;

16-0906 Tuesday “The Daily Bugle”

16-0906 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

Tuesday, 6 September 2016

TOP
The Daily Bugle is a free daily newsletter from Full Circle Compliance, containing changes to export/import regulations (ATF, Customs, NISPOM, EAR, FACR/OFAC, FTR/AES, HTSUS, and ITAR), plus news and events.  Subscribe 
here for free subscription.  Contact us
for advertising inquiries and rates. (Note: The Daily Bugle was not published Monday, 5 June, a U.S. Federal holiday.) 

  1. Commerce/BIS Amends EAR, Revises Existing VEU for Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd. 
  1. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.) 
  3. DoD/DSCA Posts SAMM and Policy Memoranda, Week 4-10 Sep 
  4. State/DDTC: (No new postings.) 
  5. European Commission Posts Annual Dual-Use Regulation Implementation Report 
  6. EU Amends Restrictions Concerning Iraq 
  1. Globes: “Israel’s Defense Ministry Raises Fines for Export Violations” 
  2. Reuters: “Brazil Defense Ministry: Taurus Arms Exports Not Cleared for Re-Export” 
  3. ST&R Trade Report: “New Liquidation Capabilities to be Deployed in ACE Oct. 1”  
  1. A.I. Tzinova & F. Hekmat: “Final Rules Affecting Definitions of Export and Fundamental Research Take Effect” 
  2. G.R. Tuttle III: “CBP Updates Trade on Changes to Entry Liquidation Notice Process”
  3. N.A. Fischer, S.E. Becker & A.R. Hutman: “Redefining U.S. Export Controls: Takeaways from Key Changes Effective September 1st” 
  4. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day 
  1. Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 118 Jobs Posted 
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Changes: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (26 Aug 2016), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (6 Sep 2016), FACR/OFAC (18 May 2016), FTR (15 May 2015), HTSUS (30 Aug 2016), ITAR (17 Aug 2016) 

EXIMEX/IM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a11. Commerce/BIS Amends EAR, Revises Existing VEU for Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd.

 
81 FR 61104-61106: Amendments to Existing Validated End-User Authorization in the People’s Republic of China: Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd.
* AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
* ACTION: Final rule.
* SUMMARY: In this rule, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to revise the existing Validated End-User (VEU) list for the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by updating the list of eligible destinations (facilities) for VEU Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd. (BTC). Specifically, BIS amends supplement No. 7 to part 748 of the EAR to change the written address of BTC’s existing facility. The physical location of the facility has not changed. BIS updated the facility address after receiving notification of the change from BTC. The End-User Review Committee reviewed and authorized the amendment in accordance with established procedures. The updated address contributes to maintaining accurate location information for BTC’s VEU.
* DATES: This rule is effective September 6, 2016.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chair, End-User Review Committee, Office of the Assistant Secretary, Export Administration, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, Phone: 202-482-5991; Email: ERC@bis.doc.gov.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: …
   The revision is as follows:
 
Revision to Address of BTC’s Eligible Destination (Facility)
 
   Current address: Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd., No. 4-388 Hebei Road, Tanggu Tianjin, China.
   New address: Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd., 4566 Hebei Road, Marine Hi-Tech Development Area, Tanggu District, Tianjin, China 300451.
  
   Dated: August 30, 2016.
Kevin J. Wolf, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a12. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
(Source: Federal Register)

 
* Commerce; Industry and Security Bureau; RULES; Russian Sanctions: Addition of Certain Entities to Entity List [Publication Date: 7 Sep 2016.]

* Defense Acquisition Regulations System; PROPOSED RULES; Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Rights in Technical Data and Validation of Proprietary Data Restrictions [Publication Date: 7 Sep 2016.]  

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

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

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

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

OGS_a56. European Commission Posts Annual Dual-Use Regulation Implementation Report

(Source: European Commission) [Excerpts.]
 
Article 23(3) of Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 calls for the Commission to submit an annual report to the European Parliament on the activities, examinations and consultations of the Dual-Use Coordination Group (DUCG). Furthermore, the   Commission Communication (COM(2014)244) recognizes that the publication of reports   and non-sensitive control information could be critical steps to enhance transparency and improve operators’ compliance and their capacity to implement controls. This report, prepared by the Commission and the DUCG with inputs from Member States, provides information on the implementation of the Regulation in 2015, and includes aggregated export control data for 2014. …

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

OGS_a67. EU Amends Restrictions Concerning Iraq

 
Regulations:
  – Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1453 of 5 September 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 concerning certain specific restrictions on economic and financial relations with Iraq.

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

NWSNEWS

NWS_a18. Globes: “Israel’s Defense Ministry Raises Fines for Export Violations”
(Source: Globes)
 
A carrot and stick: More countries will not require export permits for unclassified products, but fines for violations will rise.
 
The Ministry of Defense Export Controls Agency intends to harden its policy towards companies violating the Defense Export Controls Act, and significantly raise the imposed administrative fine to a NIS 5 million maximum. At present, the Ministry of Defense is capable of imposing a maximum fine of NIS 1 million. According to the head of the Defense Control Agency Dubi Lavi, NIS 5 million fines will be imposed for violations of the Defense Export Controls Act by companies with sales exceeding $80 million during three consecutive years.
 
The toughened policy towards companies exporting arms and means which require Ministry of Defense marketing permits, as well as the receipt of export permits beforehand, has followed criticism that NIS 1 million are not enough to deter ‘rogue’ companies. Lavi says, “When a company is fined with NIS 5 million detracted from its profit – this is a significant sum, even for a large corporation.”
 
