No products in the cart.
The Daily Bugle Weekly Highlights: Week 50 (9 – 13 Dec 2019)
Every Monday we post the highlights out of last week’s FCC Export/Import Daily Update (“The Daily Bugle”). Send out every business day to approximately 7,500 readers of changes to defense and high-tech trade laws and regulations, The Daily Bugle is a free daily newsletter from Full Circle Compliance, edited by James E. Bartlett III, and Alexander Witt.
We check the following sources daily: Federal Register, Congressional Record, Commerce/AES, Commerce/BIS, DHS/CBP, DOE/NRC, DOJ/ATF, DoD/DSS, DoD/DTSA, FAR/DFARS, State/DDTC, Treasury/OFAC, White House, and similar websites of Australia, Canada, U.K., and other countries and international organizations. Due to space limitations, we do not post Arms Sales notifications, Denied Party listings, or Customs AD/CVD items. To subscribe, click here.
Last week’s highlights of The Daily Bugle included in this edition are:
- Dutch Government Publishes Guidelines for compiling an Internal Compliance Programme for Strategic Goods, Torture Goods, Technology and Sanctions; The Daily Bugle; Monday, 9 December; Item #5.
- Commerce/BIS Requests Comments Concerning Procedure for Parties on the Entity List and Unverified List to Request Removal or Modification of Their Listing; The Daily Bugle; Tuesday, 10 December 2019; Item #2.
- Treasury/OFAC Announces Settlement Agreement with Allianz Global Risks U.S. Insurance Company, and, separately, Chubb Limited; The Daily Bugle; Tuesday, 10 December 2019; Item #6.
- Treasury/OFAC Issues Global Magnitsky General License Number 1; The Daily Bugle; Tuesday, 10 December 2019; Item #7.
- Justice Publishes Export Control and Sanctions Enforcement Policy for Business Organizations; The Daily Bugle; Thursday 12 December 2019; Item #5.
1. Dutch Government Publishes Guidelines for compiling an Internal Compliance Programme for Strategic Goods, Torture Goods, Technology and Sanctions
(Source: Rijksoverheid, 6 Dec 2019.)
This document contains guidelines for businesses and was drawn up by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in close collaboration with the Central Office for Import and Export (CDIU). It serves as a guide forimplementing an Internal Compliance Programme (ICP) that sets out responsibilities for compliance with the applicable legal requirements. This document is primarily intended for exporters of strategic and sanctioned goods. It also provides useful pointers for exporters of strategic technology.
Dutch export control policy is based on international agreements and commitments that have been implemented at national level on the basis of EU legislation. The Netherlands has signed a number of conventions and takes part in the international export control regimes that aim to regulate the global distribution of certain ‘sensitive’ goods. The countries participating in these regimes make agreements on export control policy and draw up control lists for the goods in question. Sensitive goods include dual-use and military goods.
Responsibility for ethical export control lies with both the business community and the competent authorities. The Dutch government monitors export control on strategic goods. Detailed information can be found in the User Guide on Strategic Goods and Services. An important tool for developing and implementing ethical export control procedures within a company is an ICP.
Download in English: ‘Guidelines for compiling an Internal Compliance Programme’
Download in Dutch: ‘Richtlijnen opstellen Internal Compliance Programme’
2. Commerce/BIS Requests Comments Concerning Procedure for Parties on the Entity List and Unverified List to Request Removal or Modification of Their Listing
(Source: Federal Register, 10 Dec 2019.) [Excerpts.]
84 FR 67426-67427: Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Procedure for Parties on the Entity List and Unverified List to Request Removal or Modification of Their Listing
* AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
* ACTION: Notice.
* SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
* DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before February 10, 2020.
* ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Mark Crace, IC Liaison, Bureau of Industry and Security, 1401 Constitution Avenue, Suite 2099B, Washington, DC 20233 (or via the internet at PRAcomments@doc.gov). Comments will generally be posted without change. All Personally Identifiable Information (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
This collection is needed to provide a procedure for persons or organizations listed on the Entity List and Unverified List to request removal or modification of the entry that affects them. The Entity List appears at 15 CFR part 744, Supp. No. 4, and the Unverified List appears at 15 CFR part 744, Supp. No. 6. The Entity List and Unverified List are used to inform the public of certain parties whose presence in a transaction that is subject to the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730-799) requires a license from the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). Requests for removal from the Entity List would be reviewed by the Departments of Commerce, State, and Defense, and Energy and Treasury as appropriate. The interagency decision, as communicated to the requesting entity by BIS, would be the final agency action on such a request. Requests for removal from the Unverified List would be reviewed by the Department of Commerce. The decision, as communicated to the requesting entity by BIS, would be the final agency action on such a request. This is a voluntary collection. …
- Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. …
3. Treasury/OFAC Announces Settlement Agreement with Allianz Global Risks U.S. Insurance Company, and, separately, Chubb Limited
(Source: Treasury/OFAC, 10 Dec 2019.)
