;

17-1013 Friday ” Daily Bugle”

17-1013 Friday “Daily Bugle”

Friday, 13 October, 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 Announces MPETAC Meeting on 24 Oct in Wash DC
  2. Commerce/BIS Announces SITAC Meeting on 25 Oct 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 Production Outage This Weekend
  4. DHS/CBP Updates FTZ CATAIR Chapter
  5. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  6. Canada GA/TID Seeks Comments on Proposed Addition of Japan and Mexico to the AFCCL
  1. Express: “Australia Jet and Navy Data Stolen in Massive Hacking Operation”
  2. Reuters: “EU to Ban Business Ties with Pyongyang Over Nuclear Tests”
  3. Reuters: “U.S. Sanctions to Complicate, Not Disrupt, Iran Oil Trade”
  4. ST&R Trade Report: “Dates and Deadlines: Classification, GSP, Valuation, CTPAT, Safeguards”
  5. ZDNet: “Blaming Government for Defense Contractor’s Lax Cybersecurity ‘A Stretch’: Pyne”
  1. A. Rabkin: “Should We Allow Foreign Governments to Do Security Audits of Sensitive Source Code?”
  2. R. Cook, W. Shahid, R. Giambalvo: “Should We Get Outside Compliance Help? Thoughts on When, Why, and Who”
  3. R. Slack & L. Baumgardner: “The Paper Caper: U.S. Persons Cannot Help Foreign Subsidiaries or Affiliates with Sanctioned Country Transactions”
  4. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day
  5. R.C. Burns: “Happy Sudan Day!”
  1. ICPA Presents Annual Asia Conferences: 5-7 Nov in Singapore and 9-10 Nov in Shanghai
  2. Friday List of Approaching Events: 31 New Events Posted This Week
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Changes: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (28 Sep 2017), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (3 Oct 2017), FACR/OFAC (16 Jun 2017), FTR (20 Sep 2017), HTSUS (25 Jul 2017), ITAR (30 Aug 2017)
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMEX/IM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a11.

Commerce/BIS Announces MPETAC Meeting on 24 Oct in Wash DC

(Source:
Commerce/BIS) [Excerpts.]
 
82 FR 47697: Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Open Meeting
 
  The Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (MPETAC) will meet on October 24, 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 October 17, 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.
  For more information, call Yvette Springer at (202) 482-2813.
 
Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.

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

FR_a22.

Commerce/BIS Announces SITAC Meeting on 25 Oct in Wash DC

(Source:
Commerce/BIS) [Excerpts.]
 
82 FR 47697: Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting
 
  The Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC) will meet on October 25, 2017, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to sensors and instrumentation equipment and 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 October 18, 2017.
  A limited number of seats will be available during the public session of the meeting. 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 distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that the materials be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. Springer.
  The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined… that the portion of this 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 Sec. Sec.  10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.
  For more information contact Yvette Springer on (202) 482-2813.
 
Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

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

(Source:
Federal Register)
 

[No items of interest noted today.]

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


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

OGS_a3
5.

DHS/CBP Announces ACE Production Outage This Weekend

(Source:
CSMS# 17-000655, 13 Oct 2017.)
 
There will be an ACE PRODUCTION Outage Saturday evening, October 14, 2017 from 2200 ET to 0400 ET Sunday, October 15, 2017 for infrastructure maintenance.

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

OGS_a4
6.

DHS/CBP Updates FTZ CATAIR Chapter

(Source:
CSMS# 17-000654, 12 Oct 2017.)
 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would like to inform the trade community that version 2.05 of the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) CATAIR has been published.
 
This update contains revisions for airway bill splits. The updated chapter may be accessed here.

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

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

OGS_a6
8.

Canada GA/TID Seeks Comments on Proposed Addition of Japan and Mexico to the AFCCL

 
Under the Export and Import Permits Act, anyone wishing to export from Canada any items included in the Export Control List is required to obtain, prior to shipment, an export permit (exceptions are made for the export to the United States of certain controlled goods and technology). Applications to export controlled goods or technology are reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure that the exports are consistent with Canada’s foreign and defence policies.
 
What will be the focus of consultations?
The Government of Canada invites industry stakeholders and the general public to provide their views regarding a possible regulatory amendment that could result in the addition of Japan and Mexico to the Automatic Firearms Country Control List (AFCCL). The proposed regulation, if ultimately approved by the Governor in Council, would allow exporters of certain prohibited firearms, prohibited weapons and prohibited devices to submit permit applications for the export of these items to Japan and Mexico.
 
How do I participate?
The Government of Canada is seeking the views of industry stakeholders, non-government organizations and all interested Canadian citizens. Click here to see the different ways you can participate in these consultations. … 

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

NWSNEWS

NWS_1
9.

Express: “Australia Jet and Navy Data Stolen in Massive Hacking Operation”

(Source:
Express, 12 Oct 2017.) [Excerpts.]
 
Australian security officials claim sensitive data about their F-35 stealth fighter and P-8 surveillance aircraft programs have been stolen in a massive hacking operation.
 
The data was stolen after a defense subcontractor was hacked using a tool widely used by Chinese cyber criminals, according to officials.
 