Despite the trend of raising fines for defense companies and exporters violating regulations, Lavi told “Globes”, “The vast majority of Israel’s defense industries are disciplined, responsible and abide by the Defense Export Controls Act. During the decade in which the Ministry of Defense Export Controls Agency has been operating, both the establishment and the companies themselves have matured: even the largest companies do not like reaching a situation in which they are invited to a hearing due to a suspected violation. No company seeks this combination of fines and damage to its image.” Yesterday, the Export Controls Agency held its annual conference, with the participation of senior figures in the defense establishment, including Minister of Defense Avigdor Liberman, and the ministry’s director-general Maj. Gen. (res.) Udi Adam, as well as representatives of defense exporters. The conference marked a decade from the establishment of the agency, which is responsible for providing defense industries with permits enabling them to market and export their products abroad. It is aimed at protecting Israeli defense interests and preventing the spillover of defense technology, information and measures to enemy states and organizations.
 
At the conference, Lavi disclosed that alongside the hardening of sanctions on companies violating export regulations, the trend of simplifying the export of non-classified means, initiated two years ago, will continue. Thereby, the list of 98 states to which such means could be exported without a permit will be expanded. Lavi says that the mitigations also include fast-tracking export and marketing licenses in special cases; exemption from further marketing permit for intermediate agents – an exporter with a marketing permit will not be required to file a further permit for a foreign company that will market its products abroad; extending the license duration from 3 to 4 years; updating non-controlled technologies in the Combat Equipment Act to include unmanned aerial vehicles and satellites for civilian ends corresponding to the standards defined in the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies.
 
Earlier this year, an initiative promoted by the Defense Export Controls Agency and the Prime Minister’s Office National Cyber Bureau to regulate cyber products developed in Israel was called off. This initiative raised the suspicions of senior figures in Israel’s cyber industry, who claimed that it will negatively affect investments in the field, potentially leading local cyber firms to transfer their operations abroad.
 
Following the uproar, and after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had become directly involved, the state went back on its intentions to require all cyber export deals to receive an Export Controls Agency permit, thereby maintained the current situation. Lavi says, “The cyber field is currently supervised according to Wassenaar Arrangement standards. The arrangement might be modified, but the changes will only come into effect at the end of 2017”
 
$5.7 Billion Exports
 
According to data reported by the Ministry of Defense in June, in 2015 the Export Control Agency received 40,000 new applications for marketing permits for arms, systems and components, to 190 states. This is a 20% drop from 2014. The drop was explained by the expansion in the list of countries not requiring marketing permits. In the same year, the Ministry of Defense received about 9,000 export permit applications – the preliminary process preceding a marketing permit – to 130 countries, a 13% rise.
 
Ministry of Defense figures further indicate that in the past year there were 176 cases in which defense companies or exporters were suspected of violating the Defense Export Controls Act, but only a few exporters were fined a total sum of NIS 2.8 million.
 
In 2015, 1,400 exporters were listed in the Defense Export Registry, with about 200,000 valid marketing permits. In the past year, Israel’s defense exports totaled $5.7 billion, a slight increase from $5.6 billion in 2014.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NWS_a29. Reuters: “Brazil Defense Ministry: Taurus Arms Exports Not Cleared for Re-Export”
(Source: Reuters)
 
Brazil’s Defense Ministry said on Monday it had authorized gun maker Forjas Taurus SA to export arms to Djibouti in recent years, but that those weapons could not be legally re-exported to other countries.
 
Reuters reported and Taurus subsequently confirmed on Monday that Brazilian prosecutors charged two of its former executives with shipping guns to a known Yemeni arms dealer who allegedly funneled them from Djibouti into his country’s civil war.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NWS_a310. ST&R Trade Report: “New Liquidation Capabilities to be Deployed in ACE Oct. 1”
(Source: ST&R Trade Report)
 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection states that it will deploy liquidation capabilities in the Automated Commercial Environment on Oct. 1, at which time liquidations will no longer be processed in the Automated Commercial System and must be done via ACE. An interim final rule announcing this change will be published prior to Oct. 1.
 
According to CBP, following are the high-level changes for processing liquidations in ACE.
 
New Weekly Processing. Starting Oct. 1 liquidations will no longer occur on a two-week cycle but will process weekly. Once an entry summary is liquidated, ACE will automatically populate a liquidation date equal to the next immediate Friday: liquidations processed before 12 pm EST Friday will post as of that day, while those occurring after this time will post the following Friday.
 
Elimination of Paper Postings. CBP will no longer print the C16 notices for posting to the liquidation bulletin and will replace this process with an entirely electronic bulletin available on CBP.gov that will update every 90 minutes. An ACE account will not be required to access the electronic bulletin. Liquidations will be posted 365 days a year, including holidays.
 
The electronic bulletin will be searchable by filer or date the event occurred and postings will be kept online for 18 months to allow time to search for a liquidation. After 18 months, a request will need to be made to CBP to view a past liquidation. For entry summaries with liquidation dates in the future, the liquidation reports will no longer display as “liquidated” and will instead display “pending” as the liquidation status.
 
Extensions and Suspensions. Notifications of extension and suspension will no longer be printed and instead will be posted to the electronic bulletin within 90 minutes. Sureties and filers will continue to receive extension and suspension courtesy notices via ABI but only if they have filed electronically. If necessary, a liquidation may be extended up to three years. Reports will be available for CBP and the trade to view extension and suspension records.
 
TIB Extensions. Temporary importation under bond extensions requested by the trade will automatically be accepted in ACE but CBP will have the ability to deny an extension as necessary. TIBs may only be extended for up to two years.
 
