: NOTICES; Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties [Pub. Date: 1 Jul 2020] (PDF) and (PDF)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

OGS_a24. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

Venezuela: Eleven officials added to sanctions list
   The Council today added 11 leading Venezuelan officials to the list of those subject to restrictive measures, because of their role in acts and decisions undermining democracy and the rule of law in Venezuela.
   The individuals added to the list are responsible notably for acting against the democratic functioning of the National Assembly, including by stripping the parliamentary immunity of several members of its members, not least its president, Juan Guaidó. Actions motivating the decision for listing also include initiating politically motivated prosecutions and creating obstacles to a political and democratic solution to the crisis in Venezuela, as well as serious violations of human rights and restrictions of fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of press and speech.
   Today’s decision brings to 36 the total number of individuals under sanctions, which include a travel ban and an asset freeze. These measures target individuals and do not affect the population in general. The EU will continue working to foster a peaceful democratic solution in Venezuela, through inclusive and credible legislative elections.
   The Council decision follows up on four declarations issued by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on 21 December 2019, 9 January, 4 June and 16 June 2020.
   Restrictive measures by the EU on Venezuela were introduced in November 2017. They include an embargo on arms and on equipment for internal repression as well as a travel ban and an asset freeze on listed individuals. They are flexible and reversible and designed not to harm the Venezuelan population.
* Russia: Council renews economic sanctions over Ukrainian crisis for six more months
   Why did the EU impose sanctions on Russia?
  The Council today decided to renew the sanctions targeting specific economic sectors of the Russian Federation for a further six months, until 31 January 2021.
   This decision follows the latest assessment of the state of implementation of the Minsk agreements – foreseen to take place by 31 December 2015 – at the video conference of the members of the European Council of 19 June 2020. Given that full implementation has not yet been achieved, EU leaders took the political decision to roll-over the economic sanctions against Russia.
   Such restrictive measures were originally introduced in 2014 in view of Russia’s destabilising actions against Ukraine, and target the financial, energy and defence sectors, as well as the area of dual

use goods.
   The sanctions limit access to EU primary and secondary capital markets for certain Russian banks and companies and prohibit forms of financial assistance and brokering towards Russian financial institutions. The measures also prohibit the direct or indirect import, export or transfer of all defence-related materiel and establish a ban for dual-use goods which may have military use or be used by military end users in Russia. The sanctions further curtail Russian access to certain sensitive technologies that can be used in the Russian energy sector, for instance in oil production and exploration. 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

* Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/904 of 29 June 2020 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/1424 as regards the expiry date for support of OSCE activities relating to the reduction of small arms, light weapons and conventional ammunition in the Republic of North Macedonia and in Georgia.
* Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/907 of 29 June 2020 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine.
* Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/898, and in Council Regulation (EU) 2017/2063, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/897 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

8. UK DIT: “Existing UK Trade Agreements With Non-EU Countries”  

Trade agreements still in discussion
   The following agreements are still under discussion with countries where there are existing EU trade agreements in place.
   If an agreement is not reached by 31 December 2020, trade with other WTO members will take place on WTO terms.
was u
pdated to reflect ongoing trade discussions with Turkey and Vietnam

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  


EU Sanctions, 30 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]

   The US has suspended exports of US-origin defence equipment and sensitive technology controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations and Export Administration Regulations to Hong Kong following China’s adoption of the Hong Kong national security law.
   The State Dept
press release
says that it is no longer possible to distinguish between exports of controlled items to Hong Kong or to mainland China, presenting a risk that items/technology may be diverted to China’s People’s Liberation Army.
   The Commerce Dept
that it is suspending Hong Kong’s preferential trade treatment, and it is considering taking further action to eliminate differential treatment between China and Hong Kong. New controls entered into force last week, 26 June 2020, imposing tighter restrictions on exports to China intended for civilian use which could be used in a military capacity (see


Medium, 30 Jun 2020)

