17-0220 Monday “The Daily Bugle”

17-0220 Monday “Daily Bugle”

Monday, 20 February 2017

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.

[Today was a U.S. federal holiday, so no Federal Register was published.]  

  1. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.) 
  3. State/DDTC Posts Name Change for Vextronix AG 
  4. EU Implements Regulation (EU) 2017/285 Concerning the Classification of Certain Goods in the Combined Nomenclature 
  5. EU Amends Certain Restrictive Measures and Introduces an Arms Embargo Exception Concerning Zimbabwe 
  1. Globes: “Israel to Relax Arms Export Controls” 
  2. ST&R Trade Report: “New Legislation on Trade Enforcement, China Tariffs, Export Controls, Mail Shipments”  
  1. J. Kies Mammen & G. Kreijen: “U.S. Uses CFIUS Regulatory Authority to Prohibit Transaction Between Two German Entities” 
  2. M. Volkov: “The Test for Bad Actors in a Bad Company” 
  3. S.A. Baker, M. Vatis & J.M. Weinstein: “Cybersecurity and the Wassenaar Arrangement – What Needs to Be Done in 2017?” 
  1. Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 110 Jobs Posted 
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Changes: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (27 Jan 2017), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (1 Feb 2017), FACR/OFAC (10 Feb 2017), FTR (15 May 2015), HTSUS (10 Feb 2017), ITAR (11 Jan 2017) 



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


OGS_a11. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
(Source: Federal Register)

* Commerce; Industry and Security Bureau; NOTICES; Meetings [Publication Date: 21 February 2017.]
  – Emerging Technology and Research Advisory Committee

  – Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee
  – Materials Technical Advisory Committee
  – Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee

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

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


State/DDTC Posts Name Change for Vectronix AG

State/DDTC) [Excerpts.]
Effective immediately, Vectronix AG will change as follows: Safran Vectronix AG. Due to the volume of authorizations requiring amendments to reflect this change, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Trade Controls is exercising the authority under 22 CFR 126.3 to waive the requirement for amendments to change currently approved license authorizations. The amendment waiver does not apply to approved or pending agreements. … 

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


EU Implements Regulation (EU) 2017/285 Concerning the Classification of Certain Goods in the Combined Nomenclature

  – Commission Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2017/285 of 15 February 2017 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

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


EU Amends Certain Restrictive Measures and Introduces an Arms Embargo Exception Concerning Zimbabwe

Council Regulation (EU) 2017/284 of 17 February 2017 amending Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe

  – Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/288 of 17 February 2017 amending Decision 2011/101/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe

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



Globes: “Israel to Relax Arms Export Controls”

Globes) [Excerpts.]
At the same time, penalties for breach of regulations will become more severe.
Defense Export Controls Agency head Racheli Chen today presented the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee with the main points of the reform in defense exports. The defense industries are very alarmed about stricter supervision and penalties from the state. … 
The concessions reported today also include an expansion of the Defense Export Controls Agency’s online services for exporters, thereby substantially shortening waiting times. This is especially important for the US market, because the Defense Export Controls Agency receives thousands of requests every year for marketing activity for defense products in the US. … 

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


ST&R Trade Report: “New Legislation on Trade Enforcement, China Tariffs, Export Controls, Mail Shipments”