Deem Liquidations. Entry summaries that are deem liquidated will display on the electronic bulletin as “deem liquidated” for the basis of liquidation. If no action has been taken to extend or suspend, an entry summary will deem liquidate at 365 days.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMMCOMMENTARY

COMM_a111. A.I. Tzinova & F. Hekmat: “Final Rules Affecting Definitions of Export and Fundamental Research Take Effect”
 
* Authors: Antonia I. Tzinova, Esq., antonia.tzinova@hklaw.com,
202-419-2661; and Farid Hekmat, Esq., farid.hekmat@hklaw.com, 202-469-5191. Both of Holland & Knight LLP.
 
HIGHLIGHTS:
 
  – Amended definitions under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) are now effective.
  – Important changes to the definitions of “export,” “reexport,” “transfer,” “technology” and “fundamental research” will be of particular interest to industry and research institutions, including universities.
  – The changes are part of final rules published by the Departments of Commerce and State to amend certain definitions and regulations relating to the export of “dual-use” and defense-related goods, services and technology subject to the EAR and the ITAR, in an attempt to synchronize the regulations.
 
Amended definitions under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) became effective today, Sept. 1, 2016. Although there are no significant changes to the scope or substance of the regulations, there are important changes to the definitions of “export,” “reexport,” “transfer,” “technology” and “fundamental research” that will be of particular interest to industry and research institutions, including universities. This alert provides a summary of the more significant changes.
 
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), 81 Fed. Reg. 35586, and the Department of State’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), 81 Fed. Reg. 35611, on June 3, 2016, published notices of final rules (BIS Rules and DDTC Rules, respectively) to amend certain definitions and regulations relating to the export of “dual-use” and defense-related goods, services and technology subject to the EAR and the ITAR. The BIS and DDTC Rules are part of the Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative that began in 2009. The ERC initiative seeks to reorganize and streamline the U.S. export control regime in order to reduce regulatory burdens on U.S. companies while increasing the effectiveness of controls on the most sensitive defense-related goods and technologies. Most notably, previous ECR-related BIS and DDTC rule changes focused on transferring certain goods and technology from the U.S. Munitions List (USML) to the Commerce Control List (CCL), or deregulating them altogether.1 The BIS Rules and the DDTC Rules discussed here are more focused on clarifying existing provisions and harmonizing, to the extent possible, the ITAR and the EAR.
 
Definitions of Export, Release, Transfer and Foreign Person
 
  – Export. The BIS Rules and DDTC Rules include new definitions of “export” that attempt to harmonize the EAR and ITAR. Under the BIS Rules, an export under the EAR is defined to include, inter alia, an “actual shipment or transmission out of the United States, including the sending or taking of an item out of the United States in any manner.”2 The ITAR definition contained in the DDTC Rules mirrors the BIS definition, and removes activities associated with the further movement of a defense article or its “release” outside the United States, which now fall within the definitions of “reexport” and “retransfer.”3
  – Deemed Export. The BIS Rules also clarified long-standing policy on “deemed exports” to “foreign persons” (see below). A “deemed export” occurs when there is a “release in the United States of ‘technology’ or source code to a foreign person.” Similarly, “release” is defined in the BIS Rules as “visual or other inspection by a foreign person of items that reveals ‘technology’ or source code subject to the EAR to a foreign person.”4 Although this adheres to long-standing BIS policy, the requirement that such inspection must “reveal” makes it explicit that a foreign person merely seeing an item or “having theoretical or potential access” to technology or software is not sufficient to constitute a deemed export.5 The DDTC Rules adopt the identical definition of release for the ITAR.
  – Foreign Person. In a similar vein, the BIS Rules simplify the terms used in the EAR to designate non-U.S. persons by adopting the ITAR nomenclature of “foreign person” instead of “foreign national.” In turn, under the synchronized definition, “foreign person” is any individual who is not a U.S. permanent resident (aka “green card” holder), U.S. citizen or protected refugee.
  – Reexport / Transfer (in-country). Another important modification to the EAR involves changes to the end-use and end-users within the same foreign country of already exported articles. Although BIS has always considered such changes as re-exports because it involves a material change, existing EAR provisions did not specifically include it in the definition for “reexport.” The BIS Rules specifically address this with a new definition for “transfer (in-country)” as a “change in end-use or end-user of an item within the same foreign country.”6 Similar language will be included as the standard first condition in BIS licenses.
  – Activities that are not Exports, Reexports or Retransfers. The BIS Rules also include a new provision that gathers various exceptions and exclusions presently found in separate sections of the EAR into a new provision titled “activities that are not exports, reexports, and transfers.”7 These activities include, inter alia, (i) the launching of a spacecraft, launch vehicle, or payload into orbit; (ii) the transmission or transfer of technology or software from one person located in the United States to a non-foreign person in the United States; (iii) transmitting or transferring within the same foreign country technology or software between or among only non-foreign persons; (iv) shipping, moving, or transferring items between or among the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, or other territories and possessions of the United States; and (v) “sending, taking, or storing” unclassified technology or software so long as it is (a) secured using end-to-end encryption; (b) uses cryptographic modules compliant with FIPS 140-2 or “other equally or more effective cryptographic means”; and (c) is not “intentionally stored” in Russia or a country listed in Country Group D:5 of the EAR.
 