* Author: 
Nicholas Turner
, Esq., 852-5998-7559, 
Steptoe & Johnson HK 
  Here are five things that happened this week in the world of economic sanctions that I think you should know about:
   (1) The US Senate passed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which, if passed, would authorize sanctions against non-US persons and financial institutions in connection with Beijing’s planned national security law for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (expected today). The Act still has to make it through the House of Representatives before becoming law. Word on the street, it could end up in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. (Drop me a line to receive my separate Hong Kong-related updates.)
   (2) In related news, the US State Department announced that it would impose visa restrictions on certain Chinese Communist Party officials for “undermin[ing] human rights and fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong.” No word yet on who the targets are, but the State Department news release says it could include officials and their family members. (China responded in kind.)
   (3) The US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) named seven companies in Iran, Germany, and the United Arab Emirates as Specially Designated Nationals (SDNs) under Executive Order 13871 for operating in Iran’s iron, steel, and aluminum sectors. OFAC also designated a China and Hong Kong-based company under Section 1245 of the Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation Act for transferring graphite to the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL).
   (4) OFAC named five Iranian nationals as SDNs under Executive Order 13599 for captaining vessels owned or operated by IRISL and the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC). The vessels recently delivered Iranian gasoline to Venezuela.
   (5) Switzerland’s Federal Council adopted financial sanctions and travel bans against six individuals in Nicaragua for “ongoing violations against human rights, democracy and the rule of law” by the government of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. The European Union sanctioned the individuals in May 2020. OFAC sanctioned them between July 2018 and March 2020 (here, here, here, here, and here).
   What would the Hong Kong Autonomy Act do? Section 5 gives the Secretary of State 90 days to report to Congress the names of foreign persons who materially contribute to “the failure of the government of China to meet its obligations” under the Sino-British Joint Declaration or the Hong Kong Basic Law. The Secretary of Treasury then has between 30 and 60 days to identify any foreign financial institution that “knowingly conducts a significant transaction” with such persons.
   Sections 6 and 7 mandate sanctions against persons and financial institutions named in reports within one year (unless they get removed from the reports). However, the Act does not include blocking sanctions (like those in the recent Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act or last year’s Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act). There are also no strict correspondent banking sanctions. Instead, Section 7 offers a menu of 10 financial institution sanctions to be applied in two phases.
   The latest: the National Security Law is expected to be approved today in Beijing. A few hours ago the US State Department announced the United States would “end exports of US-origin defense equipment and will take steps toward imposing the same restrictions on US defense and dual-use technologies to Hong Kong as it does for China.” The US Commerce    Department announced “regulations affording preferential treatment to Hong Kong over China, including the availability of export license exceptions, are suspended.” Still waiting for specifics.

   For the IT pros out there: OFAC issued a technical notice of the annual renewal of the public certificate for the Treasury Department website. Systems that retrieve automatic SDN List updates from OFAC’s website should have been updated by 25 June, else they might miss some updates. (Thanks to Alisher Rakhmatullaev at First Abu Dhabi for the heads up.) 

* Principal Author: Peter Jeydel, 1-202-429-6291, Steptoe & Johnson

  On June 29, 2020, the US Department of State
that the US government “will today end exports of US-origin defense equipment and will take steps toward imposing the same restrictions on US defense and dual-use technologies to Hong Kong as it does for China.”

