;

16-1021 Friday “The Daily Bugle”

16-1021 Friday “Daily Bugle”

Friday, 21 October 2016

TOPThe 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.

  1. DHS/CBP Extends Comment Period re Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties 
    1. DoD/DARS Amends DFARS to Require Contractor Reporting of Network Penetration and Contracting for Cloud Services 
  1. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: Junaid Peerani of Plantation, FL, Denied Export Privileges for Five Years 
  3. DoD/DSS Provides Update on Industry Insider Threat Program Implementation 
  4. Ex/Im Bank: “Export Controls: Do I Need a License to Export?” 
  5. State/DDTC: (No new postings.) 
  1. ST&R Trade Report: “CBP Procedures for Investigating AD/CV Duty Evasion Get Longer Comment Period”
  2. ST&R Trade Report: “Dates and Deadlines: Customs Brokers, Classification, IMMEX, Prop 65, AD Basics”
  1. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day 
  2. R.C. Burns: “Court Holds US Can Jail Anyone Anywhere for Dollar-Based Transactions” 
  1. Friday List of Approaching Events 
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Changes: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (30 Sep 2016), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (17 Oct 2016), FACR/OFAC (17 Oct 2016), FTR (15 May 2015), HTSUS (30 Aug 2016), ITAR (12 Oct 2016)

EXIMEX/IM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a1

1. DHS/CBP Extends Comment Period re Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties

(Source: Federal Register) [Excerpts.]
 
81 FR 72692: Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties
* AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Department of the Treasury.
* ACTION: Interim final regulations; extension of comment period.
* SUMMARY: This document provides an additional 60 days for interested parties to submit comments on the interim final rule that amended the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations setting forth procedures for CBP to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders in accordance with section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. The interim final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2016, with comments due on or before October 21, 2016. To have as much public participation as possible in the formulation of the final rule, CBP is extending the comment period to December 20, 2016.
* DATES: The comment period for the interim final rule published August
22, 2016, at 81 FR 56477, effective August 22, 2016, is extended.
Comments must be received on or before December 20, 2016. …
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. McCann, Chief, Analytical Communications Branch, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 202-863-6078.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: …
   With the goal of establishing the most effective and transparent procedures as possible for CBP to employ to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders, CBP believes that it is very important to have as much public participation as possible in the formulation of the final rule that establishes those procedures for CBP. Therefore, CBP has decided to allow additional time for the public to submit comments on the final rule. Accordingly, the comment period is extended to December 20, 2016.
 
   Dated: October 18, 2016.
Alice A. Kipel, Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

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

EXIM_a2

2. DoD/DARS Amends DFARS to Require Contractor Reporting on Network Penetration and Contracting for Cloud Services
(Source: Federal Register) [Excerpts.]
 
81 FR 72986-73001: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services (DFARS Case 2013-D018)
* AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).
* ACTION: Final rule.
* SUMMARY: DoD is adopting as final, with changes, an interim rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 and a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, both of which require contractor reporting on network penetrations, as well as DoD policy on the purchase of cloud computing services.
* DATES: Effective October 21, 2016.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dustin Pitsch, telephone 571-372-6090.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: …
 