Trade Agreements and Enforcement. The Presidential Trade Transparency Act (S. 408, introduced Feb. 16 by Sen. Wyden, D-Ore., and H.R. 1172, introduced Feb. 16 by Rep. Neal, D-Mass.) would require the president to disclose income, assets, and liabilities when initiating or continuing trade or investment negotiations with a foreign country, taking or refraining from taking certain trade enforcement actions, or granting or modifying preferential tariff treatment under statutory trade preference programs. The president would also have to describe in detail the nature of the connection between the income, asset, or liability and the foreign country. Failure to timely submit a report would render without legal effect a presidential proclamation modifying U.S. tariffs with respect to the country and disqualify a trade agreement for expedited consideration under trade promotion authority.
China Tariffs. H.R. 1048 (introduced Feb. 14 by Rep. King, R-Iowa) would direct the president to impose duties on goods from China in an amount equivalent to the estimated annual loss of revenue to holders of U.S. intellectual property rights as a result of violations of such IPR in China. The resulting revenue would be proportionally distributed to provide compensation to U.S. IPR holders.
Export Controls. The Secure E-Waste Export and Recycling Act (H.R. 917, introduced Feb. 7 by Rep. Cook, R-Calif.) would control the export of electronic waste to ensure it does not become the source of counterfeit goods that may reenter military and civilian electronics supply chains in the U.S. A press release from Cook’s office states that under this bill domestic recycling would be required of all untested, non-working electronics but exports of tested working equipment would continue. U.S. Customs and Border Protection would be authorized to inspect shipments of electronic products intended for export.
Mail Shipments. Legislation introduced Feb. 14 (S. 372, introduced by Sen. Portman, R-Ohio, and H.R. 1057, introduced by Rep. Tiberi, R-Ohio) would amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to ensure that goods arriving through the mail are subject to review by U.S. Customs and Border Protection and to require advance electronic information on mail shipments to be provided to CBP.
Reshoring. The Bring Jobs Home Act (H.R. 685, introduced Jan. 24 by Rep. Pascrell, D-N.J., and S. 247, introduced Jan. 30 by Sen. Stabenow, D-Mich.) would amend the Internal Revenue Code to (1) grant business taxpayers a tax credit for up to 20 percent of insourcing expenses incurred for eliminating a business located outside the U.S. and relocating it within the U.S. and (2) deny a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses incurred in relocating a U.S. business outside the U.S.
Cuba. The Agricultural Export Expansion Act (S. 275, introduced Feb. 2 by Sen. Heitkamp, D-N.D.) would allow U.S. persons to finance sales of agricultural commodities to Cuba. A press release from Heitkamp’s office notes that in January 2016 the Obama administration loosened export restrictions to allow companies to sell non-agricultural products to Cuba on credit but that legal restrictions on financing exports of agricultural products to Cuba are still in place.

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


COMM_a18. J.

Kies Mammen & G. Kreijen: “U.S. Uses CFIUS Regulatory Authority to Prohibit Transaction Between Two German Entities”

* Authors: Jennifer Kies Mammen, Esq, Bryan Cave LLP Washington DC
jennifer.mammen@bryancave.com, +1-202-508-6044; and Gerard Kreijen, Esq., Loyens & Loeff Amsterdam,
gerard.kreijen@loyensloeff.com, +31-(0)20-578-5395
U.S. law provides the President with broad authority to prohibit transactions that he deems to present a national security threat to the United States. In this context, national security concerns may, but need not, involve information that is trade-controlled or classified.
At the end of 2016, President Obama used this power to block a transaction after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) determined that it threatened the security of the United States due to, among other things, the military applications of the technological capability of the company to be acquired. Notably, neither of the parties to the transaction was based in the United States.
Investors in the United States have long been aware of the various regulatory requirements that must be met before a transaction may close, including any local regulatory requirements. Where a transaction involves foreign investment in a U.S. business, however, there may be another, often overlooked, regulatory hurdle to overcome: a national security review by CFIUS.
CFIUS, a group comprised of U.S. administrative agencies, is tasked with the review of certain acquisitions of U.S. businesses by foreign entities to determine whether those transactions present a national security concern to the United States. Under U.S. law, CFIUS has the authority to review any transaction in which a foreign interest may gain control of a U.S. business that could present such a risk. CFIUS is tasked to determine whether a foreign investment in a U.S. business presents a national security concern, to evaluate whether such concerns can be mitigated, and to recommend to the President preventing the transaction altogether if such a risk cannot be sufficiently mitigated.
National security concerns can arise in various contexts beyond the expected areas of access to classified or export-controlled information or links to military or intelligence work.  For the transaction blocked by President Obama last year, CFIUS determined the transaction threatened the security of the United States due to, among other things, the military applications of the technological capability of the company to be acquired. Specifically, the target’s wholly-owned subsidiary in the United States employed engineers working on the company’s semiconductor deposition technology, as well as sales and distribution of the target’s products in the United States. The
Presidential Order prohibiting the acquisition of the target’s U.S. business and the statement issued by the Department of the Treasury reflected concerns that access by the acquirer (a German subsidiary of a Chinese investment fund) to the target’s knowledge and experience as a producer and innovator of semiconductor manufacturing equipment and technology could “impair the national security of the U.S.” That position corresponds to prior statements from CFIUS and the U.S. Intelligence Community regarding the importance of safeguarding advanced technology, including semiconductor or other technology that may have both commercial and military uses, and concerns regarding the increasing Chinese investment in the global semiconductor market.
The proposed takeover was terminated less than one week after the issuance of the
Presidential Order.
While it remains to be seen how the Trump Administration will use the CFIUS process to effect and regulate foreign investment in U.S. business or whether it will attempt to make changes to the established CFIUS process, we suspect that the U.S. will remain open to foreign investment but CFIUS scrutiny will increase. We also anticipate that CFIUS will continue to assert its authority to review transactions between non-U.S. parties, to the extent that such transactions involve U.S. business. Parties considering investment targets in the United States or that include assets or business in the United States should not underestimate the potential for national security concerns, even when the parties involved are not facially U.S. businesses. In order to maximize the likelihood of a successful transaction and minimize potential disruption, parties should consider such concerns early in transaction planning and negotiations, both with respect to the selection of potential transaction targets and partners and in structuring proposed transactions.
While most EU Member States do not have national laws providing for a general screening, review, or approval of foreign investments, countries, including Belgium, are finding ways to address growing concerns in other ways. In October 2016, the city of Antwerp effectively blocked a proposed bid to acquire a minority stake in Belgian grid operator Eandis by Chinese-owned State Grid International Development Limited after the Flemish regional energy market regulator announced higher tariffs would go into effect post-investment. In the Netherlands, where no legal mechanism like the CFIUS regulatory authority exists, the Ministry of Defense has sought to extend its influence over the day-to-day management of the crypto division of Fox-IT after the company was acquired by the UK based NCC Group in 2015. Fox-IT provides IT technology to the Dutch government for the protection of state secrets, and reports suggest that the company may risk losing its contracts with the Dutch government if it refuses to accept increased government controls. Things could change rapidly at EU level now that Germany, Italy and France have recently called upon Brussels to grant them a right of veto especially with respect to Chinese high tech takeovers.
The above examples demonstrate the continued importance of considering and addressing in advance any potential concerns of relevant national authorities in any transaction involving cross-border interests.