At least 30GB of “sensitive data” subjected to restricted access under the US government’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations rules were stolen, the national cyber security agency Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) revealed.
 
The 50-person aerospace engineering firm was also compromised in July last year but the the ASD only became aware of the breach in November, technology website ZDNet Australia reported.
 
Mitchell Clarke, a spokesman from the ASD who worked on the case and did not name the subcontractor, said information about the F-35, the US’ latest generation of fighter jets, as well as the P8, an advanced submarine hunter and surveillance craft, were lifted. …
 
He said that the hackers used a tool called “China Chopper” which according to security experts is widely used in Chinese and had gained access via an internet-facing server. … 

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

NWS_a2
10.

Reuters: “EU to Ban Business Ties with Pyongyang Over Nuclear Tests”

(Source:
Reuters, 13 Oct 2017.)
 
The European Union is set to agree on Monday to ban business ties with North Korea, part of a new package of sanctions to isolate Pyongyang over its nuclear and missile programs.
 
The practical impact of the moves is likely to be mostly symbolic: Brussels will impose an oil embargo and a ban on EU investment, but it sells no crude to North Korea and European companies have no substantial investments there.
 
North Korean workers in the EU, of which Brussels estimates there are about 400 mainly in Poland, will face a lower limit on the amount for money they can send home and their work visas will not be renewed once they expire.
 
The measures to be agreed by EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg go further than the latest round of multi-lateral sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council.
 
  “The North Koreans appear to be uninterested in having the EU get involved as a peace mediator,” said an EU diplomat. “The North Koreans want direct talks with the United States, but President (Donald) Trump has ruled that out,” the diplomat said.
 
The sanctions will add three more top North Korean officials and six businesses to a blacklist banning them from travel to the EU and freezing their assets. That will take the total of those sanctioned by the EU to 41 individuals and 10 companies, a senior EU official said. Separately, U.N. sanctions target 63 people and 53 companies and institutions.
 
  “We have in place everything that we possibly could do to try to get the DPRK to change their behavior,” the EU official said, using North Korea’s official name of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
 
Although the EU does not export crude to North Korea, its aim is to push other countries to ban oil exports, either unilaterally or at the United Nations. The U.N. Security Council last month capped North Korean imports of crude oil, but China and Russia resisted an outright ban.
 
Diplomats said that if Pyongyang launches more missiles, the EU could consider imposing sanctions on non-EU firms doing business with Pyongyang, as the United States has done.
 
However, such “secondary sanctions” need clear evidence to avoid legal challenges and the bloc is reluctant to anger China, a top trading partner, by targeting Chinese people and firms.

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

NWS_a3
11.

Reuters: “U.S. Sanctions to Complicate, Not Disrupt, Iran Oil Trade”

(Source:
Reuters, 13 Oct 2017.)
 
A looming ramp-up in U.S. sanctions on Tehran will further spook potential buyers of Iranian oil although supplies to Europe will most likely remain uninterrupted, top trading houses told the Reuters Global Commodities Summit this week.
 
U.S. President Donald Trump is likely to take a major step against the Iran nuclear deal on Friday, marking a more aggressive approach to Iranian activities in the Middle East.
 
Trump will lay out his plan in a 12:45 p.m. EDT (1645 GMT) speech at the White House, the product of weeks of internal discussions between him and his national security team.
 
Any big increase in sanctions will effectively leave the oil market where it was at the start of this decade, when Washington had a tough stance on Iran while the European Union still allowed trade with Tehran before beefing up sanctions in 2012.
 
The EU eased sanctions last year as part of a broader nuclear deal, paving the way for Tehran to increase oil trade and attract billions of dollars in investment.
 
  “If the U.S. does decertify the nuclear deal, and raises the tension, then inevitably some people will say, well, maybe that is a business that I shouldn’t be involved in,” said Glencore’s global head of oil, Alex Beard.
 
He said dealing with Iran was complex enough without any new U.S. sanctions because of a lack of dollar clearing, as the global banking system is sensitive to the U.S. view on transacting with Iran.
 
Glencore and Vitol, the world’s No.2 and No.1 oil trading houses, have resumed dealings with Iran since last year.
 
The chief executive of Vitol, Ian Taylor, said he expected transactions with Iran to become more complicated although a small number of financial institutions would still facilitate trade.
 
  “If Trump decides not to certify … it will have some impact but I don’t think the Europeans will go with him so probably the impact will be limited,” he said.
 
Kim Gyo-hyun, CEO of Lotte Chemical (011170.KS), South Korea’s No.2 petrochemical maker, told the summit he did not think oil prices would spike due to tighter sanctions because the world has much larger crude oil stocks than it did in 2012.
 
  “We are not short of oil,” he said.
 
Jeff Brown, president of energy consultant FGE, said new U.S. sanctions would complicate Iranian oil trade finance under which Tehran could attract loans guaranteed by future oil deliveries.

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

NWS_a4
12.

ST&R Trade Report: “Dates and Deadlines: Classification, GSP, Valuation, CTPAT, Safeguards”

 
Following are highlights of regulatory effective dates and deadlines and federal agency meetings coming up in the next week.
 