   The US Department of Commerce also
on June 29, 2020, that, as part of the “revocation of Hong Kong’s special status,” the “Commerce Department regulations affording preferential treatment to Hong Kong over China, including the availability of export license exceptions, are suspended. Further actions to eliminate differential treatment are also being evaluated. We urge Beijing to immediately reverse course and fulfill the promises it has made to the people of Hong Kong and the world.”
   The Commerce Department’s announcement may indicate that the favorable provisions under the US Export Administration Regulations (EAR) previously applicable to Hong Kong as compared with China should now be viewed as suspended and no longer in effect. Hong Kong could soon be treated in much the same way as China under the EAR. While the details are still not clear, this could potentially mean that, among other things, Hong Kong could be viewed as falling under EAR Country Groups D:1, D:3, D:4, and D:5 (restricting trade in products controlled for national security, chemical and biological weapons proliferation, and missile technology reasons, and also subject to US arms embargo policies under the EAR), not eligible for more favorable treatment under EAR Country Groups A:6 and B or under the Commerce Country Chart, and subject to the end-user and end-use restrictions now applicable to China under Part 744 of the EAR.
   We have not yet seen a similar regulatory announcement from the US State Department, although we would expect Hong Kong to be added to the list of proscribed (i.e., US arms embargoed) destinations in Section 126.1 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Given the State Department’s use of the word “today” with respect to the announced “end” of “exports of US-origin defense equipment,” a cautious approach would be to assume that this is already US policy under the ITAR. Companies doing business with Hong Kong in the defense sector should be cautious in assessing whether US export control restrictions or obligations apply to their activity.
   In announcing the changes today, the State Department stated that “the United States is reviewing other authorities and will take additional measures to reflect the reality on the ground in Hong Kong.” It further explained that “the Chinese Communist Party’s decision to eviscerate Hong Kong’s freedoms has forced the Trump Administration to re-evaluate its policies toward the territory” and to announce this export controls policy change, “as Beijing moves forward with passing the national security law.” See our earlier
providing additional background on this issue.
   Additionally, it appears that, effective June 29, 2020, the US government may revoke or begin the process of reviewing with an eye towards possible revocation any licenses or other authorizations that may have been granted for trade with or technology transfers to Hong Kong (possibly including so-called “deemed export” or “deemed reexport” authorizations for Hong Kong residents outside of Hong Kong) that would be inconsistent with this new policy, and that any future or pending requests for such licenses or authorizations will be subject to the more restrictive review policies currently applicable to China.
Other US export control regulations could also be impacted, such as the nuclear export control regulations at 10 C.F.R. Parts 110 and 810, which currently impose significant restrictions on trade with and technology transfers to China and in some cases Chinese nationals as well.

Trump and Trade, 26 Jun 2020)
   On June 25, 2020, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced that it would be delaying the effective date for certain filing requirements set forth in April 2020 regulations on military-related exports to China, Russia and Venezuela.  After significant pushback from industry representatives that more time was needed to transition to the additional Electronic Export Information (EEI) filing requirements, BIS has delayed implementing and enforcing one aspect of the regulation until September 27, 2020.  Other aspects of the April rulemaking will still become effective on June 29, 2020.
   In April 2020, BIS issued a final rule intended to prevent efforts by entities in China, Russia and Venezuela from acquiring U.S. technology that could be used in the development of weapons, military aircraft or surveillance technology through civilian supply chains or under civilian-use pretenses. 
Trump and Trade Update of April 28, 2020.  This rule expands licensing requirement controls on China, Russia and Venezuela to cover “military end users” in all three countries, in addition to “military end uses.” It also broadens the list of items controlled and potentially requiring an export license, including items such as semiconductor equipment, sensors, and other technologies sought for military end use or by military end users in these countries.  The list of such items is set forth as
Supplement 2 to Part 744
of the Export Administration Regulations.  The rule also expands EEI filing requirements when the destination is China, Russia or Venezuela by removing two exemptions: (i) from filing EEI for any shipments valued under $2,500 and (ii) from reporting the Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) when the only reason for control is anti-terrorism (AT).  This aspect of the rule essentially requires all U.S. exporters shipping to China, Russia and Venezuela to file EEI data on all exports to these countries regardless of the value.  It was this aspect of the final rule that received strong opposition by industry.
   As a result, BIS has
that while the EEI filing requirement for items subject to Supplement No. 2 to Part 744 will become effective on June 29, 2020, EEI filings for exports to China, Russia or Venezuela of items controlled by ECCNs not listed in Supplement No. 2 will not be required until September 27, 2020.