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


M. Volkov: “The Test for Bad Actors in a Bad Company”

Volkov Law Group Blog. Reprinted by permission.)
* Author: Michael Volkov, Esq., Volkov Law Group,
mvolkov@volkovlaw.com, 240-505-1992.
Some business people are “bad,” meaning they engage in misconduct and either feel no remorse or rationalize why their conduct is acceptable. In a company that embraces bad acting, breaking rules or cutting corners, bad actors are likely to flourish. A bad company is the breeding ground for bad actors.
How do you define a “bad” company? We all know examples of bad companies that were eventually caught but there are plenty of bad companies that continue to operate in violation of the law and without impunity.
Some of the telltale signs of a “bad” company are fairly basic. Here are some of the key indicators:
  – A CEO and senior leadership team that repeatedly push accounting issues to achieve financial goals, especially quarterly projections and results, with no regard to sustainability, ethical principles or values;
  – The absence (or mere perfunctory) statements of compliance commitment by the CEO and other senior executives with no participation or reinforcement by middle management;
  – The lack of any real disciplinary system nor performance and ethical conduct expectations for the CEO and senior executives;
A dated code of conduct that reflects a “cookie-cutter” approach to ethics and compliance without any real tailoring to the company’s operations or risks;
  – A moribund compliance department, which is understaffed, and narrowly focused on issues such as gifts, meals, entertainment, and other ministerial tasks, without regard to other more serious risks surrounding foreign government interactions;
  – A check-the-box training system that consists almost exclusively of online training programs that do not address key risks nor provide any meaningful guidance on the company’s internal policies and procedures for operationalizing its compliance program;
  – An aggressive sales department that has no interaction with compliance nor little contact to ensure that they are aware of risks of sales activities;
  – The absence of a speak up culture and a chilling of employee concerns, investigation of any concerns, or remediation of any issues that may be of concern; and
  – A disengaged corporate board committee and weak reporting relationship between the CCO and the specific committee.
This list is not exhaustive. It does offer a parade of horribles for a CCO and a company’s culture.
The profile listed above is not as unusual as everyone thinks. We spend a lot of time discussing compliance issues, and often self-select our examples, speakers at conferences who have robust programs, and reinforce the message we want to hear.
A “bad” company will breed more bad actors, who will in turn evade or stretch internal controls. In the end, the company’s ability to self-regulate and avoid controversy will suffer. Not every company that engages in misconduct gets caught, and for every company that does undergo investigation and enforcement, there are large multiples of companies that escape detection and prosecution.
One key indicator of a company’s culture and adherence to ethics and compliance is the sustainability of a company’s financial growth. If a company performs relatively well with typical ups and downs that reflect a consistent range of performance and outside influences (e.g. overall strong economy, or the converse, a recession), the company is likely to have a strong culture with minimal misconduct risks.
On the other hand, when you see companies with sky rocketing performance based on questionable market strategies (e.g. Valeant Pharmaceuticals), the old adage comes to mind – if it is too good to be true, it likely is not true. In most of these cases, I am sure if you looked under the hood of the company, you would find some or all of the above-listed characteristics. Eventually, these companies are brought down to earth, shareholders suffer, and legal problems compound, eventually resulting in some kind of enforcement action.