Oct 16:
  – effective date of USDA rule allowing imports of orchids in growing media from Korea
 
Oct 17:
  – deadline for GSP modification petitions
  – deadline for comments on DOE proposal to expedite small-scale natural gas exports
 
Oct 18:
  – deadline for comments to ITC on IPR import restriction petition on Internet of Things devices
 
Oct 19:
  – ITC hearing in remedy phase of global safeguard investigation of residential washers
 
Oct 20:
  – deadline for comments to ITC on potential IPR import restrictions on mobile device holders
  – deadline for comments to USTR on Special 301 out-of-cycle review of Colombia

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

NWS_5
13.

ZDNet: “Blaming Government for Defense Contractor’s Lax Cybersecurity ‘a Stretch’: Pyne”

(Source:
ZDNet, 12 Oct 2017.) [Excerpts.]
 
Data on key defense projects was stolen from a small Australian defense contractor. Minister Christopher Pyne says the government isn’t responsible for vendor cybersecurity. But who is?
 
An unknown malicious actor stole 30 gigabytes of data from a defense contractor. That’s a huge security oopsie. But it’s also a massive failure of governance, one the government is keen to sweep under the rug.
 
On Wednesday afternoon, ZDNet broke the story that the stolen data included information on defense projects including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, the C-130 transport aircraft, the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) smart bomb kit, and “a few Australian naval vessels”, as an officer from the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) put it. The story was soon picked up by the mainstream media.
 
On Thursday morning, the government spin doctoring began.
 
  “This attack on the defense contractor here in Adelaide is really a salutary reminder to everyone that when the government says that businesses need to take their cybersecurity very seriously, we aren’t joking,” defense industry minister Christopher Pyne told ABC Radio. …
 

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

COMMCOMMENTARY

 
* Author: Ariel Rabkin, adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).
 
When you buy software, how do you know if it is secure? If you are a normal user, you have only its past track record and published reports to go on. But if you are a government or other large customer, you can do a bit better: You can demand that the vendor show you their source code before buying. (Source code is like the blueprints for a computer program; it is the set of directions used to produce a runnable piece of software.)
 
Reuters recently reported that HP Enterprise (HPE) allowed a Russian government contractor to do such an audit on Arcsight, a tool for large-scale data analysis, for instance for intrusion detection. This review caused some concern, since the US government also relies on Arcsight. Is our security endangered by this review? What should we do about it? “Code review” is an ambiguous term, and there is less here than one might infer from the headline. The review was done in a period of a few hours, on HPE premises, and the reviewers were not allowed to take the code home.
 
Reviews of that sort are useful and relatively safe. Looking casually through source code will reveal some security-relevant properties: whether the code was designed carefully, the overall level of polish and maturity, and if it has particularly risky or safe coding practices. But, if the product is any good, it will not be possible to find unobvious security flaws from this sort of short-term inspection. (If a foreign consultant can find a security problem within a few hours, without knowing anything about the internal design beforehand, why couldn’t the company find the same problem?)
 
If a product has serious security weaknesses, keeping the source code secret won’t prevent malicious parties from finding the vulnerabilities. You can learn a lot about a car by reading the blueprints – but you can also learn a lot by opening the hood and disassembling the thing. Similarly, it is routine to reverse engineer software from the compiled artifact and to look for vulnerabilities even without the source code. If we would be endangered by a foreign intelligence agency finding vulnerabilities in a computer program, we shouldn’t allow commercial sale of the program at all. Once we allow copies to be sold to private parties, we should take for granted that foreign governments will have copies and be able to look for vulnerabilities.
 
To the extent that some software merits special protections, such measures can be imposed without new legislation. We already have several suitable categories. For example, some kinds of software are covered under the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations. These rules would precisely restrict the transfer of computer code to foreign persons and organizations.
 
But we should hesitate before imposing such measures. The United States is probably a net exporter of software, but both the government and the private sector do buy considerable amounts of software from overseas. An international norm in favor of source-code inspections is likely to protect us from our own ill-advised software acquisitions.
 
Companies are traditionally uncomfortable having outsiders looking at their source code, but there are times when it is appropriate, even with an untrusted reviewer. If the review is structured carefully, the value of increased trust exceeds the risk of the disclosure. From published accounts, the review of Arcsight on behalf of the Russian government was indeed conducted responsibly and should not be cause for alarm from policymakers.

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

COMM_JEB
15.

R. Cook, W. Shahid, R. Giambalvo: “Should We Get Outside Compliance Help? Thoughts on When, Why, and Who”

 
* Authors: Randy Cook, Esq., randy.cook@ankuraconsulting.com, 646-291-8545; Waqas Shahid, Esq., waqas.shahid@ankuraconsulting.com, 646-291-8546; and Rosanne Giambalvo, rosanne.giambalvo@ankuraconsulting.com, 646-291-8575. All of Ankura Consulting Group, LLC.
 
For most organizations, lean execution and reducing overhead are constant expectations. As a result, it is often difficult to be the one arguing in favor of spending money on outside compliance help. In our experience building an in-house compliance team, we focused on developing effective, credible, and efficient internal capabilities to improve program performance and drive down costs. But for even the most robust compliance program, there are some situations in which the best interest of the organization is to engage high-value outside resources.
 
