;

17-0425 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

17-0425 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

Tuesday, 25 April 2017

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. Commerce/BIS: MPETAC to Meet on 16 May in Wash DC 
  2. Commerce/BIS: TRETAC to Meet on 10 May in Wash DC 
  1. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.) 
  3. DHS/CBP Announces ACE Certification Outage, 26 Apr 
  4. DHS/CBP Updates ACE Drawback CATAIR Chapter 
  5. State/DDTC: (No new postings.) 
  6. EU Strengthens Control of the Acquisition and Possession of Firearms 
  1. The Guardian: “Dutch Arms Trafficker to Liberia Given War Crimes Conviction” 
  2. ST&R Trade Report: “Former Executives Get Fines for Telecom Bribery” 
  1. L. Cornell: “What Compliance Needs to Know About Data Privacy and Security” 
  2. R. MacLean, Aline Doussin & Martin Rees: “Trump Orders ‘Buy American and Hire American'” 
  1. ECS Presents “Benchmarking Your ITAR/EAR Compliance Program” featuring Gerry Horner, Commerce/BIS; Byron Angvall, The Boeing Company and Christine Lee, UTC in Annapolis MD, 24-25 May 
  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 (18 Apr 2017), FACR/OFAC (10 Feb 2017), FTR (19 Apr 2017), HTSUS (7 Mar 2017), ITAR (11 Jan 2017) 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMEX/IM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

 
82 FR 19022: Notice of Partially Closed Meeting of the Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee
 
The Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (MPETAC) will meet on May 16, 2017, 9:00 a.m., Room 3884, in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to materials processing equipment and related technology. …
  The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at
Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov, no later than May 9, 2017.
A limited number of seats will be available for the public session.
Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email.
  The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 15, 2017, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 10(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with matters the premature disclosure of which would be likely to frustrate significantly implementation of a proposed agency action as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 
§§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.
  For more information, call Yvette Springer at (202) 482-2813.
 
Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

EXIM_a22.

Commerce/BIS: TRETAC to Meet on 10 May in Wash DC

 
82 FR 19022: Bureau of Industry and Security 
Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting
 
The Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (TRETAC) will meet on May 10, 2017, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution & Pennsylvania Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to transportation and related equipment or technology. …
  The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at
Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov no later than May 3, 2017.
A limited number of seats will be available during the public session of the meeting. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email.
  The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, 
formally determined on February 15, 2017, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § (10)(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.
  For more information, call Yvette Springer at (202) 482-2813.
 
Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.

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

OGS
OTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a13. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions

(Source: Federal Register)

* Commerce; Industry and Security Bureau; NOTICES; Initiation of National Security Investigation of Imports of Steel; Request for Comments and Public Hearing [Publication Date: 26 April 2017.]

* Commerce; Industry and Security Bureau; NOTICES; Meetings: Materials Technical Advisory Committee [Publication Date: 26 April 2017.]
* Justice; Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau; NOTICES; Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Inventories, Licensed Explosives Importers, Manufacturers, Dealers, and Permittees [Publication Date: 26 April 2017.]
* State; NOTICES; Designations as Global Terrorists: Mubarak Mohammed A Alotaibi, aka Abu Ghayth, aka Waqqas al-Jazrawi [Publication Date: 26 April 2017.]

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

OGS_a24. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)

(Source: Commerce/BIS

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

OGS_a35
. DHS/CBP Announces ACE Certification Outage, 26 Apr

(Source:
CSMS# 17-000238, 25 April 2017.)
 
There will be an ACE CERTIFICATION Outage Wednesday evening, April 26, 2017 from 1700 ET to 2000 ET for Infrastructure maintenance.

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

OGS_a46
. DHS/CBP Updates ACE Drawback CATAIR Chapter

(Source:
CSMS# 17-000233, 25 April 2017.)
 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has updated the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) CBP and Trade Automated Interface Requirements (CATAIR) chapter for Drawback on CBP.gov.
 
To download a copy of the ACE Drawback CATAIR Guidelines, please visit the “ACE Automated Broker Interface (ABI) CATAIR” page of CBP.gov/ACE and click on the “Chapters: Drafts for future capabilities” tab or go here.