Fundamental Research
 
The BIS Rules also modify the provision which excludes technology and software that “arises during, or results” from “fundamental research” from export control restrictions.8 The core concept remains unchanged: The research is to be published and shared broadly without restrictions. As BIS stated, “it was not intended to change the scope of the current section 734.8,” rather, just to clarify the definition and move it closer to the definition found in the ITAR.9 First, the new treatment of “fundamental research” moves away from the current definition’s focus on the locus of research (e.g., whether it is conducted at a university, private industry or for the federal government), and instead provides a more precise definition of the term that closely tracks the definition currently used in the ITAR – “research in science, engineering, or mathematics, the results of which are published and shared broadly within the research community, and for which the researchers have not accepted restrictions for proprietary or national security reasons.”10 Therefore, the location in which fundamental research takes place does not matter so long as the definitional requirements of fundamental research are met, although there is a rebuttable presumption that university-based research is fundamental research.
 
Additionally, the new definition does not include any reference to research being “basic” or “applied,” which BIS did not view as providing any additional clarity. Furthermore, BIS reiterated that commodities resulting from fundamental research are not excluded from EAR restrictions; the fundamental research exclusion applies only to software and technology. Likewise, inputs used for fundamental research (which includes information, software and equipment) that are themselves not intended to be published are also not eligible for the fundamental research exclusion.
 
The new provision on fundamental research also retains the two types of pre-publication reviews that may be conducted while still qualifying as fundamental research (patent and proprietary information). It also adds a third, review of research within “any appropriate system” to “control the release of information” pertaining to research performed for a federal agency or a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). However, the phrase “arises during, or results from” was purposefully used by BIS to make clear that technology that arises prior to a final result is subject to the EAR unless it otherwise meets all the requirements of Section 734.8.11
 
To summarize key points about the new definition of fundamental research under the EAR:
 
  – It mirrors the ITAR definition of fundamental research
  – The focus is on the core concept: The research is to be published and shared broadly without restriction
  – The adjectives “basic” and “applied” are irrelevant; BIS attempted to keep the rule simple
  – Commodities that result from fundamental research are not exempt from controls: According to BIS, “the policy foundations for the exclusion from the EAR of fundamental research apply only to technology and software, not commodities”
  – The definition clarified existing policy on “inputs” – “information that is not intended to be published is not covered by fundamental research” (i.e., fundamental research does not apply to “technology or software subject to the EAR that is released to conduct the fundamental research”)
  – Pre-publication review is preserved
  – Locus of the research is removed from the definition on the grounds that, regardless of where the fundamental research takes place, the key is whether it meets the definition, although there is a rebuttable presumption that university-based research is fundamental research
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a212. G.R. Tuttle III: “CBP Updates Trade on Changes to Entry Liquidation Notice Process”
 
* Author: George R. Tuttle III, Esq., Law Offices of George R. Tuttle, george.tuttle.iii@tuttlelaw.com, 415-986-8780.
 
In CSMS# 16-000787 message dated September 2, 2016, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is updating the trade community on changes to the Liquidation Information Notice associated with the ACE Deployment, effective October 1, 2016.
 
In support of trade modernization and the implementation of the “Single Window” process by December 31, 2016, CBP is preparing to roll out new ACE capabilities that support the liquidation process.
 
Liquidation is the process of determining the final duties, fees and in some cases, the admissibility of imported products. When “liquidation” occurs is key to importers in determining their final liabilities for imported goods and the right to challenge a decision by CBP. While liquidation normally happens within the first year following importation, there are situations where liquidation can be delayed for many years with an associated unwelcome surprise for importers in the form of increased duties.
 
On October 1, 2016 CBP will deploy liquidation capabilities in its ACE, at which time liquidations will no longer be processed in its legacy Automated Commercial System (ACS). An Interim Final Rule (IFR) will be published prior to October 1st announcing liquidation capabilities in ACE.
 
The following is a summary of the high level changes for processing liquidations in ACE:
 
  – New Weekly Processing: Liquidations will no longer occur on a two-week cycle. Starting October 1st, liquidations will process weekly, with entry summaries liquidating every Friday. Once an entry summary is liquidated, ACE will automatically populate a liquidation date equal to the next immediate Friday  
  – for liquidations processed before 12pm EST, liquidations will post Friday of the same week; liquidations occurring after this timeframe will post the following Friday.
  – Electronic Bulletin, No More Paper Postings: CBP will no longer print the C16 notices for posting to the liquidation bulletin. This process will be replaced with an entirely electronic bulletin available on CBP.gov that will update every 90 minutes. The electronic bulletin provides public notice, and an ACE account will not be required to access This bulletin. Liquidations will be posted 365 days a year, including holidays. The trade will be able to search the electronic bulletin by filer or date the event occurred. Postings will be kept online for 18 months to allow time to search for a liquidation. After 18 months, a request will need to be made to CBP to view a past liquidation. For entry summaries with liquidation dates in the future, the liquidation reports will no longer display as “liquidated” and will instead display “pending” as the liquidation status.
  – Extensions and Suspensions: CBP will no longer print notifications of extension and suspension. The electronic bulletin will serve as the official notice for extensions and suspensions. Extensions and suspensions will post same day to the bulletin within 90 minutes of the extension and suspension action. Sureties and filers will continue to receive extension and suspension courtesy notices, which will be sent via ABI. Those filing in paper will not receive a courtesy notice, they will only be available to those filing electronically. If necessary, a liquidation may be extended up to three years. Reports will be available for CBP and the trade to view extension and suspension records.
  – Temporary Importations Under Bond (TIB) Extensions: TIB Extensions requested by trade will automatically be accepted in ACE, but CBP will have the ability to deny an extension as necessary. TIBs may only be extended for up to two years.
  – Deem Liquidations: For entry summaries that are deem liquidated, they will display on the electronic bulletin as “deem liquidated” for the basis of liquidation. If no action has been taken to extend or suspend, an entry summary will deem liquidate at 365 days.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a313. N.A. Fischer, S.E. Becker & A.R. Hutman: “Redefining U.S. Export Controls: Takeaways from Key Changes Effective September 1st
* Authors: Nancy A. Fischer, Esq., nancy.fischer@pillsburylaw.com, 202-663-8965; Stephan E. Becker, Esq., stephan.becker@pillsburylaw.com, 202-663-8277; and Aaron R. Hutman, Esq., aaron.hutman@pillsburylaw.com, 202-663-8341.  All of
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.
 