This piece describes several considerations, based on our experience working in and with complex organizations, in the analysis of when outside compliance resources are the right answer. These considerations may also help justify the need for such assistance to your operational and financial colleagues, and help you choose among the menu of available capabilities. In every instance, the fundamental question is, what solution would be most effective, credible, and efficient?
 
How serious is the problem
? Issues that implicate knowing, widespread, and/or ongoing noncompliance or illegality need to be addressed by focused, competent capabilities. If there is risk that the issue will be disclosed to the government or become the subject of litigation, or that the company’s response may otherwise be subject to outside scrutiny, a credible, independent capability becomes more important. For example, responding to a government inquiry or mandate, addressing a significant program defect identified during an audit or self-assessment, or correcting a problem caused by an employee’s knowing misconduct are all issues for which outside assistance may be advisable. To address situations in which you know there is heightened compliance risk, you need people who have successfully resolved similar problems before. This can make the difference between a satisfactory outcome and a disastrous result.
 
Are your internal capabilities up to the task?
Different organizations have different levels of compliance capability. You should be clear-eyed about your own organization’s strengths and opportunities. If you have a lean organization that is tailored to address solely recurring issues, recognize that reality. Similarly, some tasks present peculiar capability or design challenges that are best addressed by specialized resources. You are not doing yourself or your organization any favors if you task an internal resource to resolve an issue that your company cannot address credibly or in a timely manner, especially if the effort causes neglect of that person’s or team’s principal responsibilities. Addressing recently identified, but historical violations and compliance problems; designing and implementing new system or process enhancements, such as data-based program performance measures; and integrating new products, programs, business lines, or joint ventures are the kinds of issues that may exceed the capacity of internal resources, and lend themselves to outside help. Keep in mind that a hybrid approach may be a good option: If your internal capabilities are not seasoned in a particular compliance task, engaging expert outside help to form mixed internal-external teams can be a cost-effective way to address complex initiatives while simultaneously seasoning your internal resources.
 
Is there a concern with independence or credibility?
If the problem implicates any considerations that may lead to an actual or perceived conflict of interest, or that would otherwise impair the credibility or objectivity of an internal resource-led solution, you should consider an outside resource. Compliance issues that particularly implicate this consideration are the direct involvement of senior enterprise or compliance leadership in the underlying scenario, or where the validity of a previous assertion or commitment is called into question. For example, determining that a new violation may be related to the company’s failure to complete a corrective action from a previous disclosure to the government may prompt the need for independent assistance. Engaging an experienced and expert third party to address a recurring or particularly problematic issue can sometimes carry additional weight with regulators, demonstrating your company’s commitment to compliance. It may also help communicate seriousness to internal constituencies, demonstrating to leadership, employees, shareholders, and customers that the company recognizes the need for objectivity. Finally, an external resource may help insulate both the internal compliance team and the organization’s leadership from the “blowback” that can accompany the resolution of a tough compliance activity.   
 
Is the problem recurring or temporary/exceptional?
If you are addressing a compliance issue that is recurring or persistent, you should consider whether an internal resource (whether reassigned or newly staffed) may be the most appropriate approach. Conversely, a crisis, or a temporary or surge requirement, is likely to be most efficiently addressed through outside resources.
 
Has it been awhile since you benchmarked your program?
Periodic, objective program health reviews and self-assessments are critical for both the performance and credibility of your program. The compliance environment is dynamic, and industry and regulatory best practices constantly evolve. Frequency and depth vary by industry and particular organizational circumstance, but periodic use of an outside expert can be valuable to validate the strength of your program, help identify emergent risks, and keep you abreast of evolving expectations.
 
Is there an outside resource that is well-suited to the task?
There are few things more frustrating than spending scarce financial and organizational capital on an outside resource that proves poorly suited to address your problem. Circling back to the fundamental question, an outside resource is worth it only if it delivers a credible, effective, and efficient solution. Clearly, there is a range of options to choose from. In general, you will want to make sure the provider has the perspective to understand your problem, and the right experience, vision, expertise, and capabilities to resolve it. Make sure the provider knows how to partner with your internal compliance and business resources. As mentioned, a provider that can integrate seamlessly into a hybrid team of internal and external resources can be a particularly high-value resource. Privilege is often a relevant consideration. Subject-matter consulting experts can be engaged through in-house or outside counsel to preserve privilege when that is desired or needed. Finally, finding a provider that understands and addresses compliance issues in the context of your business system, rather than as a discrete regulatory or transactional problem, is vital to achieving the best, most satisfying outcome.
 
Let’s face it, the final determination in whether to hire an outside resource is your organization’s willingness to pay for it. In general, though, framing a request as the most effective, credible, and efficient solution to a problem the enterprise needs to resolve – in order to avoid risking a compliance failure – optimizes the likelihood of securing the resources you need.   As a compliance professional, you learn something about organizational noise. On any given day, you may hear from a program manager that you are single-handedly shutting down the business, from the Chief Financial Officer that you are breaking the budget, and from the General Counsel that you are enabling excessive risk. In this real compliance world of cross-cutting interests, tight timelines, and hard choices, you need a clear picture of your company’s compliance posture and performance. But how do you make sure that your picture is accurate? Is the crisis du jour or a squeaky wheel stakeholder obscuring the riskiest and most critical parts of your compliance program? Can you objectively measure your program’s performance and improvement over time to justify the budget allocated to your program? Are you sure you are effectively allocating your limited resources to tackle your highest-risk items instead of spending time on a low-risk, low-activity area? And can you communicate the effectiveness of your program to others inside and outside your organization? This piece describes a deliberate process for collecting and utilizing data and metrics to assess and optimize your company’s compliance programs. 