Summary of Significant Changes From the Interim Rule
  (1) The definition of “covered defense information” is amended to clarify that, in order to be designated as covered defense information, the information must be controlled technical information or other information (as described in the Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Registry) that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls and is (1) marked or otherwise identified in the contract, task order, or delivery order, and provided to the contractor by or on behalf of DoD in connection with the performance of the contract; or (2) collected, developed, received, transmitted, used, or stored by or on behalf of the contractor in support of the performance of the contract. This definition is in line with the National Archives and Record Administration (NARA) “Controlled Unclassified Information” final rule published in the Federal Register on September 14, 2016 (81 FR 63324). Covered defense information includes all of the categories of information that are considered CUI. The rule also now specifies that all covered contractor information systems need to be protected in accordance with DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting.
  (2) The definition of “covered contractor information system” is amended to clarify that it is an “unclassified” information system that is owned, or operated by or for, a contractor and that processes, stores, or transmits covered defense information.
  (3) DFARS 204.7304, Solicitation provision and contract clauses, is amended to specify that DFARS provision 252.204-7008, Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls, and DFARS clause 252.204-7012 are not prescribed for use in solicitations or contracts that are solely for the acquisition of commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items.
  (4) DFARS 239.7602-1, General, is amended to provide for two exceptions in which a contracting officer may award a contract to acquire cloud services from a cloud service provider (CSP) that has not been granted a provisional authorization by the Defense Information System Agency.
  (5) DFARS clause 252.204-7000, Disclosure of Information, is amended to clarify that fundamental research, by definition, must not involve any covered defense information.
  (6) DFARS clause 252.204-7012 is amended to–
     a) Specify that contractors are obligated to implement information protection requirements on all covered contractor information systems;
     b) Provide additional guidance on requests to vary from National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171, “Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Information Systems and Organizations;”
     c) Clarify that contractors are not required to implement any security requirement if an authorized representative of the DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) has adjudicated the contractor’s request to vary from NIST SP 800-171 and indicated the security requirement to be nonapplicable or to have an alternative, but equally effective, security measure;
     d) Require contractors to ensure that external CSPs used in performance of the contract to store, process, or transmit any covered defense information meet security requirements equivalent to those established by the Government for the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) Moderate baseline (available here) and comply with requirements in the clause for cyber incident reporting, malicious software, media preservation and protection, access to additional information and equipment necessary for forensic analysis, and cyber incident damage assessment;
     e) Clarify that subcontractor flowdown is only necessary when covered defense information is necessary for performance of the subcontract, and that the contractor may consult with the contracting officer, if necessary, when uncertain if the clause should flow down; and
     f) Clarify that the prime contract shall require its subcontractors to notify the prime contractor (or the next higher-tier subcontractor) when submitting requests to vary from a NIST SP 800-171 security requirement to the contracting officer. …
 
Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System. …

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a13. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
(Source: Federal Register)

* Justice; Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau; NOTICES; Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Firearms Manufactured or Imported [Publication Date: 24 October 2016.]

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

 
* Respondent: Junaid Peerani, Plantation, FL
* Charges: On August 14, 2013, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Junaid Peerani (“Peerani”) was convicted o f violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. § 1701, el seq. (2012)) (“IEEPA”). Specifically, Peerani knowingly and willfully attempted to export and caused to be exported from the United States to Turkey, two Inertial Navigation Unit LTN-72’s, without first having obtained the required authorization from the United States Department of Commerce.
* Debarred: Denied export privileges for five years from the date of Peerani’s conviction, until 14 August 2018.
* Date of Order: 19 October 2016
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 
On May 18, 2016, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence issued NISPOM Change 2. NISPOM Change 2 requires cleared contractors to establish and implement insider threat programs that are consistent with E.O. 13587 and the National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs.
 
During the past several months DSS and industry have partnered to communicate requirements, address challenges, and pave the way for implementation success. As part of the NISPOM Change 2 requirements, cleared contractors are required to appoint an Insider Threat Program Senior Official (ITPSO) and develop and certify their written insider threat program plans. Click here for more details.

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

 
* Author:
Suhail Karim Beg, Business Development Specialist, Small Business Group
 
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS)
 
At the last Export Control Seminar in Salt Lake City, Secretary Penny Pritzker addressed why export controls are necessary for safety and national competitiveness. The duty of how to address proliferation and keep the most sensitive goods and technologies out of dangerous hands falls to the BIS. The BIS is responsible for implementing and enforcing the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), which regulate the export and re-export of most commercial items, often referred to as dual-use items. Here’s the rub: dual-use items may have both commercial and military applications.
 
The EAR does not control all goods, only a small percentage of exports under BIS require a license.  What matters are the end user, destination country and technical characteristics. Goods and services with more specialized and sensitive uses are covered by specific government agencies. However, determining dual-use items is not as straight forward as you might suppose. Even purely commercial items without any apparent military use are also subject to the EAR. 
 
An EAR for All
 
Export compliance applies to exporters big and small and the penalties are applied equally for each export violation. According the BIS, fines for export violations can reach $1 million per violation in criminal cases and 20 years behind bars, while for administrative cases it can result in penalties of up to $250,000 and a denial of export privileges. The U.S. small business exporter represents 97 percent of the roughly 300,000 companies that export and are often unaware of U.S. export regulations. Oftentimes, they think they compliance screening is unnecessary and a waste of money. In an effort to dissuade the small business exporter from any such illusions, the BIS produced a guide titled “Don’t Let This Happen to You”, with real life examples of penalties and punishments.
 
So What is an Export?
 