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

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

OGS_a68
. EU Strengthens Control of the Acquisition and Possession of Firearms

 
On 25 April 2017, the Council of the European Union adopted a directive on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons, which revises and complements existing directive 91/477/ECC.
Carmelo Abela, Maltese Minister for Home Affairs and National Security:
 
The new Firearms Directive provides for more rigorous controls on the acquisition and possession of firearms, in particular so that legitimate channels and regulatory set-ups for the acquisition and possession of firearms are not abused by criminal groups or terrorists. The directive is therefore an important step forward, particularly since it balances security concerns with the need to preserve legitimate activities. It is however, vital for the EU and its member states to continue working towards shutting off illegal channels for the acquisition of firearms by criminal groups and terrorists.
 
The amendments address risks for public safety and security, and focus on:
 
Enhanced Traceability of Firearms
 
The revision strengthens the rules on the marking of firearms, by including, among other things, a new obligation to mark also all their essential components. Harmonizing the rules for the marking of firearms and establishing the mutual recognition of marks between member states will improve the traceability of firearms used in criminal activities, including those which have been assembled from components acquired separately.
 
This information also has to be recorded in national data-filing systems. For this to happen, member states will now have to ensure that dealers and brokers register any transaction of firearms electronically and without any undue delay.
 
Measures on Deactivation and Reactivation or Conversion of Firearms
 
The rules on the deactivation of firearms have been strengthened, not least through a provision requiring the classification of deactivated firearms under category C (firearms subject to declaration). Until now, deactivated firearms have not been subject to the requirements set by the directive.
 
The revision also includes a new category of salute and acoustic weapons, which were not covered by the original directive. These are live firearms that have been converted to blank firing ones, for example, for use in theatres or television. In the absence of more stringent national provisions, such firearms could be purchased freely. This posed a risk, given that their reconversion to live ones was often possible with limited efforts (they were for example used in the Paris terrorist attacks). The new wording of the directive ensures that these weapons remain registered under the same category as the firearm from which they have been converted.
 
Stricter Rules for the Acquisition and Possession of the Most Dangerous Firearms
 
The most dangerous firearms, classified in category A, can only be acquired and possessed on the basis of an exemption granted by the relevant member state. The rules for granting such exemptions have now been significantly strengthened. Possible grounds for exemption, such as national defence or the protection of critical infrastructure, are now set out in a limited list and exemptions may only be granted where there is no risk to public security or public order.
 
When a firearm of category A is required for sport-shooting, it can only be acquired according to strict rules which include proven practice recognised by an official shooting sport federation.
 
Article 7 para 4a provides the possibility of confirming authorisations for semi-automatic firearms (new point 6, 7 or 8 of category A) legally acquired and registered before the directive comes into force.
 
Banning Civilian Use of the Most Dangerous Semi-Automatic Firearms
 
Some dangerous semi-automatic firearms have now been added to category A and are therefore prohibited for civilian use. This is the case for short semi-automatic firearms with loading devices over 20 rounds and long semi-automatic firearms with loading devices over 10 rounds. Similarly, long firearms that can be easily concealed, for example by means of a folding or telescopic stock, are also now prohibited.
 
Improving the Exchange of Relevant Information Between Member States
 
The new rules enable the Commission to propose the establishment of a system for the exchange of information electronically between member states. The information would cover cases where the transfer of a firearm to another member state has been authorised as well as where the acquisition and possession of a firearm has been refused.
 
The directive sets out minimum rules and does not prevent member states from adopting and applying stricter rules.
 
Next steps
 
The Council and the European Parliament now need to sign the adopted directive. The signed text will be published in the EU Official Journal and will enter into force 20 days later.
 
Background
 
Council directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons was originally designed as a measure to balance internal market objectives and security imperatives regarding “civil” firearms.
 
The amending proposal was submitted by the European Commission on 18 November 2015 against the backdrop of a series of terrorist acts that took place in Europe and which revealed gaps in the implementation of the directive. The current review is a continuation of the 2008 revision and also aligns EU legislation with the provisions on the UN Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms.
 
  – Directive amending Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons
  – Visit the meeting page

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

NWSNEWS

NWS_a19. The Guardian: “Dutch Arms Trafficker to Liberia Given War Crimes Conviction”

(Source:
The Guardian) [Excerpts.]
 
An international timber trader who used his business as cover for smuggling weapons into West Africa in defiance of a UN arms embargo has been sentenced to 19 years in prison.
 
Guus Kouwenhoven, 74, was convicted by the Dutch appeal court of being an accessory to war crimes and arms trafficking for selling weapons to Liberia’s then president Charles Taylor during civil wars that involved mass atrocities, the use of child soldiers and sexual slavery. He had denied the charges.
 