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

COMM_a3
16.

R. Slack & L. Baumgardner: “The Paper Caper: U.S. Persons Cannot Help Foreign Subsidiaries or Affiliates with Sanctioned Country Transactions”

 
* Authors: Robert Slack, Esq., rslack@kelleydrye.com; and Lee Baumgardner, Esq. Both of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP.
 
A recent settlement agreement between the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) and BD White Birch Investment LLC, a U.S.-based paper company, is an important reminder that U.S. companies cannot assist their foreign subsidiaries or affiliates with sales related to sanctioned countries.
 
In this case, White Birch faced potential civil liability for facilitating the sale and shipment of Canadian-origin paper from White Birch’s Canadian subsidiary to Sudan, which was subject to a U.S. embargo at the time.  OFAC determined that while the sale and shipment took place outside the United States, White Birch personnel from both its U.S. headquarters and Canadian subsidiary “were actively involved in discussing, arranging, and executing the export transactions to Sudan.”  Such assistance is prohibited under OFAC’s regulations under provisions barring U.S. persons from “facilitating” transactions between non-U.S. companies (such as foreign subsidiaries) and sanctioned countries.
 

Among other things, facilitation can include helping, assisting, or approving transactions between foreign companies and sanctioned countries or parties.  U.S. companies with overseas affiliates that conduct transactions involving sanctioned territories – currently including Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Crimea region of Ukraine – must adopt processes to fully wall off their U.S. operations and employees to prevent impermissible facilitation that is prohibited by OFAC’s regulations. 

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

 
* Author: Gary Stanley, Esq., Global Legal Services, PC, (202) 352-3059,
gstanley@glstrade.com
.
 

EAR § 770.2(f) provides that “parts,” “accessories,” or equipment that are being shipped as scrap should be described on the EEI filing to the AES in sufficient detail to be identified under the proper ECCN. When commodities declared as “parts,” “accessories,” or equipment are shipped in bulk, or are otherwise not packaged, packed, or sorted in accordance with normal trade practices, the Customs Officer may require evidence that the shipment is not scrap. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, bills of sale, orders and correspondence indicating whether the commodities are scrap or are being exported for use as “parts,” “accessories,” or equipment.

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

COMM_a5
18.

R.C. Burns: “Happy Sudan Day!”

(Source: 
Export Law Blog
, 12 Oct 2017. Reprinted by permission.)
 
* Author: R. Clifton Burns, Esq., Bryan Cave LLP, Wash DC,
Clif.Burns@bryancave.com
, 202-508-6067).
 
Today, October 12, is the day on which Executive Order 13067, which repealed earlier executive orders imposing sanctions on Sudan, becomes effective. We got here by a somewhat circuitous route. Executive Order 13067, issued in the last days of the Obama administration, delayed its effective date until July 12, 2017, although OFAC issued a general license at the time the order was issued doing everything the order would do when it became more or less permanently effective on July 12, 2017. The Trump Administration extended that effective date until October 12, 2017. Since no further orders have been issued, the lifting of sanctions contemplated by the Obama executive order is now in effect, although practically nothing much has changed given that the general license issued with the Obama order, and found in section 538.540 of the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations (“SSR”), did everything the executive order itself does now that it has officially gone into effect.
 
Of course, when the Office of Foreign Assets Control is involved, there is always some confusion. In the FAQs issued on the revocation of the Sudan Sanctions, OFAC makes this odd statement: “OFAC expects to remove the SSR from the C.F.R.” When that will happen and why on earth it didn’t happen today is not addressed. So, technically, the rules prohibiting Sudan transactions remain on the books although fortunately so does the general license in section 538.540. Perhaps the new folks at OFAC don’t know the difference between the printed edition of the C.F.R., where removal has to wait to the next edition, and the electronic edition, where the SSR can be removed virtually immediately.
 
The lifting of the sanctions on Sudan, as a practical matter, means that all imports from Sudan are permitted and most EAR99 items can be exported to Sudan. Since Sudan remains a state sponsor of terrorism, section 7205 to the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 requires a license for all exports of agricultural commodities, medicine and medical devices to Sudan. These are covered by the general license in 538.540 and the new General License A, both of which permit exports of these items pursuant to a written agreement during the one-year period from the signing of the agreement. 

The lifting of the sanctions has no effect on the export restrictions in the Export Administration Regulations which require licenses for exports of Sudan for most items with an ECCN other than EAR99 or items listed in Supplement 2 to Part 742 (which includes some EAR99 items). And the arms embargo on Sudan in section 126.1 of the ITAR continues to remain in effect.