COM_a313. Thomsen and Burke: “BIS Publishes FAQs Related to New Military End User and End Use Rule”


   On April 28, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a Final Rule expanding the licensing requirements in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) on exports for military end-uses and military end-users in China, Russia and Venezuela (MEU Rule). The MEU Rule applies to specific items listed in Supplement 2 to Part 744 of the EAR, which includes items such as semiconductor equipment, sensors, and other technologies sought for military end use or by military end-users in these countries.
   The MEU Rule is now effective, and BIS published Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on its website to clarify the new restrictions on these exports.
Frequently Asked Questions
   The FAQs are intended to clarify the scope of the MEU restrictions. We have highlighted some of the FAQs that may be of importance to exporters analyzing a customer under the MEU restrictions:
   “Military end users” are more than traditional military organizations. The definition of “military end users” includes traditional military organizations, as well as any other end user whose activities are intended to support “military end uses.” These “Other MEUsers,” as referred to by BIS in FAQ 3, covers other foreign national governmental organizations, as well as state-owned enterprises (SOEs) or other specific entities that develop, produce, maintain, or use military items.
   A license is still required if a “military end user” intends to use an item for non-military end uses. If the end user meets the definition of a “military end user”, the export of any ECCN listed in Supplement No. 2 of Part 744 of the EAR requires a license, even if the item is destined for a non-military end use (FAQ 4).
   An affiliate of a “military end user” does not automatically become a “military end user.” The exporter must evaluate the particular end user customer, giving consideration to its parent or affiliate is also a military end user. BIS notes in FAQ 9 that the exporter “must exercise due diligence to determine whether the parent or subordinate entity’s military activities is relevant to the specific end user’s activities and that knowledge should be taken into account along with information regarding the specific end user.” For university departments (FAQ 14), BIS noted “knowledge of university’s military-related activities is relevant and should be taken into account along with information regarding the specific department. Knowledge of the specific department or individual’s research would also be a relevant fact.”

  BIS expanded the definition of “military end use.” This rule expands the definition of “military end use” to include incorporation into “any item that supports or contributes to the operation, installation, refurbishing, “development,” or “production,” of military items on the USML, or items classified under ECCNs ending in “A018” or in “600 series” ECCNs. BIS notes in FAQ 20 that this new definition goes beyond incorporation into a military item to mean direct facilitation, such as installation, inspection, or test equipment and related software and technology, of the operation, installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing, or the “development” or “production” of military items described on the USML, Wassenaar Arrangement Munitions List, or items classified in an ECCN ending in “A018” or a “600 series” ECCN. 
   Knowing that a systems integrator uses mass-market products for multiple systems, including a data center for a military end user, does not automatically render the integrator a “military end user.” BIS notes in FAQ 12 that using mass market items for products sold to the general market, which may include “military end users” does not necessarily make the system integrator (i.e., end user) a “military end user.” However, if you have knowledge that the systems integrator intends to reexport or transfer (in-country) your items for a “military end use,” a license is required.
Additional FAQs can be found on the BIS website.  


Scope of the MEU Rule
   The scope of the MEU Rule, which became effective today, has not changed since the Final Rule was published in April. As a reminder, Section 744.21 prohibits exports, reexports, and transfers to China, Russia and Venezuela intended for military end-use or for military end-users:
  • Military end-use is expanded to mean incorporation into a military item described on the U.S. Munitions List (USML) (22 CFR part 121, International Traffic in Arms Regulations); incorporation into items classified under ECCNs ending in “A018” or under “600 series” ECCNs; or any item that supports or contributes to the operation, installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul, refurbishing, “development,” or “production,” of military items described on the USML, or items classified under ECCNs ending in “A018” or under “600 series” ECCNs.
  • Military end-user means the national armed services (army, navy, marine, air force, or coast guard), as well as the national guard and national police, government intelligence or reconnaissance organizations, or any person or entity whose actions or functions are intended to support military end-uses.
  • The list of items subject to these requirements is found in Supplement 2 to Part 744 of the EAR and includes items classified under the following ECCNs: 2A290, 2A291, 2B999, 2D290, 3A991, 3A992, 3A999, 3B991, 3B992, 3C992, 3D991, 5B991, 5A992, 5D992, 6A991, 6A996, and 9B990. The full details of the changes can be found in the Final Rule.
  • Changes to the AES/EEI filing requirements: AES/EEI filings will now be required for all U.S. exports of physical items on the Commerce Control List to China, Russia, or Venezuela removing the $2,500 threshold for these shipments. For the items subject to Supplement No. 2 to Part 744 destined for China, Russia, and Venezuela, the EEI filing requirement is now effective. The effective date for the new filing provisions for items not identified in Supplement No. 2 to Part 744 has been extended to September 27, 2020, as further described by BIS.