On September 1, 2016 new rules previously published by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) [FN/1] and the U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) [FN/2] will become effective. These rule changes will revise key definitions in both the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Following is an overview of takeaways from the final rules and how they may impact companies moving forward.
 
Takeaway 1 – EAR-controlled transmissions through the Cloud generally will no longer be considered an “export” where encrypted end-to-end, but a similar change has not yet occurred in the ITAR.
 
Building off of rules proposed in June 2015, the final rules stand to positively affect cloud services and other encrypted technology and software. For example, companies can store EAR-controlled software and technology on cloud servers based in most countries without “exporting” the data to those countries.
BIS redefined “export , reexport, or transfers” to exclude sending, taking, or storing technology or software so long as it is:
 
  (1) Unclassified [FN/3]
  (2) Secured using “end-to-end” encryption; that is, the data must be encrypted before crossing a national boundary and stay encrypted while being transmitted from one security boundary to another, so long as no third party has the ability to access the data in clear text; [FN/4]
  (3) The encryption is at least as effective as that compliant with Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS) 140-2 supplemented by procedures and controls according to National Institute for Standard and Technology publications; and
  (4) Not intentionally stored in a D:5 arms embargo country or in Russia. [FN/5]
 
Importantly, this carve-out does not currently apply in the ITAR context. DDTC has stated that it will address analogous controls on encrypted technical data in a separate rulemaking. As a result, companies with both ITAR and EAR items should not assume they can apply the same compliance procedures for cloud services in both contexts.
 
Takeaway 2 – Alternative security may be used for encrypted transmissions, but the burden is on the sender to ensure effectiveness.
 
With respect to the new EAR rule for transmissions through the Cloud, exporters can use third-party or internally developed cryptography that is not NIST-certified, because the final rule allows for encryption “at least as effective” as FIPS 140-2. On the other hand, BIS’s FAQs make clear that the onus is on companies to ensure that whatever security means they use are effective in the context the company operates. [FN/6] Transmissions lacking adequate security could therefore be treated as exports, with the associated export liability.
 
Takeaway 3 – An export requires a “release” that actually reveals technology or technical data to a foreign person.
 
Companies whose procedures allow “theoretical access” by foreign persons to EAR-controlled items requiring authorization are not necessarily in violation. The BIS final rule clarifies that a foreign person’s having theoretical or potential access to technology or software is similarly not a “release” because such access, by definition, does not reveal technology or software. [FN/7] In other words, under the EAR the fact that persons have access to a computer system in general does not automatically mean that they will be deemed to have received controlled data stored in a file in the computer system.
 
In addition, inspection (visual, aural or tactile) of an item must actually reveal technology or source code subject to the EAR to constitute a “release.” Therefore, merely seeing an item briefly is not necessarily sufficient to constitute a release of the technology required to develop or produce it. [FN/8]
Separately, DDTC stated in its final rule that to constitute a “release” under the ITAR, information about the defense article must be technical data and not simply attributes, such as size or weight. [FN/9]
 
————-
  [FN/1] Department of Commerce, Revisions to Definitions in the Export Administration Regulations, 81 F.R. 35586 (June 3, 2016) (“BIS Rule”).
  [FN/2] Department of State, International Traffic in Arms: Revisions to Definition of Export and Related Definitions, 81 F.R. 35611 (June 3, 2016) (“DDTC Rule”).
  [FN/3] “Unclassified” means that the software or technology is not classified in accordance with E.O. 13526.
BIS Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs).
  [FN/4] Ability to access the technology or software in encrypted form satisfying the encryption in 734.18(a)(5) is not a release. EAR § 734.18(c) (effective Sept. 1, 2016).
  [FN/5] EAR § 734.18(a)(5) (effective Sept. 1, 2016).
  [FN/6] BIS FAQs, Q.4.
  [FN/7] BIS Rule, 81 F.R. at 35592.
  [FN/8] BIS Rule, 81 F.R. at 35592.
  [FN/9] DDTC Rule, 81 F.R. at 35614.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a414. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day

(Source: Defense and Export-Import Update; available by subscription from
gstanley@glstrade.com
)
 
* Author: Gary Stanley, Esq., Global Legal Services, PC, (202) 352-3059,
gstanley@glstrade.com
 
Per the
“Corrections, Clarifications, and Movement of Definitions” Rule published October 10, 2014
, grenade launchers are captured under Category II(a), “Guns over caliber .50 (12.7 mm), whether towed, airborne, self-propelled, or fixed, including but not limited to, howitzers, mortars, cannons, recoilless rifles, and grenade launchers,” while the related grenade rounds are caught under Category III(a), “Ammunition/ordnance for the articles in Categories I and II of this section.” Note, rocket-propelled grenades remain under Category IV(a)(12).

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

MSEX/IM MOVERS & SHAKERS

MS_a115
. Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 118 Jobs Posted

(Source: Editor)  


 
Published every Monday or first business day of the week.  Send openings in the following format to
apbosch@fullcirclecompliance.eu
.
 