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

TEEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

TE_a019
ICPA Presents Annual Asia Conferences: 5-7 Nov in Singapore and 9-10 Nov in Shanghai

(Source: Ann Lister, Anngelfire@yahoo.com)
 
* What: ICPA Annual Asia Conferences 2017
* When: Singapore: 5-7 Nov 2017; Shanghai: 9-10 Nov 2017.
* Where:
  – Singapore: Grand Copthorne, Singapore. Book
here
.
  – Shanghai: Four Seasons Hotel Shanghai. Book
here
.
* Sponsor: International Compliance Professionals Association (ICPA).
* Speakers: Large number of experienced, knowledgeable professionals (see agendas). 
* Agenda:
  – Singapore: View
here
.
  – Shanghai: View
here
.
* Register: 
  – Singapore:
SGD
here
; or USD
here
.
  – Shanghai: RMB
here
; or USD
here

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

TE_a220
. Friday List of Approaching Events: X New Events Posted This Week

(Sources: Editor and Event Sponsors) 
 
Published every Friday or last publication day of the week. Please, send event announcements to
jwbartlett@fullcirclecompliance.eu
, composed in the below format:

# DATE: LOCATION; “EVENT TITLE;” SPONSOR; WEBLINK; CONTACT (email and phone number)


#” New listing this week  

 
Continuously Available Training:
 
* E-Seminars: “
US Export Controls” / “Defense Trade Controls
;” Export Compliance Training Institute;
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com
 
* E-Seminars: “ITAR/EAR Awareness;” Export Compliance Solutions; spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.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 16: Toronto; ”
3rd Canadian Forum on Economic Sanctions Compliance and Enforcement, Toronto;” American Conference Institute and Canadian Institute

*
Oct 17 & 26: Webinar; “Two Part Webinar Series: EAR License Exceptions: Learning By Doing;” ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Oct 19: Free Webinar; ”
Duty Drawback;” Citta Brokerage Company

*
 Oct 19: Boston, MA;
 
2017 Trade Compliance and Policy Seminar
; C.H. Robinson

* Oct 19: Boston, MA; ”
Import Documentation and Procedures Seminar;” International Business Training
# Oct 19: Brussels, Belgium ”
Dual-Use Reform – Enabling and Securing European Exports of Technologies;” SME Europe, European Semiconductor Industry Association

* Oct 20: Milwaukee, WI;
Import Audit Compliance Seminar; International Business Training

* Oct 22-24: Grapevine, TX; “
Annual ICPA Fall Conference
;” International Compliance Professional Association;
Wizard@icpainc.org 

* Oct 23-24: Arlington, VA; “
2017 Fall Advanced Conference
;” Society for International Affairs

*
 Oct 24-25: Cleveland, OH;
 
2017 Trade Compliance and Policy Seminar
; C.H. Robinson

*
 Oct 24: Rotterdam, the Netherlands; “
Awareness Training Export Control, Dual-Use, and Sanctions
” day 2/3 [in Dutch]; Fenex

* Oct 25-26: Tysons Corner, VA;
ITAR Fundamentals; FD Associates
# Oct 25: Haymarket, Australia;
Defence Export Controls Sydney Outreach; AU Department of Defense
* Oct 26: Coventry, UK;
Export Control Symposium; Midlands Aerospace Alliance and UK Department of International Trade
# Oct 26: London, UK; “US and UK Export Controls: A Basic Understanding;” Institute of Export and International Trade

* Oct 30-Nov 2: Phoenix, AZ; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
;” ECTI;
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977
* Oct 31: Manchester, UK; “UK Strategic Export Controls: Intermediate Seminar;” Code loct2017; or contact Denise Carter at 020-7215-4459; UK Department for International Trade;
# Oct 31: Birmingham, UK; “Effective Incoterms – Half Day;” Institute of Export and International Trade
* Nov 1: Manchester, UK; “UK Strategic Export Controls: Beginner’s Workshop;” Code Bnov2017-1; or contact Denise Carter at 020-7215-4459; UK Department for International Trade; 
* Nov 1: Manchester, UK; “UK Strategic Export Controls: Licenses Workshop;” Code Lnov2017-1; or contact Denise Carter at 020-7215-4459; UK Department for International Trade; 
* Nov 1: Manchester, UK; “UK Strategic Export Controls: Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” Code Cnov2017-1; or contact Denise Carter at 020-7215-4459; UK Department for International Trade;
* Nov 2-3: Las Vegas, NV; “The 22nd National M&A Institute;” American Bar Association
*
Nov 2: Webinar; “DIY Encryption Classification 2017 Edition;” ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Nov 5-7: Singapore; ”
ICPA Singapore Conference;”
International Compliance Professionals Association;
wizard@icpainc.org
*
 Nov 6: Rotterdam, the Netherlands; “
Awareness Training Export Control, Dual-Use, and Sanctions
” day 3/3 [in Dutch]; Fenex 

* Nov 6-8: Chicago, IL; “Basics of Government Contracting;” Federal Publications Seminars

* Nov 7: Norfolk, VA; “
AES Compliance Seminar
;
” Dept. of Commerce/Census
Bureau;
itmd.outreach@census.gov