* What: 3nd Annual ITAR/EAR Symposium and Managing ITAR/EAR Complexities
* When: 15-17 Sep
* Where: Annapolis, MD
* Sponsor: Export Compliance Solutions & Consulting (ECS)
* ECS and Guest Speakers: Suzanne Palmer, Mal Zerden, Lisa Bencivenga, Debi Davis, Scott Jackson, Matt McGrath, Matt Doyle
* Register:
 or write to 
 or call 1-866-238-4018

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


EN_a115. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)

* John Gay (30 Jun 1685 – 4 Dec 1732; was an English poet and dramatist and member of the Scriblerus Club. He is best remembered for The Beggar’s Opera, a ballad opera. The characters, including Captain Macheath and Polly Peachum, became household names.)
  – “Tell me and I forget. Show me and I remember. Involve me and I understand.”
  – “The comfortable estate of widowhood is the only hope that keeps up a wife’s spirits.”
* Frederic Bastiat (30 Jun 1801 – 24 Dec 1850; was a French economist, writer, and a prominent member of the French Liberal School. Bastiat developed the economic concept of opportunity cost and introduced the parable of the broken window. As an advocate of classical economics and the economics of Adam Smith, his views favored a free market and influenced the Austrian School.)
  – “Each of us has a natural right, from God, to defend his person, his liberty, and his property.”
  – “The state is the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


The official versions of the following regulations are published annually in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), but are updated as amended in the Federal Register.  The latest amendments are listed below.
Latest Update 
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.


5 Apr 2019: 84 FR 13499:

Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation. 
DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30.   24 Apr 2018: 83 FR 17749: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on the Collection and Confidentiality of Kimberley Process Certificates.  

: DoD 5220.22-M. Implemented by Dep’t of Defense. 

18 May 2016: Change 2: Implement an insider threat program; reporting requirements for Cleared Defense Contractors; alignment with Federal standards for classified information systems; incorporated and cancelled Supp. 1 to the NISPOM (Summary here.)  
DOE ASSISTANCE TO FOREIGN ATOMIC ENERGY ACTIVITIES: 10 CFR Part 810.    23 Feb 2015: 80 FR 9359: comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. 

15 Nov 2017, 82 FR 52823: miscellaneous corrections include correcting references, an address and a misspelling.

DOJ ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War. 
14 Mar 2019: 84 FR 9239: Bump-Stock-Type Devices.

6 May 2020: 85 FR 26847: Notice (not an amendment) temporarily reducing the registration fee schedule in ITAR 122.3 until April 30, 2021. 
DOT FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR): 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders

5 Jun 2020:
85 FR 84510:

Syria Sanctions Regulations. 


1 Jan 2019: 19 USC 1202 Annex.
  – HTS codes for AES are available here.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Daily Bugle Archive

Are you searching for updates from the past editions of the Daily Bugle? 

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance job openings every day.

Submit your job for free.
PermanentJobListView All Job Openings

Are you looking for a new job in trade compliance?
Click here to see the current job openings.

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance events every day. Submit your event for free.

PermanentJobListView All Events

Are you looking for an upcoming event?   
Click here to see upcoming events.

Scroll to Top