The method of transportation outside the U.S. has no bearing on determining export license requirements. If an item is sent by plane, mail, hand-carried, faxed, uploaded or downloaded or even mentioned in a phone conversation, if it left U.S. borders, it is considered an export and subject to license requirements. Perhaps it is machinery going to a wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary-same rules apply. Even foreign origin items shipped or transmitted through the U.S. are considered exports.
 
Knowing the What, Where, Who, and How
 
You must first determine whether your product has a five character Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) by checking your product against the EAR. The EAR will list reasons why the particular product falls under BIS control. You will use this to determine if you need an export license, depending upon the where your product is being shipped. Any product that does not have and ECCN is designated as an EAR99, which usually do not need an export license, unless exported to an embargoed country or in support of a prohibited end-use. 
 
Once you know if your product is controlled you will need to compare the ECCN against the Commerce Country Chart in the EAR to determine if a license is required. This is the “where” part of it you then need to need to determine the “who”.
 
The U.S. and other governments and international organizations, such as the United Nations and the European Union, maintain lists of restricted parties. These are persons or entities that you are prohibited from exporting to without a license. This may include EAR99 items that otherwise don’t require a license based on the country of export. All exporters should check the parties on every export transaction if they believe they may be on the restricted parties list, particularly the U.S. lists.
 
“How” your product will be used at the end destination is just as important. Even the most harmless product might be intended for uses not envisioned by the exporter but clearly prohibited or requiring an export license.
 
One Last Caution
 
If you accept a foreign trade delegation’s visit to your plant or permit visual inspection of plans or blueprints, this is considered a “deemed export”. You must follow the same procedures outlined above to determine EAR restrictions as if you were shipping the product outside of the U.S.
 
Export license in hand and ready to export fearlessly? Find out how to obtain the export finance solutions offered by EXIM Bank

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

OGS_a57. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
(Source: State/DDTC)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NWSNEWS

 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has extended from Oct. 21 to Dec. 20 the deadline for comments on an interim rule setting forth the procedures CBP will use to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders. This rule was effective as of Aug. 22 and CBP is moving quickly to implement it as part of a broader focus on improving trade enforcement efforts.
 
Evasion refers to entering goods into the U.S. customs territory for consumption by an act or omission that is material and false and results in AD or CV duties being reduced or not applied to or collected on such goods. Examples of evasion include misrepresentation of the goods’ true country of origin (e.g., through fraudulent country of origin markings on the product itself or false sales), false or incorrect shipping and entry documentation, and misreporting of the goods’ physical characteristics.
 
The Enforce and Protect Act created a new framework for CBP to investigate AD/CV duty evasion allegations and the interim rule sets out the formal process CBP will use to act on its new authority. The rule allows any interested party, including competing importers and federal agencies, to submit allegations and sets a fairly low bar for CBP to launch an investigation. CBP has broad authority to conduct these investigations and can impose initial remedial measures that could interrupt a supply chain in as little as 90 days. Any final determination of evasion may be met with not only AD/CV duties but also other enforcement measures such as civil or criminal investigations.  

 

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

NWS_a2
9. ST&R Trade Report: “Dates and Deadlines: Customs Brokers, Classification, IMMEX, Prop 65, AD Basics”
 
Following are highlights of regulatory effective dates and deadlines and federal agency meetings coming up in the next week.
 
  – Oct. 24: deadline for comments to BIS on proposal to aid exports to Mexico for IMMEX operations
  – Oct 24: deadline for comments to USDA on proposal to update assessments on imported veal
  – Oct 24: deadline for applications to fill positions on National Maritime Security Advisory Committee
  – Oct 24: deadline for comments to USDA on information collection on citrus from Mexico
  – Oct 25: deadline for comments to USDA on proposal to allow imports of persimmons from New Zealand and raspberries from Morocco
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMMCOMMENTARY

COMM_a1
10. 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
 
Under the EAR §748.3(e) process, if the Departments of Commerce, Defense and State all concur that a “part,” “component,” “accessory,” “attachment,” or “software” does not warrant being “specially designed,” BIS can issue a classification specifying that the “part,” “component,” “accessory,” “attachment,” or “software” is not “specially designed” and provide a classification in an ECCN paragraph that does not use “specially designed” or an EAR99 designation. However, before submitting such a classification request, you should review the entire “specially designed” definition. Your submission should include information on why the item does not meet any of the paragraph (b) tests.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a2
11. R.C. Burns: “Court Holds US Can Jail Anyone Anywhere for Dollar-Based Transactions”
(Source:
Export Law Blog
. Reprinted by permission.)
 