# Nov 8: London UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Nov 8: Webinar; “Introduction to the National Firearms Act;” Reeves & Dola LLP; Teresa Ficaretta; tficaretta@reevesdola.com; 202-715-9183

# Nov 9: London UK; ”
Making Better Licence Applications;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Nov 9-10: Shanghai, China;ICPA China Conference;” International Compliance Professionals Association; wizard@icpainc.org
* Nov 9: Tysons Corner, VA; ITAR for the Empowered Official; FD Associates

* Nov 13: San Diego, CA; 
 “
Import Documentation and Procedures Seminar
;” International Business Training

* Nov 13-16: Wash DC; “ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar;” ECTI; jessica@learnexportcompliance.com; 540-433-3977

* Nov 14-15; Schöllkrippen, Germany; ”
Fundamentals of Export Controls” (in German); FALEX
* Nov 14-15; Schöllkrippen, Germany; ”
Export Controls Refresher Course” (in German); FALEX
* Nov 16-17; Schöllkrippen, Germany; ”
Workshop Export Controls” (in German); FALEX

# Nov 15: Leeds, UK; ”
Intermediate Seminar;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk 

# Nov 16: Leeds, UK; ”
Beginners Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk 

# Nov 16: Leeds, UK; ”
Licenses Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk 

# Nov 16: Leeds, UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade  
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk 

* Nov 16: Nijkerk, the Netherlands; “Training Export Control” [in Dutch];

Fenedex

* Nov 16: Chicago, IL;
 “
Import Documentation and Procedures Seminar
;” International Business Training 
*
 Nov 17: Chicago, IL; “
Import Audit Compliance Seminar
;” International Business Training 

* Nov 29: Wash DC; ”
4th U.S. Customs Compliance Boot Camp, Washington, DC;” American Conference Institute

* Dec 4: NYC; ”
8th Annual New York Forum on Economic Sanctions, New York“, American Conference Institute

* Dec 4-7: Miami FL; “ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar;” ECTI; jessica@learnexportcompliance.com; 540-433-3977

* Dec 5: Webinar; ”
NAFTA Rules of Origin;” International Business Training

* Dec 5: Brussels, Belgium; ”
Dual Use For Beginners
” [In Dutch]; Flemish Department of Foreign Affairs

* Dec 5: San Juan, PR; “AES Compliance Seminar in Spanish;” Dept. of Commerce/Census Bureau; itmd.outreach@census.gov

# Dec 5-6: New York, NY; ”
8th Annual Forum on Economic Sanctions;” American Conference Institute

# Dec 6: London UK; ”
Intermediate Seminar;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Dec 6: Webinar; ”
Introduction to Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET);” Reeves & Dola LLP; Teresa Ficaretta;
tficaretta@reevesdola.com; 202-715-9183

* Dec 6: Wood Ridge, NJ; “
AES Compliance Seminar
;” Dept. of Commerce/Census Bureau;
itmd.outreach@census.gov 

* Dec 7: Laredo, TX; “AES Compliance Seminar in Spanish;” Dept. of Commerce/Census Bureau; itmd.outreach@census.gov 

# Dec 7: London UK; ”
Beginners Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Dec 7: London UK; ”
Licences Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Dec 8: Boston, MA; ”
Export Expo;” Compliance Alliance
* Dec 8: Minneapolis, MN; 

Incoterms 2010: Terms of Sale Seminar
;” International Business Training
* Dec 8: Washington, D.C.; ”
2017 SIA Holiday Party;” Society for International Affairs (SIA)

* Dec 11-13: Sterling, VA; “
Basics of Government Contracting
;” Federal Publications Seminars

# Dec 12: London UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Dec 13: Washington, DC; “DDTC In-House Seminar;”

*
 Dec 14: Minneapolis, MN; “
Import Audit Compliance Seminar
;” International Business Training 

* Dec 15: Atlanta, GA; ”
Incoterms 2010: Terms of Sale Seminar;” International Business Training
# Dec 19: Brussels, Belgium; ”
2017 Export Control Forum;” European Commission

 
2018
 

# Jan 17: Bristol UK; ”
Intermediate Seminar;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Jan 18: Bristol UK; ”
Beginners Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Jan 18: Bristol UK; ”
Licences Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Jan 18: Bristol UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Jan 22-25: San Diego CA; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
;” ECTI; 
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977


Jan 29-30: Toronto, Canada;
7th Industry Forum on Export and Re-Export Compliance for Canadian Operations;”
American Conference Institute
# Jan 31: Washington, D.C.; “4th National Forum on CFIUS and Team Telecom;” American Conference Institute

* Feb 6: Las Vegas, NV;
 “
Import Documentation and Procedures Seminar
;” International Business Training

* Feb 13-14: Orlando FL; “
ITAR/EAR Boot Camp
;” Export Compliance Solutions; 
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
; 866-238-4018

* Feb 19-22: Huntsville AL; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
;” ECTI; 
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