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


S.A. Baker, M. Vatis & J.M. Weinstein: “Cybersecurity and the Wassenaar Arrangement – What Needs to Be Done in 2017?”

* Authors: Stewart A. Baker, Esq.,
sbaker@steptoe.com, 202-429-6402; Michael Vatis, Esq.,
mvatis@steptoe.com, 212-506-3927; and Jason M. Weinstein, Esq.,
jweinstein@steptoe.com, 202-429-8061.  All of Steptoe & Johnson LLP.
Cyber threats move at Internet speed and so must cyber responders, to protect networks and data across the globe. Imagine the impact on cybersecurity if responders, innovators, and developers were told to pause and apply for an export license before responding to a threat. With a new round of international negotiations about to begin for the Wassenaar Arrangement, now is the time to press hard to arrive at a workable international standard that protects, rather than undermines, cybersecurity.
In 2013, the Wassenaar Arrangement, a 41-country international forum that seeks consensus among its members on dual-use export controls, adopted new controls on “intrusion software” and “carrier class network surveillance tools.” The purpose behind these controls is worthy: protecting human rights activists and political dissidents from surveillance by authoritarian governments.
Unfortunately, the approach proposed by the Wassenaar regulation misses the mark, and indeed, the controls would ultimately undermine that goal by making it harder for cyber responders to defend against the use of surveillance technologies. Because the regulation is so overly broad, it would require cyber responders and security researchers to obtain an export license prior to exchanging essential information to remediate a newly-identified network vulnerability, even when that vulnerability is capable of being exploited for purposes of surveillance. It would also require an onerous licensing process for sales of strong cybersecurity tools and services by companies around the world, and in some cases, could prohibit their sale altogether.
The Coalition for Responsible Cybersecurity, together with industry associations, academics, and researchers, have filed comments with the US government and provided white papers on the controls to a variety of governments. In 2016, the Coalition supported the US government’s work to begin the process of reshaping these controls. However, the proposed revisions for 2016 were modest and not ultimately adopted, and indeed, more can be done to revise and clarify the controls to ensure that they do not jeopardize security or weaken global cybersecurity efforts.
In 2017, there is a real opportunity for industry, academia, and researchers to work with the US government and other Wassenaar arrangement member governments around the world to fashion a workable standard that strengthens cybersecurity while protecting human rights and political dissent. It is critical that those concerned about these controls step up to the plate and offer constructive solutions before the window to do so closes.
For 2017, industry, academia, and researchers should push together for the following four key steps:
  – Stop any further efforts by the US government to implement the Wassenaar Arrangement controls in their current form, and work with other governments who have already implemented the controls, such as the United Kingdom, to clarify the scope and intended application so as not to harm defensive cybersecurity.
  – Support efforts by the US government in 2017 to advocate for meaningful changes to the controls, including by revising the overbroad definition of intrusion software, and by limiting the controls on related software, hardware, technology, and information sharing.
  – Work with the governments of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, and Germany to fashion a different approach to curbing sales of harmful products and services to objectionable end-users.
  – Advocate for opening the Wassenaar Arrangement discussions on these controls to broader engagement with industry, academia, and researchers-the technical experts on these subjects-through industry forums, two-way feedback mechanisms, and inclusion of a broader range of technical experts in the Wassenaar Arrangement working sessions, in order to ensure that policy makers have an accurate and fulsome understanding of the relevant technology, and to enable all interested parties to work together to find the right solution to this challenge.