Kouwenhoven, whose past exploits include deportation from the US in the 1970s for trying to sell stolen Rembrandt paintings, was not in court for the ruling.
 
The campaign group Global Witness, which investigates corruption and environmental despoliation, said it believed the case was the first war crimes conviction for a businessman profiting from conflict resources. …
 
[Editor’s note: the text of ruling (in Dutch) is available
here.] 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced April 24 that two former executives of a Hungarian telecommunications company have agreed to financial penalties and employment restrictions to settle charges that they violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
 
The company paid a $95 million penalty in December 2011 to settle parallel civil and criminal charges that it bribed officials in Macedonia and Montenegro to win business and shut out competition. The company’s former CEO and former chief strategy officer were charged with orchestrating the use of sham contracts to funnel millions of dollars in corrupt payments.
 
The SEC has now reached settlements under which these individuals agreed to pay penalties of $250,000 and $150,000, respectively. Both also agreed to a five-year bar from serving as an officer or director of any SEC-registered public company. A third executive, the company’s former director of business development and acquisitions, previously agreed to a settlement requiring him to pay a $60,000 penalty for falsifying the company’s books and records in connection with the bribery scheme.

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

COMMCOMMENTARY

(Source:
Volkov Law Group Blog. Reprinted by permission.)
 
* Author: Lauren Cornell, Esq., Volkov Law Group, lconnell@volkovlaw.com.
 
Lauren Connell, Managing Associate at The Volkov Law Group, rejoins us for a post on data privacy and compliance. Lauren can be reached at lconnell@volkovlaw.com.
 
You don’t have to be a tech-savvy computer genius to address the basics of data privacy. Like many areas which compliance departments oversee, asking the right question and getting the right internal controls in place are the most important first steps to address data privacy concerns within an organization. The problem is, most companies aren’t.
 
Data Privacy compliance is built on the same foundation as other regulatory regimes compliance professionals are already familiar with – the FCPA, the BSA, and others. Compliance Departments in the healthcare industry are familiar with data privacy but most other industries have not built an infrastructure for compliance. That needs to change.
 
The US lags far behind many other countries around the world in implementing comprehensive data privacy laws. This means many US-based compliance professionals are not as familiar with what data privacy laws are and, equally important, how a company complies. Especially for companies doing business internationally, this is a small but quickly growing problem. While enforcement has been low relative to the high penalties we’ve seen for anti-corruption enforcement, we are experiencing a perfect storm: the volume of data and sophistication of technology is growing while more countries are enacting and strengthening data privacy laws.
 
Europe has taken the lead in data privacy. US companies used to rely upon a safe harbor when transferring personal data to the US, such as for credit card transactions or employee data, but that safe harbor, which had been in place for 15 years, was struck down in the Fall of 2015. Shortly thereafter, Germany fined three companies who had been relying on this safe harbor (after it was struck down). In that enforcement action, Adobe, Punica (a Pepsi subsidiary), and Unilever were fined $32,000.
 
Enforcement and legal activity continues at a fast pace. On February 2, 2017, Italy imposed a record data privacy fine of €5.9 million on a UK company for violating Italian data privacy consent rules. In that case, the UK company had sent money transfers to China without consent of users. A few days later, on February 7, 2017, Russia enacted a law increasing fines for violating Russian data protection laws.
 
In 2018, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulations will come into effect, introducing fines of up to €20 million or 4% of annual revenue, whichever is greater, for data breaches. In the future we may see much larger fines… now is the time for Compliance Departments to act.
 
At their heart, compliance departments mitigate regulatory risks – data privacy laws are not an exception. As a new but quickly growing area of concern, compliance professionals who take an active approach, putting into place basic data privacy components, will find themselves far ahead of their colleagues. Addressing data privacy should be done the same way other risks are: assess your risk sources, design appropriate risk mitigation steps (such as policies & procedures, assigning responsibility, training, and setting up internal controls), and then implement. To do so, compliance professionals must work closely with their IT department, relying upon them as a partner similar to HR.
 
Addressing data privacy is not as easy as other compliance department risk areas – but it is increasingly dangerous to ignore it. Perhaps just as worrisome as legal repercussions, we have all seen the adverse media that results from lax data privacy and control standards – just ask Home Depot, Target, or Yahoo – who were all the target of data security breaches and paid dearly in the news for them. Taking the time to put your company along the right path now will save you time and effort in the future and may even save you significant fines and bad publicity.