COMPANY; LOCATION; POSITION TITLE (WEBLINK); CONTACT INFO; REQ ID

*” New listing this week:

 

* AAR Corp; Wood Dale IL;
Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 5923

* Airschott / Seaschott; Wash DC/National;
National Sales Director
;
newhire@airschott.com

* Amazon; Beijing, China; 
Trade Compliance Program Manager
; Requisition ID: 344454

* Amazon; London, UK;
Trade Compliance Program Manager (M/F)
; Requisition ID: 429019

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Corporate Counsel, AWS Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 404016

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Compliance Investigator; Requisition ID: 422931
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Compliance Investigator
; Requisition ID: 432560
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Compliance Investigator
; Requisition ID: 432561
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Compliance Investigator
; Requisition ID: 432564
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Sanctions Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 431298

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
NA Compliance Analyst; Requisition ID: 256357

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Global Trade Compliance Program Manager – Corporate Projects; Requisition ID: 390244
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Prime Air Trade Compliance Program Manager; Requisition ID: 395658

* Amber Road; Mclean VA;
Senior Trade Specialist

* Armstrong Flight Research Center; Edwards AFB CA; Export Control Specialist; Requisition ID: AF16D0026

* ASML; Hong Kong or Taiwan; Expertise Manager International Trade, Customs and Export Controls APAC; Requisition ID: TW00208

* Aviall; Dallas TX;
Sr. Regulatory & Export Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 11624

* Baylor University; Waco TX;
Manager Export Compliance; Requisition ID: S030428

* Beckman Coulter; Nyon Switzerland;
Senior Trade Compliance Manager – L&D EMEAI
; Requisition ID: DIA009227

* Boeing; Brisbane, Australia;
International Trade Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID:
BOE/1218243X

* Boeing; Mesa AZ;
Trade Controls/Exports – First Line Manager
; Requisition ID: 1600014070 


* Bourns Inc.; Riverside CA;
Director Worldwide Contracts
;
BournsHR.Riv@bourns.com
* Burberry; New York NY;
US Customs Operations Manager
; Requisition ID: 95585

* Choice Logistics; New York;
Manager, Global Trade Operations

* CONMED Corporation; Utica NY;
Logistics & Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 3469

* Cummins, Inc.; Columbus IN; 
Export Controls Analyst Senior
;
scot.lashley@cummins.com

* DeLaval; Kansas City MO;
Trade Compliance Manager

* DoD/DSS; Parsippany NJ; Industrial Security Specialist; Requisition ID: DSS-16-1758834-B

* DoD/DSS; San Diego CA; Industrial Security Specialist; Requisition ID: DSS-16-1748385-MP

* DRS Technologies; Germantown MD;
Senior Trade Compliance Manager
;
Requisition ID: 54749
* DRS Technologies; Melbourne FL;
Senior Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 59327

*
DynCorp International LLC; Fort Worth TX;
BD Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 1601114

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Bellevue WA;
Senior Manager Trade Compliance – Segment Jurisdiction and Classification
; Requisition ID: 7187BR


* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Buena Park CA;
Trade Compliance Specialist 3
; Requisition ID: 6025BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Buena Park CA;
Trade Compliance Team Lead
; Requisition ID: 7125BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Brea CA;
Trade Compliance Manager; Requisition ID: 7333BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Everett WA;
Trade Compliance Specialist III
; Requisition ID: 7805BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Paso Robles CA;
Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 6148BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Tijuana, Mexico;
Trade Compliance Specialist III
; Requisition ID: 7763BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Valencia CA;
Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 6648BR

* Export Solutions Inc.; Melbourne FL; 
Trade Compliance Specialist II

info@exportsolutionsinc.com

* FLIR Systems; Arlington VA;
Director of Defense Trade Licensing & Compliance

* Google; Hyderabad, India; 
Logistics Trade Compliance Manager, APAC/India 

* Graco; Rogers MN;
Trade Compliance Supervisor 

* Henderson Group Unlimited Inc.; Wash DC;
Commodities Jurisdiction Analyst
;
alannasmith@hendersongroupinc.net


* Henkel; Amsterdam, the Netherlands;
Global Trade Compliance Manager (m/f)
; Requisition ID:
160004JX

* Hub Group; Dallas TX;
International Compliance Analyst

* IBM; Dallas TX;
Global Trade Compliance Senior Analyst
; Requisition ID: 55904BR

* ICAT Logistics; Elkridge MD;
Domestic Operations Agent 

* ICAT Logistics; Elkridge MD;
International Operations Agent 

* Intel; Santa Clara CA;
Global Import Regulatory Program Manager; Requisition ID: 802320


* L-3 Communications; Greenville TX;
International Trade Compliance Admin 2
; Requisition ID: 083430
* L-3 Communications,
L-3 Link Simulation & Training; Arlington TX;
Manager, Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 083367
* L-3 Communications,
L-3 Link Simulation & Training; Arlington TX;
Trade Compliance Practitioner, Empowered Official
; Requisition ID: 083157

* L-3 Communications, Platform Integration Division; Waco TX;
Export/Import Compliance Administrator A3
; Requisition ID: 083171

* Lam Research Corporation; Fremont CA:
Foreign Trade Analyst 6
; Requisition ID: 12079BR

* Lennox International; Richardson TX;
Trade Compliance Administrator
; Requisition ID: 2016-8055

* Lumber Liquidators; Toano VA;
Compliance Auditor
; Requisition ID: 913

* Lumber Liquidators; Toano VA;
Supply Chain Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 1578

* Lutron; Coopersburg PA; Trade Compliance Coordinator; Requisition ID: 2834

* Lutron; Coopersburg PA;
Trade Manager
; Requisition ID: 2926

* MACOM; Lowell MA;
Trade Compliance Analyst
;
David.Cassin@MACOM.com
; Requisition ID: 1522