# Feb 21: Newcastle UK; ”
Intermediate Seminar;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Feb 22: Newcastle UK; ”
Beginners Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Feb 22: Newcastle UK; ”
Licences Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Feb 22: Newcastle UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Mar 5-7: Sugar Land, TX; ”
2018 Winter Basics Conference;” Society for International Affairs (SIA)
* Mar 6-8: Orlando, FL; “
‘Partnering for Compliance’ East Export/Import Control Training and Education Program
;” Partnering for Compliance
* Mar 9: Dallas, TX; “Customs/Import Boot Camp;” Partnering for Compliance 
* Mar 11-14: San Diego, CA; “ICPA Annual Conference;” International Compliance Professionals Association; wizard@icpainc.org

* Mar 14-15: Austin, TX; “
Establishing an ITAR/EAR Export Compliance Program
” Export Compliance Solutions;
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
;
866-238-4018 

# Mar 14: Birmingham UK; ”
Intermediate Seminar;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Mar 15: Birmingham UK; ”
Beginners Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Mar 15: Birmingham UK; ”
Licences Workshop;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

# Mar 15: Birmingham UK; ”
Control List Classification – Combined Dual Use and Military;” UK Department for International Trade;
denise.carter@trade.gsi.gov.uk

* Apr 16-19: Las Vegas NV; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
;” ECTI; 
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977
* Apr 30-May 3: Wash DC; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
;” ECTI; 
jessica@learnexportcompliance.com
; 540-433-3977

* May 6-8: Toronto, Canada;
2018 ICPA Canadian Conference; ICPA
* May 7-8: Denver, CO; ”
2018 Spring Advanced Conference;” Society for International Affairs (SIA)

* May 16-17: National Harbor, MD; “
ITAR/EAR Compliance: An Industry Perspective
;” Export Compliance Solutions;
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
;
 866-238-4018 

* Jul 10-11: Long Beach, CA; ”
ITAR/EAR Boot Camp;”  Export Compliance Solutions; 
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
; 866-238-4018

* Sep 12-13: Annapolis, MD; “ITAR/EAR Boot Camp;” Export Compliance Solutions; spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com; 866-238-4018

*
Oct 22-23; Arlington, VA; “2018 Fall Advanced Conference;” Society for International Affairs (SIA)

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a121
. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)

 
* Albert J. Nock (Albert Jay Nock; 13 Oct 1870 – 19 Aug 1945; was an American libertarian author, editor first of The Freeman and then The Nation, educational theorist, Georgist, and social critic of the early and middle 20th century. He was an outspoken opponent of the New Deal, and served as a fundamental inspiration for the modern libertarian and Conservative movements, cited as an influence by William F. Buckley, Jr. He was one of the first Americans to self-identify as “libertarian”.)
  – “The mind is like the stomach. It is not how much you put into it that counts, but how much it digests.”
 
* Margaret Thatcher (Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, née Roberts; 13 Oct 1925 – 8 Apr 2013; was a British stateswoman who was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990 and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990. She was the longest-serving British prime minister of the 20th century and the first woman to have been appointed.)
  – “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples’ money.”
 
* e e cummings (Edward Estlin Cummings, 14 Oct 1894 – 3 Sep 1962, usually styled as “e e cummings”, as he often signed his name, was an American poet, painter, essayist, author, and playwright. He wrote approximately 2,900 poems; two autobiographical novels; four plays and several essays. He is remembered as an eminent voice of 20th century English-language literature.)
  – “A wind has blown the rain away and blown the sky away and all the leaves away, and the trees stand. I think, I too, have known autumn too long.”
 
Friday funnies: 
 
A drunk goes to his doctor and says, “Doctor, everywhere I touch my body with my finger, it hurts!  The doctor examines him and says, “Sir, your finger is broken.”  
  — Mike Taylor, Fort Worth, TX
 
Q. How many elderly mothers does it take to change a light bulb?
A. None, because: “I don’t need a light. I just sit here in the dark, because NOBODY EVER COMES TO VISIT ME!” 
  — Brian Vigue, Pleasantville, NJ

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

EN_a222. 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: 28 Sep 2017: 82 FR 45366-45408: Changes to the In-Bond Process [Effective Date: 27 Nov 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 cancelled Supp. 1 to the NISPOM (Summary 
here
.)


EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR): 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774 

  – Last Amendment:
3 Oct 2017: 82 FR 4 5959-45962: Updated Statements of Legal Authority for the Export Administration Regulations

  

FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR): 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
 
 – Last Amendment: 16 Jun 2017: 82 FR 27613-27614: Removal of Burmese Sanctions Regulations 
 

FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30
  –
Last Amendment: 
20 Sep 2017:
 
82 FR 43842-43844
: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on Filing Requirements; Correction
  
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available 
here.
  – The latest edition (20 Sep 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: 25 Jul 2017: 
Harmonized System Update 1704, containing 
2,564 ABI records and 463 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.
  – Last Amendment: Last Amendment: 30 Aug 2017: 82 FR 41172-41173: Temporary Modification of Category XI of the United States Munitions List
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 12 Sep 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 800 footnotes containing amendment histories, 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_a323
. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories

(Source: Editor)
 

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

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

* The Ex/Im Daily Update is a publication of FCC Advisory B.V., compiled by: Editor, James E. Bartlett III; Assistant Editors, Alexander P. Bosch and Vincent J.A. Goossen; and Events & Jobs Editor, John Bartlett. The Ex/Im Daily Update is 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 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