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

 
Following through on his promise to put “America first,” President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) on April 18 titled “Buy American and Hire American,” a two-part document addressing both US government procurement and immigration programs. As he announced the EO in Wisconsin a state that helped him win the 2016 election President Trump relied on many of the populist themes that drove his presidential campaign, pledging the EO would help end the “theft of American prosperity” and “protect workers and students.”
 
The EO addresses “Buy American” policies, calling for an expansive review of existing federal procurement programs to increase government procurement of US-made products and materials and minimize the use of waivers. The EO’s “Hire American” provisions focus on eliminating fraud and abuse in immigration, particularly the H-1B non-immigrant visa program for employment in specialty occupations.
 
President Trump and others in his administration lauded the EO, suggesting it will stimulate domestic job creation and create incentives to buy American-made products. Despite the publicity, a majority of the EO requests only investigation, reporting and strategy development on existing US policy, all of which may direct future policy-making.
 
Procurement Provisions
 
The EO’s procurement provisions aim “to promote economic and national security and to help stimulate economic growth, create good jobs at decent wages, strengthen our middle class, and support the American manufacturing and defense industrial bases,” establishing that US policy will be “to maximize… the use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States.”
 
Notably, the EO broadly defines “Buy American Laws” as “all statutes, regulations, rules, and Executive Orders relating to Federal procurement or Federal grants including those that refer to `Buy America’ or `Buy American’ that require, or provide a preference for, the purchase or acquisition of goods, products, or materials produced in the United States, including iron, steel, and manufactured goods.”
 
  (1) The EO directs federal agencies to “scrupulously monitor, enforce, and comply with Buy American Laws,” minimizing the use of waivers. Within 150 days, the heads of all agencies must:
 
    – Assess the monitoring, enforcement and implementation of, and compliance with, Buy American laws within their departments.
    – Assess the use of waivers within their departments by type and by their impact on domestic jobs and manufacturing.
    – Develop and propose policies for their respective departments to ensure that “Federal financial assistance awards and Federal procurements maximize the use of materials produced in the United States, including manufactured products; components of manufactured products; and materials such as steel, iron, aluminum, and cement.”
 
Within 60 days, the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), working with the heads of several other agencies, must issue guidance to agencies on how to develop these Buy American assessments and policies.
 
Within 150 days, the heads of all agencies must submit the findings of the above assessments to the Secretary of Commerce and the OMB Director.
 
  (2) Also within 150 days, the Secretary of Commerce and the US Trade Representative must assess the impacts of all US free trade agreements and the World Trade Organization Agreement on Government Procurement on the operation of Buy American laws, including their impacts on the implementation of domestic procurement preferences. A senior administration official called this “the [United States’] first ever review of worldwide procurement procedures.”
 
  (3) Within 220 days, the Secretary of Commerce working with the Secretary of State, the OMB Director and the US Trade Representative must provide the President with a report that includes the findings of the three Buy Americanrelated assessments aforedescribed. The report must include recommendations to strengthen implementation of Buy American laws, including domestic procurement preference policies and programs. Agency heads must also submit annual reports on implementation of Buy American laws to the Secretary of Commerce and the OMB Director for the next three years and later, as directed; the Secretary of Commerce must follow up with an annual report to the President on these submissions.
 
  (4) The EO directs federal agencies to be “judicious” in their use of public interest waivers, one of several waivers available under existing law. To the extent permissible under law:
 
    – Such waivers should be construed to ensure the maximum utilization of goods, products and materials produced in the US.
    – Determinations for such waivers must be made by the head of the agency with authority over the federal financial assistance award or federal procurement under consideration.
    – Before granting such waivers, agencies must consider “whether a significant portion of the cost advantage of a foreign-sourced product is the result of the use of dumped steel, iron, or manufactured goods or the use of injuriously subsidized steel, iron, or manufactured goods,” and integrate such findings into the waiver, as appropriate.
 
The term “produced in the United States” is defined to mean that for iron and steel products “all manufacturing processes, from the initial melting stage through the application of coatings, occurred in the United States.” …
 
What It Means
 
In many ways, the EO’s Buy American provisions are a natural extension of President Trump’s trade policies going as far back as the start of his campaign. The Trump Administration, with the support of bipartisan Members of Congress, has committed to strong enforcement of existing US trade laws and pursuing investigations against allegations of illegally dumped and subsidized imports. However, the phrasing of the EO suggests any dumping/illegal subsidy determinations will be made by the agencies themselves and not necessarily as part of formal and often highly complex antidumping/countervailing duty investigations jointly conducted by the Department of Commerce and the International Trade Commission.
 