* Author: R. Clifton Burns, Esq., Bryan Cave LLP, Wash DC, 202-624-3949,
Clif.Burns@bryancave.com
)
 
I often joke about the number of foreigners who arrive in the United States with their families hoping to see Mickey Mouse but who wind up seeing Elliot Ness and a jail cell instead. Controversial Turkish businessman Reza Zarrab showed up in Miami on March 19 of this year to take his wife and daughter to Disneyland and was arrested at the airport.  His application for bail was denied, and he is still languishing in jail, despite having retained fifteen lawyers from top-flight law firms.
 
Zarrab is accused of violating U.S. sanctions on Iran by processing payments through his financial network for companies in Iran.   His dream team of lawyers sought to dismiss the indictment, arguing that U.S. sanctions could not reach a foreign citizen requesting foreign banks to send money from foreign citizens to persons in Iran. Judge Berman, writing for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, just issued an opinion disagreeing with the defendant’s claim and asserting that the United States could prosecute anyone anywhere in the world engaged in any transactions involving U.S. Dollars.
 
There are two questions here, one much easier than the other.   The first is whether the Iran Transactions and Sanctions Regulations prohibit this conduct. The court held, and probably rightly so, that since dollar-based transactions were involved, the transactions ran afoul of the prohibition in the regulations against the export of services from the United States to Iran.  Clearly, if a U.S. bank was used to clear the dollar transaction, there is a good argument that financial services were exported from the United States to Iran in violation of the prohibition in section 560.204 on the export of services from the United States to Iran.
 
The second and harder question is whether Congress, when it passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, under which the regulations were promulgated and which establishes criminal penalties for violations of those regulations, intended to reach extraterritorial conduct. And on this issue, Judge Berman reaches the conclusion that Congress intended in IEEPA intended to criminalize any conduct involving U.S. dollars but he does so by misquoting the relevant statutory provision: 
50 U.S.C. § 1702(a)(l)(B) grants the President broad powers, including the power to

“investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel … any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest … subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”
 
Except here is what the statute really says (with the omitted portions bolded and the significant provisions underlined):
 

investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel
, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit, any acquisition, holding, withholding, use, transfer, withdrawal, transportation, importation or exportation of, or dealing in, or exercising any right, power, or privilege with respect to, or transactions involving,
any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest
by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States

 
The significance of Judge Berman’s misquotation is that he omits a significant qualification regarding “property subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” The actual language gives the President the power “with respect to, or transactions involving,” property in which a foreign national has an interest but omits the power with respect to “transactions involving” property “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” This is significant because Congress’s omission of “transactions involving” underlines the common understanding that Congress granted authority to block such property but did not go so far as to assert that it can criminalize foreign conduct by foreign persons that could be characterized as “transactions involving” such property.
 
NOTE:  My apologies for the sporadic posting but anyone who knows me knows that I am a die-hard Cubs fan, meaning that I’ve been up late, way too late, watching baseball games.  These games, as you may know, have run so late into the night in large part because pitchers (we’re looking at you Pedro Baez!) are blithely ignoring the never-enforced 12-second rule and are taking the time it takes for Watson to break a 256-bit AES cipher between pitches.  Once baseball finishes up for the season, I’ll be back to a more regular schedule.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

TrainingEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

TE_a212
. Friday List of Approaching Events

(Sources: Event sponsors.) 
 
Published every Friday or last publication day of the week. Send events to
apbosch@fullcirclecompliance.eu
, composed in the below format:

* DATE: PLACE; “TITLE;” SPONSOR; WEBLINK; CONTACT (email and phone number)
 
Continuously Available Training:
* Executive Masters: “
International Trade Compliance
;” University of Liverpool;
exed@liverpool.ac.uk
;
+44 (0) 20 768 24614
* E-Seminars: “
US Export Controls” / “Defense Trade Controls
;” Export Compliance Training Institute;
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 
* On-Line: “
Simplified Network Application Process Redesign (SNAP-R)
;” Commerce/BIS; 202-482-2227
* E-Seminars: “
Webinars On-Demand Library
;” Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.
 