The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) today announced a $170,535 settlement with Allianz Global Risks U.S. Insurance Company (“AGR US”). AGR US is a Chicago-based property casualty insurer and a wholly owned subsidiary of Allianz SE, a German financial services provider organized under the laws of the European Union and Germany. AGR US operates AGR Canada as a Canadian branch office in Toronto, Canada. AGR US has agreed to remit $170,535 to settle its potential civil liability for 6,474 apparent violations of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (“CACR”), 31 C.F.R. Part 515. OFAC has determined that AGR US voluntarily self-disclosed the apparent violations, and that these apparent violations constitute a non-egregious case.
For more information, please visit the following web notice.
Separately, OFAC today also announced a $66,212 settlement with Chubb Limited, as successor legal entity of the former ACE Limited (“ACE”). ACE was a Swiss company that provided insurance and reinsurance services for commercial and individual customers worldwide. In January 2016, ACE merged with Chubb Corporation to create Chubb Limited (“Chubb”), which is a Swiss holding company headquartered in Switzerland. Prior to the merger, ACE Group Holdings, Inc. was a subsidiary of ACE, and an insurance holding company incorporated in the United States. Through a series of intermediate corporate entities, ACE Europe was a subsidiary of ACE Group Holdings, Inc. ACE Europe was domiciled in the United Kingdom and conducted business in Europe. As a subsidiary of a U.S. company, ACE Europe was subject to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. Part 515 (CACR). Chubb has agreed to remit $66,212 to settle its potential civil liability for 20,291 apparent violations of the CACR. OFAC has determined that ACE made a voluntary self-disclosure of the apparent violations, and that these apparent violations constitute a non-egregious case.
For more information, please visit the following web notice.
4. Treasury/OFAC Issues Global Magnitsky General License Number 1
(Source: Treasury/OFAC, 9 Dec 2019.)
The Office of Foreign Assets Control has issued Global Magnitsky General License Number 1: Authorizing Certain Activities Necessary to the Wind Down of Transactions Involving Ventspils Freeport Authority, Ventspils Attistibas Agentura, Biznesa Attistibas Asociacija, and Latvijas Tranzita Biznesa Asociacija.
5. Justice Publishes Export Control and Sanctions Enforcement Policy for Business Organizations
(Source: Justice, 13 Dec 2019.) [Excerpt.]
The unlawful export of sensitive commodities, technologies, and services, as well as trading and engaging in transactions with sanctioned countries and designated individuals and entities, undermines the national security of the United States. Thwarting these unlawful efforts and holding those who violate our export controls and sanctions laws accountable is a top priority for the National Security Division (NSD) of the Department of Justice.
Business organizations and their employees are at the forefront of the effort to combat export control and sanctions violations. As the gatekeepers of our export-controlled technologies, business organizations play a vital role in protecting our national security.
The Department encourages companies to voluntarily self-disclose all potentially willful violations of the statutes implementing the U.S. government’s primary export control and sanctions regimes—the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), 22 U.S.C. § 2778, the Export Control Reform Act (ECRA), 50 U.S.C. § 4801 et seq., and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 50 U.S.C. § 1705—directly to NSD.
This Policy sets forth the criteria that the Department, through NSD’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES)4 and in partnership with the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, uses in determining an appropriate resolution for an organization that makes a voluntary self-disclosure (VSD) in export controls and/or sanctions matters. It is important to note that almost all criminal violations of U.S. export control and sanctions laws harm the national security or have the potential to cause such harm. This threat to national security informs how the Department arrives at an appropriate resolution with a business organization and distinguishes these cases from other types of corporate wrongdoing. Federal prosecutors must balance the goal of encouraging such disclosures and cooperation against the goal of deterring these very serious offenses. …