* Mars; Chicago IL;
Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 60654
* Mars; Chicago IL;
Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 69456

* Meggitt (Erlanger), LLC; Erlanger KY;
Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 22005

* Meggitt Advanced Composites Limited; Shepshed, UK;
Trade Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID: 22122

* Meggitt PLC, Los Angeles;
Trade Compliance Administrator II
; Requisition ID: 22591

* Microsoft; Redmond WA;
Trade Director, Regulatory Compliance & Standards
;
rybeli@microsoft.com
; Requisition ID: 973167
* Monsanto; St Louis MO;
North America Global Trade Specialist
; Requisition ID: 01CGT

* Moog; East Aurora NY;
Export Compliance Manager;
anihill@moog.com; Requisition ID: 161913

*
MTEQ, Inc.; Lorton VA;
Export Control Specialist
;
hr@mteq.com
; Requisition ID: 422

* NetApp; Amsterdam, the Netherlands;
Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 39950BR


* Nike; Shanghai, China; Customs Coordinator; Requisition ID: 4375 

* Northrop Grumman T
echnology Services Sector, Advanced Defense Services (ADS) Division
; International Posting (Saudi Arabia);
Manager International Trade Compliance 1
(Saudi Arabia)
; Requisition ID: 16003577

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Falls Church VA;
Corporate Counsel – Export/Import
; Requisition ID: 16011617
* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Sierra Vista AZ and Herndon VA;

International Trade Compliance Analyst 4
; Requisition ID: 16008077 

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Falls Church VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 3/4
; Requisition ID: 16016665

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; International Posting (Europe);
Global Trade Management Europe 1
; Requisition ID: 16016526
* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Herndon VA;
Manager International Trade Compliance 2
; Requisition ID:
16003572
* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Linthicum MD;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 3
; Requisition ID: 16013233
* Northrop Grumman Corporation; McLean VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 4
; Requisition ID: 16014848
* Northrop Grumman Corporation; San Diego CA;
Manager International Trade Compliance 2
; Requisition ID: 16017984


* OSI Systems, Inc.; Hawthorne CA;
Manager, Global Trade Compliance
;
kbutcher@osi-systems.com
; Requisition ID: 9380


* PerkinElmer; Waltham MA;
Manager Trade & Customs

* Premier Farnell; Chicago IL; Trade Compliance Manager – America’s; Requisition ID: 3589

* Qorvo; Richardson TX;
Import/Export Analyst
; Requisition ID:
0004791
* Raytheon; Arlington VA;
Export Licensing SME/Empowered Official
; Requisition ID: 85810BR

* Raytheon; Arlington VA/Wash DC;
Export Licensing Manager
; Requisition ID: 83780BR


* Raytheon; El Segundo CA, Fullerton CA, Goleta CA;
Export Compliance – Agreements Authorization Owner
; Requisition ID: 80519BR


* Raytheon; Fullerton CA;
Global Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 85521BR

* Raytheon; Rosslyn VA;
Director of Licensing; Requisition ID: 83836BR

* Raytheon; Tucson AZ;
Export Compliance – Agreements Authorization Owner
; Requisition ID: 80648BR


*
Sierra Nevada Corporation; Denver CO;
Trade Compliance Licensing Manager
; Requisition ID:
R0001568


* Tecomet; Lansing MI;
Export Control Coordinator – EAR/ITAR
; Requisition ID: 1539

* Textron Systems; Hunt Valley MD;
Principal Export Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 242851

* Textron Systems; Wilmington MA;
Principal Export Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 242857


* ThermoFisher Scientific; Fremont CA;
Senior Global Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 38513BR

* Troy Corporation; Florham Park NJ;
Global Trade and Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 306


* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Self-Assessment Senior Specialist
; Requisition ID: 13727BR 
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Program Manager, Customs
; Requisition ID: 31331BR 
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Sr. Manager, ITC Contracts & Central Functions
; Requisition ID: 31767BR
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Sr. Mgr, Intl Trade Compl
; Requisition ID: 30525BR  

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Princeton NJ;
Specialist, International Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 22945BR

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Colorado Springs CO; 
Intl Trade Compliance Site Lead
; Requisition ID: 28655BR

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Danbury CT;
ITC Site Lead
; Requisition ID: 30565BR

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Danbury CT; 
Sr Analyst, International Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 28174BR


* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Phoenix AZ; Sr Analyst, International Trade Compliance; Requisition ID: 30058BR 
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Pueblo CO; 
Sr Analyst, Intl Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 27643BR


* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Westford MA;
Segment Lead, International Trade Compliance
;
Requisition ID: 30451BR

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Corporate; Farmington CT;
Corporate ITC Program Mgr.; Requisition ID: 31557BR

* Virgin Galactic; Mojave CA;
Export Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID: 2016-2355

* Vista Outdoor; Overland Park KS;
Import Specialist, International Trade Operations
; Requisition ID: R0000433

* Westinghouse Electric Company; Cranberry Township PA;
Lead, Global Nuclear Export Control
; Requisition ID:
22493BR

* Zimmer Biomet; Miami FL; 
Trade Compliance Manager – Latin America
; Requisition ID: 542281


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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

 

*
Freddie Mercury (born Farrokh Bulsara; 5 Sep 1946-24 Nov 1991; was a British singer, songwriter and record producer, known as the lead vocalist and co-principal songwriter of the rock band Queen. He also became known for his flamboyant stage persona and four-octave vocal range. Mercury wrote and composed numerous hits for Queen, including “Bohemian Rhapsody,” “Killer Queen,” “Somebody to Love,” “Don’t Stop Me Now,” “Crazy Little Thing Called Love,” and “We Are the Champions.”)