Training by Date:

* Oct 24-25: Arlington VA; “2016 Fall Conference;” Society for International Affairs; admin@siaed.org 

* Oct 25: Troy MI; “Incoterms;” East Michigan District Export Council
* Oct 25: Webinar; “NISP Administration & Policy Analysis (NAPA) Industry Insider Threat Workshop;” Dept. of Defense/Defense Security Service

* Oct 31-Nov 2: Wash DC; “
Commerce/BIS Update 2016 Conference on Export Controls
;” U.S. Dept. of Commerce/Bureau of Industry and Security;
UpdateConference@bis.doc.gov
; 202-482-6031

* Oct 31-Nov 3: Wash DC; “US Export Controls Seminar;” ECTI; jessica@learnexportcompliance.com; 540-433-3977

* Nov 1: Webinar; “NISP Administration & Policy Analysis (NAPA) Industry Insider Threat Workshop;” Dept. of Defense/Defense Security Service

* Nov 2: Chicago; “AES Compliance Seminar;” Dept. of Commerce/ Census & M-Palm; shawn@m-palm.com 

* Nov 3-4: Amsterdam; International Trade & Compliance Conference; Baker McKenzie; claudia.wehmeijer@bakermckenzie.com; + 31 20 551 7481

* Nov 6-7: Singapore; “
Singapore Conference
;” International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

* Nov 8: London; “Control List Classification – Military;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 8: Webinar; “NISP Administration & Policy Analysis (NAPA) Industry Insider Threat Workshop;” Dept. of Defense/Defense Security Service
* Nov 9: Cerritos CA; “CTPAT Internal Auditor Training Program;” Foreign Trade Association

* Nov 9: London; “Making Better License Applications;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 


* Nov 9: Sturbridge MA; “Export School Fast Track Certificate Program” Massachusetts Export Center

* Nov 10-11: Shanghai; “
ICPA China Conference
;” International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

* Nov 13-15: Miami FL; “
Conference of the Americas
;” Florida Customs Brokers & Freight Forwarders; 
info@fcbfconference.com
; 305-499-9490

* Nov 14: Long Beach CA; “44th Annual Golf Tournament;” Foreign Trade Association

* Nov 14-16: London; “Expert Industry and Regulatory Advice for Solutions to Export Controls’ Global Compliance Risks;” Informa Maritime

* Nov 14-17: Phoenix AZ; “
EAR/ITAR/OFAC Compliance
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Nov 15-16: London UK; “Customs Compliance Held in Partnership with HMRC;” C5

* Nov 15-16: Santa Clara CA; “A Year-End Review of Import/Export Developments;” Baker McKenzie; Brendan.Gilmartin@bakermckenzie.com; 415-591-3246

* Nov 15: Westborough MA; “Essentials of Export Logistics & Regulatory Compliance” Massachusetts Export Center

* Nov 15: Webinar; “NISP Administration & Policy Analysis (NAPA) Industry Insider Threat Workshop;” Dept. of Defense/Defense Security Service

* Nov 16: Manchester UK; “Intermediate Seminar;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 16: Webinar; “
Classification: Advanced Classification, Part 1;”
Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.;
webinarorganizers@strtrade.com

* Nov 17: Manchester UK; “Beginners Workshop;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 17: Manchester UK; “Making Better License Applications;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 
* Nov 17: Manchester UK; “Control List Classification Combined Dual Use and Military;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 17: Rotterdam NL; “NIDV Conference & Exhibition 2016;” The Netherlands Industries for Defence & Security

* Nov 24: London; “
Cyber Export Controls 2016
;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 30: London; “Control List Classification – Dual Use;”

UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk

* Nov 29-Dec 2: Washington, D.C.; “
33rd International Conference on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
“; American Conference Institute

* Dec 1-2: Arlington VA; “
2016 East Coast Trade Symposium
;” Dept. of Homeland Security/U.S. Customs and Border Protection

* Dec 1: London; “Making Better License Applications;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 

* Dec 2: Melbourne FL; “ACE is the Place for EEI/AES Export Declarations;” Space Coast World Trade Council; bcantillon@bellsouth.net
* Dec 2: Long Beach CA; “
FTA Annual Holiday Celebration;” Foreign Trade Association

* Dec 2: Wash DC; “
SIA Holiday Party
;” Society for International Affairs

* Dec 5-8: Miami FL; “
EAR/ITAR/OFAC Compliance Seminar Series
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Dec 7: Boston; “
AES Compliance Seminar
;”
Dept. of Commerce/Census
& M-Palm;
shawn@m-palm.com  