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


MS_a111. Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 110 Jobs Posted

(Source: Editor)  
Published every Monday or first business day of the week.  Send openings in the following format to
#” New listing this week:

# AbbVie Inc.; Chicago IL;
Senior Analyst, Global Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID: 1607976

* Aerospace Industries Association; Arlington VA;
International Affairs Director

* Amazon; London, UK;
Senior Trade Compliance Program Manager (M/F)
; Requisition ID: 429019
* Amazon; Luxembourg, Luxembourg;
Trade Compliance Project Integration Manager (M/F)
; Requisition ID: 479077
* Amazon; Mexico City, Mexico;
Mexico Trade Compliance Program Manager
; Requisition ID: 481541
* Amazon; Mexico City, Mexico;
Mexico Trade Compliance Program Manager
; Requisition ID: 481542
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Compliance Investigator
; Requisition ID: 432564
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
NA Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 256357
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Prime Air Trade Compliance Program Manager
; Requisition ID: 395658
* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Senior Compliance Audit Specialist
; Requisition ID: 473466

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
Sr. Trade Compliance PM, Fashion
; Requisition ID: 475927

* Amazon; Seattle WA;
U.S. Export Compliance PM
; Requisition ID: 475927

* Amazon; Singapore;
Sr. Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 441734

* Amazon; Tokyo, Japan;
Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 481891
* American Science & Engineering; Billerica MA;
Sr. Trade Compliance Analyst
Requisition ID: 10799
* Apple; Singapore;
APAC Trade Compliance Analyst / Manager
; Requisition ID: 52327703
* Bayer; Leverkusen, Germany;
Head of Customs & International Trade Classification (m/f)
; Requisition ID: 0000180456

* Choice Logistics; New York NY;
VP, Global Trade Solutions

* Crane Aerospace and Electronics; Chandler AZ;
Sr. Export Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 4725

* Crocs; Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
Manager, Trade Compliance EU

* Cummins Inc.; Daventry, United Kingdom;
Lead Export Controls Analyst
* DRS Technologies; Germantown MD;
Senior Trade Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 54749

* Dutch Ophthalmic Research Center; Rotterdam, The Netherlands;
Trade Compliance Specialist

* Edgewell Personal Care; Milford CT; 
Export Compliance And Security Lead
; Requisition ID: NAM00808

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Bellevue WA;
Audit Manager – Compliance
; Requisition ID: 8215BR
* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Bellevue WA;
Sr. Trade Compliance Manager – Sensors & Systems (Engineering)
; Requisition ID: 8791BR
* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Brea CA;
Sr. Trade Compliance Manager;
Requisition ID: 7333BR

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Coeur d’Alene ID;
Compliance Engineer
; Requisition ID:

* Esterline Technologies Corporation; Frankenmuth MI;
Trade Compliance & Contracts Administrator
; Requisition ID: 9307BR

* Expeditors; Manila, The Philippines;
Regional Trade Compliance Manager – Indochina & Philippines
* Expeditors; Roma, Italy;
Ocean Export Manager
* Expeditors; San Francisco CA;
Export Compliance Specialist
* Expeditors; Sunnyvale CA;
Customs Compliance Specialist
* Export Solutions Inc.; Melbourne FL; Trade Compliance Specialist;

* Facebook; Dublin, Ireland;
Sanctions Specialist

* Facebook; Menlo Park CA;
Head of Global Trade Compliance Operations

* Facebook; Menlo Park CA;
Compliance Audit Analyst

* Facebook; Singapore;
Export Compliance Manager, APAC

# FD Associates, Tysons Corner VA;
Senior Export Compliance Associate

* FlightSafety International; Oklahoma; Trade Compliance Advisor; Requisition ID 16480

* FLIR; Arlington VA;
Manager of Defense Trade Licensing
; Requisition ID: 8121

FLIR; Billerica MA; 
Sr. Defense Trade Licensing & Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 8008
* General Dynamics; South Wales, UK;
Senior Trade Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID: 6079
* Givaudan; Bogor, Indonesia;
Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: 68063
Ingersoll Rand; San Diego, CA;
Latin America Trade Compliance Manager (Trilingual: English, Spanish, and Portuguese)
; Requisition ID: 1610632
* Intel; Santa Clara, CA;
Global Export Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: JR0814909
* Intel; Santa Clara, CA;
Export Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: JR0005160