  – “I dress to kill, but tastefully.”

 

*
Marquis de Lafayette (Marie-Joseph Paul Yves Roch Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette; 6 Sep 1757-20 May 1834; was a French aristocrat and military officer who fought in the American Revolutionary War. A close friend of George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson, Lafayette was a key figure in the French Revolution of 1789.)

  – “The American women are very pretty and have great simplicity of character, and the extreme neatness of their appearance is truly delightful: cleanliness is everywhere even more studiously attended to than in England.”

 

Monday is pun day (or Tuesday if we missed Monday):

 

A saw and a power sander were in a bar having drinks when two other tools came in. The saw waived them over and introduced them to the sander saying, “Sander, this is Jack Hammer. You know the drill, don’t you?”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

EN_a217
. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date?
(Source: Editor)

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.  Changes to applicable regulations are listed below.
 
*
ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS
: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War
  – Last Amendment: 15 Jan 2016: 81 FR 2657-2723: Machineguns, Destructive Devices and Certain Other Firearms; Background Checks for Responsible Persons of a Trust or Legal Entity With Respect To Making or Transferring a Firearm 
 
*
CUSTOMS REGULATIONS
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199
  – Last Amendment: 26 Aug 2016: 81 FR 58831-58834: Administrative Exemption on Value Increased for Certain Articles 

* DOD NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM): DoD 5220.22-M
  – Last Amendment: 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 canceled Supp. 1 to the NISPOM  (Summary here.)

* EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR): 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774 
  – Last Amendment: 6 Sep 2016: 81 FR 61104-61106: Amendments to Existing Validated End-User Authorization in the People’s Republic of China: Boeing Tianjin Composites Co. Ltd. 

  
*
FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR)
: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
  – Last Amendment: 18 May 2016: 81 FR 31169-31171: Burmese Sanctions Regulations   
 
*
FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR)
: 15 CFR Part 30
  – Last Amendment: 15 May 2015; 80 FR 27853-27854: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Reinstatement of Exemptions Related to Temporary Exports, Carnets, and Shipments Under a Temporary Import Bond 
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
here.
  – The latest edition (9 Mar 2016) of Bartlett’s Annotated FTR (“BAFTR”), by James E. Bartlett III, is available for downloading in Word format. The BAFTR contains all FTR amendments, FTR Letters and Notices, a large Index, and footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, and Census/AES guidance.  Subscribers receive revised copies every time the FTR is amended. The BAFTR is available by annual subscription from the Full Circle Compliance website.  BITAR subscribers are entitled to a 25% discount on subscriptions to the BAFTR.
 
*
HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA)
, 1 Jul 2016: 19 USC 1202 Annex.  (“HTS” and “HTSA” are often seen as abbreviations for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated, shortened versions of “HTSUSA”.)
  – Last Amendment: 30 Aug 2016; Harmonized System Update (HSU) 1612, containing 4,692 ABI records and 935 harmonized tariff records.  
  – HTS codes for AES are available
here
.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
here.
 
INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR): 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130 (Caution — The ITAR as posted on GPO’s eCFR website and linked on the DDTC often takes several weeks to update the latest amendments.)
  – Latest Amendment: 17 Aug 2016: 81 FR 54732-54737: Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Procedures for Obtaining State Department Authorization To Export Items Subject to the Export Administration Regulations; Revision to the Destination Control Statement; and Other Changes
  – Latest effective change: 1 Sep 2016: 81 Fed. Reg. 35611-35617 (June 3, 2016, effective 1 Sep 2016): Sections from parts 120, 123, 124, 125, and 126.
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition 1 Sep 2016) of the ITAR with all amendments is contained in Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR (“BITAR”), by James E. Bartlett III.  The BITAR contains all ITAR amendments to date, plus a large Index and over 700 footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, DDTC guidance, and explanations of errors in the official ITAR text.  Subscribers receive updated copies of the BITAR in Word by email, usually revised within 24 hours after every ITAR amendment.  The BITAR is the essential tool of the ITAR professional.  The BITAR is available by annual subscription from the Full Circle Compliance website.  BAFTR subscribers receive a 25% discount on subscriptions to the BITAR, please contact us to receive your discount code.

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

EPEDITORIAL POLICY

* The Ex/Im Daily Update is a publication of FCC Advisory B.V., edited by James E. Bartlett III and Alexander Bosch, and emailed every business day to approximately 7,500 readers of changes to defense and high-tech trade laws and regulations. We check the following sources daily: Federal Register, Congressional Record, Commerce/AES, Commerce/BIS, DHS/CBP, DOJ/ATF, DoD/DSS, DoD/DTSA, 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.

* INTERNET ACCESS AND BACK ISSUES: The National Defense Industrial Association (“NDIA”) posts the Daily Update on line, and maintains back issues since August, 2009 here.

* RIGHTS & RESTRICTIONS: This email contains no proprietary, classified, or export-controlled information. All items are obtained from public sources or are published with permission of private contributors, and may be freely circulated without further permission. Any further use of contributors’ material, however, must comply with applicable copyright laws.

* CAVEAT: The contents of this newsletter cannot be relied upon as legal or expert advice.  Consult your own legal counsel or compliance specialists before taking actions based upon news items or opinions from this or other unofficial sources.  If any U.S. federal tax issue is discussed in this communication, it was not intended or written by the author or sender for tax or legal advice, and cannot be used for the purpose of avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter.

* SUBSCRIPTIONS: Subscriptions are free.  Subscribe by completing the request form on the Full Circle Compliance website.

* TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Use the Safe Unsubscribe link below.

Scroll to Top