* Dec 7: London; “Intermediate Seminar;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 
* Dec 8: London; “Beginners Workshop;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 
* Dec 8: London; “Making Better License Applications;”
UK/BIS Export Control Organisation;
denise.carter@bis.gsi.gov.uk 
* Dec 9: Boston MA; “Export Expo” Massachusetts Export Center

* Dec 14: Wash DC; “In-House Industry Seminar;” Dept. of State/DDTC; DDTCInHouseSeminars@state.gov

* Dec 14: Webinar; “
Classification: Advanced Classification, Part 2;”
Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.;
webinarorganizers@strtrade.com

* Dec 16: Webinar; “Navigating the Intersection of HR and Trade Compliance” Massachusetts Export Center

* Jan 13: Shanghai; “
5th Advanced China Forum on Import Compliance;” American Conference Institute

* Jan 23-26: San Diego, CA; “
EAR/ITAR/OFAC Compliance Seminar Series
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Jan 31-Feb 1: Toronto; “
6th Forum on US Export & Re-Export for Canadian Operations;” American Conference Institute
* Feb 1: Wash DC; “
3rd National Forum on CFIUS & Team Telecom;” American Conference Institute

* Feb 20-23: Orlando; “
United States Export Control (EAR/OFAC/ITAR) Seminar
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Mar 5-6: Dubai UAE; “Trade Compliance in the Middle East;” C5

* Mar 7-10: Orlando; “
‘Partnering for Compliance™’ East Export/Import Control Training and Education Program
;” Partnering for Compliance East;
Ailish@PartneringForCompliance.org
; 321-952-2978

* Mar 12-15: Miami; “ICPA Miami Conference;”
International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

* Mar 13-15: Newport Beach CA; “2017 Winter Back to Basics Conference;” Society for International Affairs

* Mar 20-23: Singapore;
United States Export Control (EAR/OFAC/ITAR) (for Asia-Pacific and other non-US Companies)
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* May 1-2: Tucson AZ; “2017 Spring Conference;” Society for International Affairs
* May 7-9: Toronto; “ICPA Toronto Conference;”
International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

* May 15-18: London UK; “

United States Export Control (EAR/OFAC/ITAR) Seminar in London (for EU and other non-US Companies)
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Jun 11-13: Dublin IRL; “ICPA Dublin Conference;”
International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

* Jun 12-15: San Francisco; “

United States Export Control (EAR/OFAC/ITAR) Seminar
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* Sep 4-9: Galveston TX; “ICPA Conference at Sea;”
International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org 

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a113. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)
 
Notable birthdays:
 
*
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (21 Oct 1772 – 25 Jul 1834, was an English poet, literary critic and philosopher who, with his friend William Wordsworth, was a founder of the Romantic Movement in England and a member of the Lake Poets. His poems included
The Rime of the Ancient Mariner and
Kubla Khan.

  – “A man’s desire is for the woman, but the woman’s desire is rarely other than for the desire of the man.”

  – “Advice is like snow – the softer it falls, the longer it dwells upon, and the deeper it sinks into the mind.”

*
Kim Kardashian (Kimberly Kardashian West, born Kimberly Noel Kardashian, 21 Oct 1980, is an American reality television personality, socialite, businesswoman and model).

  “I always say you shouldn’t weigh yourself. I don’t even have a set of scales in my house.”

Friday Funnies

 

An elderly man calls 911 to sadly report that his wife has passed away and, of course, the dispatcher asks for the address. “319 Eucalyptus Street,” the fellow replies. The dispatcher, just to be clear, asks “How do you spell Eucalyptus?” “Well,” says the fellow, “I don’t remember. How’s about I drag her over to Oak Street?”

  — Ladd Anderson, Salt Lake City, UT 

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

EN_a214. 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:
30 Sep 2016: 81 FR 67140-67144: Notice of Arrival for Importations of Pesticides and Pesticidal Devices

* 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: 17 Oct 2016: 81 FR 71365-71367: Cuba: Revisions to License Exceptions  

  
*
FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR)
: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
  – Last Amendment: 17 Oct 2016: 81 FR 71372-71378: Cuban Assets Control 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.  Please contact us to receive your discount code. 
 
*
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
  – Latest Amendment: 12 Oct 2016: 81 FR 70340-70357: Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Revision of U.S. Munitions List Category XII and associated sections.
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition 12 Oct 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, footnotes to amendments that will take effect on 15 November and 31 December, plus a large Index and over 750 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 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.

* 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 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