* Johnson Controls; Wash DC;
Manager Customs & Census; Requisition ID: 144495

* Lam Research Corporation; Fremont CA:
Foreign Trade Analyst 6
; Requisition ID: 12079BR
* LORD Fly-by-Wire; Saint-Vallier, France; Trade Compliance and Customs Manager  
* Lumber Liquidators; Toano VA;
Intern, Compliance
; Requisition ID: 2227
* Lutron; Coopersburg PA;
Trade Manager-Export
; Requisition ID: 2926
* Lutron; Coopersburg PA;
Trade Compliance Coordinator
; Requisition ID: 2834
* Medtronic; Heerlen, The Netherlands;
Trade Compliance Analyst
; 16000DYY
* Meggitt PLC; Los Angeles CA;
Export Control/Trade Compliance Administrator
; Requisition ID: 22591

* Michael Page; Oestgeest, The Netherlands
Sr. Manager – Global Trade Management

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Annapolis Junction MD;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 4
; Requisition ID: 16028623

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Baltimore MD;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 2
; Requisition ID: 17001145

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Herndon VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 2
; Requisition ID: 17000564

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Herndon VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 2
; Requisition ID: 17000653

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Herndon VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 3
; Requisition ID: 17000826

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Herndon VA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 3/4
; Requisition ID: 17001180

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Linthicum MD;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 3
; Requisition ID: 17001930

* Northrop Grumman Corporation; Redondo Beach CA;
International Trade Compliance Analyst 4
; Requisition ID: 16024309

* Northrop Grumman Sperry Marine; New Malden, UK;
Trade Compliance Coordinator
* NXP Semiconductors; Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
Export Control Officer, Requirements Manager
; R-10001504
Orbital ATK; Mesa AZ;
International Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: MGK20162212-37731
* Pall Corporation; Portsmouth, UK;
Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: SHA000201
* Parexel; Kiev, Ukraine;
Global Trade Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: pare-10056329
* Roanoke Insurance Group; Schaumburg IL;
Carnet Service Representative
; Requisition ID: 1019
* Raytheon; Arlington VA;
Export Licensing Manager I
; Requisition ID: 87321BR
* Raytheon; Indianapolis IN;
Principal SC Compliance Specialist
; Requisition ID: 84932BR

* Raytheon Space & Airborne Systems; McKinney TX;
Sr Exp License & Compliance Adv;
; 310-334-7499; Requisition ID:

# Rolls-Royce; Indianapolis IN;
Export Control Specialist
; Requisition ID: JR6016567

* Shell; The Hague, The Netherlands;
Legal Counsel – Trade Controls

* Sierra Nevada Corporation; Denver CO;
International Trade Compliance Analyst II
; Requisition ID: R0002483

* Sierra Nevada Corporation; Denver CO;
International Trade Compliance Analyst III
; Requisition ID: R0002484

# Synopsys; Mountain View CA;
Senior Manager, Export Compliance
650-584-1676; Requisition ID: 13208BR

* Tesla Motors; Fremont CA;
Global Supply Manager – Logistics
; Requisition ID: 38153

* Tesla Motors; Fremont CA;
Group Manager – Logistics Sourcing
; Requisition ID: 38574
* Textron Systems; Wilmington MA;
Principal Export Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 242857

* Thales; South East Crawley, UK;
Trade Compliance Support Officer
; Requisition ID: R0013706
* ThermoFisher Scientific; Hennigsdorf, Germany;
Global Trade Compliance Specialist (m/f)
; 43954BR

* ThermoFisher Scientific; Matamoros, Mexico;
Import/Export Supervisor
; Requisition ID: 39750BR

* ThermoFisher Scientific; Shanghai, China;
Trade Compliance Specialist – CMC
; Requisition ID: 42143BR

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Chula Vista CA;
International Trade Compliance Intern
; Requisition ID:

# United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Phoenix AZ;

Manager, International Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID:
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Pueblo CO;
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Vergennes, VT;
International Trade Compliance Lead
; Requisition ID:
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Westford MA;
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Windsor Locks CT;
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Windsor Locks CT;

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Program Manager, Customs
; Requisition ID:
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Charlotte NC;
Sr Mgr, Intl Trade Compl
; Requisition ID: 30525BR
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Windsor Locks CT;

* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; Windsor Locks CT;
Specialist, International Trade Compliance
; Requisition ID:
* United Technologies Corporation, UTC Aerospace Systems; York NE;
Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID:
# Vigilant; Unknown location in the U.S.;
BioTech/Pharmaceutical Global Trade Analyst

* Wurth Industry of North America; Brooklyn Park MN; Trade Compliance Officer;
International Trade Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID: 388-720

* Wurth Industry of North America; Indianapolis IN; Trade Compliance Officer;
International Trade Compliance Officer
; Requisition ID: 389-720