Similarly, the Trump Administration has expressed a willingness to review existing trade deals starting with the expected renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to ensure they benefit American jobs and businesses. The EO’s review of existing US free trade agreements formally ensures any reviews will extend to procurement provisions. However, the Trump Administration will not be able to pursue extensive revisions to any of the 14 existing US trade deals without launching formal renegotiations, and any changes risk triggering reciprocal responses targeting US companies competing abroad.
 
The EO’s immigration provisions are long on rhetoric and short on concrete directives. It is a call to the President’s own executive agencies to seek improvements in US immigration programs, which critics claim should be done through internal directives and memoranda, not an Executive Order. Industry groups have vowed to support the President’s efforts to root out corruption and fraud, but hope the EO will not lead to increased regulations and procedures for securing visas they believe are essential to filling positions in fields with insufficient available US workers.
 
The EO’s language echoes many of the President’s campaign talking points on putting American workers first and slowing the hiring of foreign nationals. Although his past immigration statements have been mixed, for example, on the importance of H-1B visas for US employers and continuing President Obama’s DACA program for individuals brought to the US as children, recent trends show President Trump moving toward a stronger pro-American, anti-visa stance.
 
The immediate impact of the EO’s immigration provisions should be limited, with no likely legal effect on cases currently before the government, including the 85,000 new H-1B cases filed earlier this month under the annual H-1B quota. Substantial changes to most immigration programs would require congressional action or executive changes through the notice and comment rulemaking process. However, the EO reinforces a growing trend toward increased scrutiny in visa adjudications during the Trump presidency through internal guidance, such as recently introduced guidance on “extreme vetting” and more thorough screening for certain popular H-1B technology positions, and may result in a de facto increase in the difficulty of securing many employment visas.

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

TEEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

TE_a113. ECS Presents “Benchmarking Your ITAR/EAR Compliance Program” featuring Gerry Horner, Commerce/BIS; Byron Angvall, The Boeing Company and Christine Lee, UTC in Annapolis MD, 24-25 May

(Source: Suzanne Palmer, spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com)
 
* What: Benchmarking Your ITAR/EAR Compliance Program with the Experts, Annapolis, MD
* When: May 24-25, 2017
* Where: Chart House Restaurant
* Sponsor: Export Compliance Solutions (ECS)
* ECS Speaker Panel: Gerry Horner, Commerce/BIS; Byron Angvall, Boeing; Christine Lee, UTC; Suzanne Palmer & Lisa Bencivenga
* Register Here or by calling 866-238-4018 or e-mail spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

(Source: Editor)


Oliver Cromwell
 (25 April 1599 – 3 September 1658) was an English military and political leader and later Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland. In a 2002 BBC poll in Britain, Cromwell was selected as one of the ten greatest Britons of all time.

  – “He who stops being better stops being good.”

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

EN_a215
. 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: 27 Jan 2017: 82 FR 8589-8590: Delay of Effective Date for Importations of Certain Vehicles and Engines Subject to Federal Antipollution Emission Standards [New effective date: 21 March 2017.]; and 82 FR 8590: Delay of Effective Date for Toxic Substance Control Act Chemical Substance Import Certification Process Revisions [New effective date: 21 March 2017.]

* 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:
18 Apr 2017: 82 FR 18217-18220: Revision to an Entry on the Entity List

  
*
FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR)
: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
  – Last Amendment: 10 Feb 2017: 82 FR 10434-10440: Inflation Adjustment of Civil Monetary Penalties.  
 
*
FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR)
: 15 CFR Part 30
  – Last Amendment: 19 Apr 2017: 82 FR 18383-18393: Foreign Trade Regulations: Clarification on Filing Requirements 
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
here.
  – The latest edition (19 Apr 2017) 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 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: 7 Mar 2017: Harmonized System Update 1702, containing 1,754 ABI records and 360 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: 11 Jan 2017: 82 FR 3168-3170: 2017 Civil Monetary Penalties Inflationary Adjustment
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition 8 Mar 2017) 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, 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.  

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

EN_a316
. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories
(Source: Editor)

Review last week’s top Ex/Im stories in “Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories” published 
here
. 

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

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 8,000 subscribers to inform 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