* XPO Logistics; Greenwich CT;
Global Trade Compliance Analyst

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


(Source: Editor) 


* Lee Marvin (19 Feb 1924 – 29 Aug 1987, was an American film and television actor. Known for his distinctive voice and prematurely white hair, Marvin initially appeared in supporting roles, mostly villains, soldiers, and other hardboiled characters.)
  – “Tequila. Straight. There’s a real polite drink. You keep drinking until you finally take one more and it just won’t go down. Then you know you’ve reached your limit.”
* Ansel Adams (Ansel Easton Adams, 20 Feb 1902 – 22 Apr 1984, was an American photographer and environmentalist. His black-and-white landscape photographs of the American West, especially Yosemite National Park, have been widely reproduced on calendars, posters, books, and the Internet.)
  – “You don’t take a photograph, you make it.”
  – “A good photograph is knowing where to stand.”
Monday is pun day:
Q. What do you call cheese that’s made backwards?
A. Edam! 
  — Glen Anderson, Severn, MD

Oops – Last Friday we repeated the Quotations & Friday Funnies from the previous week.  So for the hundreds (well at least a couple) of faithful readers who asked for the proper Feb 17th edition of Quotations & Friday Funnies, here it is:

* Paris Hilton (Paris Whitney Hilton, born 17 Feb 1981, is an American businesswoman, socialite, television and media personality, model, actress, singer, and author. She is the great-granddaughter of Conrad Hilton, the founder of Hilton Hotels.)
  – “The only rule is don’t be boring, and dress cute wherever you go. Life is too short to blend in.”
* Thomas J. Watson (Thomas John Watson Sr. 17 Feb 1874 – 19 Jun 1956, was an American businessman. He served as the chairman and CEO of IBM.)
  – “If you want to increase your success rate, double your failure rate.”
* Auguste Comte (Isidore Marie Auguste François Xavier Comte, 19 Jan 1798 – 5 Sep 1857, was a French philosopher who founded the discipline of sociology, coining the term, and the doctrine of positivism. He is sometimes regarded as the first philosopher of science in the modern sense of the term.)
  – “The word ‘right’ should be excluded from political language, as the word ’cause’ from the language of philosophy.”
Friday funnies:
Ole won a trip to Amsterdam, but he wasn’t sure he should go because he didn’t speak Dutch.  Sven informed him that all he had to do was speak English slowly and he would be understood. Upon arriving, Ole goes to a bar in the Amsterdam airport and says “I … vould … like ….. a sev … en ….. and … sev ….. en. The bartender asks Ole, “Are …. you … from …. Minn … eh … soh … tah?” “Ja,” Ole replies, “Ya … I … em … from ….. Brain … erd …. Minn … eh …. soh … tah…” The bartender exclaims, “I … em … from …… Hibb … ing ….. Minn ….. eh … soh … tah …” Ole says, “If …. you … are …. from … Minn …. eh … soh … tah, and … I …… em … from … Minn … eh … soh … tah, … vy … are … ve both … speak …. ing … Dutch?”
  — Mark Vorhees, Winetka, IL 

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

. 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.
: 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. 
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199
  – Last Amendment: 27 Jan 2017: 82 FR 8589-8590: Delay of Effective Date for Importations of Certain Vehicles and Engines Subject to Federal Antipollution Emission Standards; and 82 FR 8590: Delay of Effective Date for Toxic Substance Control Act Chemical Substance Import Certification Process Revisions.

  – 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.)

  – Last Amendment: Last Amendment: 1 Feb 2017: 82 FR 8893-8894: Commerce Control List: Removal of Certain Nuclear Nonproliferation (NP) Column 2 Controls. 

: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
  – Last Amendment:
10 Feb 2017: 82 FR 10434-10440: Inflation Adjustment of Civil Monetary Penalties. 
: 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
  – 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.
, 1 Jan 2017: 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: 10 Feb 2017: Harmonized System Update 1701, containing 1,295 ABI records and 293 harmonized tariff records.  
  – HTS codes for AES are available
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
  – Latest Amendment: 11 Jan 2017: 82 FR 3168-3170: 2017 Civil Monetary Penalties Inflationary Adjustment
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition 24 Jan 2017) of the ITAR is Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR (“BITAR”), by James E. Bartlett III. The BITAR contains all ITAR amendments to date, plus a large Index, 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.  

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


* 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 8,000 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 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