;

18-1011 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

18-1011 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

Thursday, 11 October 2018

TOPThe Daily Bugle is a free daily newsletter from Full Circle Compliance, containing changes to export/import regulations (ATF, DOE/NRC, Customs, NISPOM, EAR, FACR/OFAC, FAR/DFARS, FTR/AES, HTSUS, and ITAR), plus news and events. Subscribe here for free subscription. Contact us for advertising inquiries and rates
.

  1. Treasury Announces Temporary Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies
  2. Treasury Amends Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons to Reflect FIRRMA Provisions
  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. DHS/CBP Releases Harmonized System Update 1816
  4. DoD/DSCA Posts Policy Memo 18-38
  5. Justice: “Chinese Intelligence Officer Charged with Economic Espionage Involving Theft of Trade Secrets from Leading U.S. Aviation Companies”
  6. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  7. EU Council Adopts Tougher Rules on Money Laundering
  1. American Shipper: “CFIUS Pilot Adds Layer of Export Control”
  2. Defense News: “U.S. Senators Order Magnitsky Probe as Riyadh’s Capitol Hill Clout Plummets”
  3. ST&R Trade Report: “Imports of 28 Chemical Substances to Require Advance Notice”
  1. M. Volkov: “The Danger to a Compliance Program of Ineffective In-House Lawyers”
  2. O. Torres, M. Alonso & P. Natta: “New Foreign Investment Status Quo: CFIUS Mandatory Filings and Potential Penalties”
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (19 Sep 2018), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (26 Sep 2018), FACR/OFAC (29 Jun 2018), FTR (24 Apr 2018), HTSUS (11 Oct 2018), ITAR (4 Oct 2018) 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a1

1. 
Treasury Announces Temporary Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies

(Source: 
Federal Register, 11 Oct 2018.) [Excerpts.] 
 
83 FR 51322-51334: Determination and Temporary Provisions Pertaining to a Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies
 
* AGENCY: Office of Investment Security, Department of the Treasury.
* ACTION: Interim rule.
* SUMMARY: This interim rule sets forth the scope of, and procedures for, a pilot program of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS, or the Committee) under section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA). Pursuant to section 1727(c) of FIRRMA, this pilot program implements the authorities provided in two sections of FIRRMA that did not take effect upon the statute’s enactment. First, the pilot program expands the scope of transactions subject to review by CFIUS to include certain investments involving foreign persons and critical technologies. Second, the pilot program makes effective FIRRMA’s mandatory declarations provision for all transactions that fall within the specific scope of the pilot program. The pilot program is temporary and will end no later than March 5, 2020.
* DATES: Effective date: 
These provisions are effective November 10, 2018.
  – Applicability date: See Sec.  801.103.
  – Comment date: Written comments must be received by November 10, 2018.
* ADDRESSES: Written comments on the interim rule may be submitted through one of two methods:
  – Electronic Submission of Comments: Interested persons may submit comments electronically through the Federal government eRulemaking Portal at 
https://www.regulations.gov. Electronic submission of comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely receipt, and enables the Department to make them available to the public. Comments submitted electronically through the 
https://www.regulations.gov website can be viewed by other commenters and interested members of the public.
  – Mail: Send to U.S. Department of the Treasury, Attention: Thomas Feddo, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220.
  In general, Treasury will post all comments to 
www.regulations.gov without change, including any business or personal information provided, such as names, addresses, email addresses, or telephone numbers. All comments received, including attachments and other supporting material, will be part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should only submit information that you wish to make publicly available. 
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this interim rule, contact: Thomas Feddo, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security; Laura Black, Director of Investment Security Policy and International Relations; Meena Sharma, Senior Policy Advisor; or Juliana Gabrovsky, Policy Advisor, at U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220; telephone: (202) 622-3425; email: 
CFIUS.pilotprogram@treasury.gov.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: … The Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA), Subtitle A of Title XVII of Public Law 115-232 (Aug. 13, 2018), amended section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA). Prior to the enactment of FIRRMA, section 721 of the DPA (section 721) authorized the President, acting through the Committee, to review mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers by or with any foreign person which could result in foreign control of any person engaged in interstate commerce in the United States, to determine the effects of such transactions on the national security of the United States. FIRRMA modified and broadened the authorities of the President and CFIUS under section 721 in several ways including, without limitation, by expanding the scope of foreign investments in the United States subject to national security review pursuant to section 721.
  Section 1727(a) of FIRRMA made certain provisions of FIRRMA effective immediately upon enactment on August 13, 2018. Section 1727(b) of FIRRMA, however, delayed the effectiveness of any provision of FIRRMA not specified in section 1727(a) until the earlier of: (1) The date that is 18 months after the date of enactment of FIRRMA (i.e., February 13, 2020); or (2) the date that is 30 days after publication in the Federal Register of a determination by the chairperson of CFIUS that the regulations, organizational structure, personnel, and other resources necessary to administer the new provisions are in place.
  Notwithstanding section 1727(b), section 1727(c) of FIRRMA authorizes CFIUS to conduct one or more pilot programs to implement any authority provided pursuant to any provision of, or amendment made by, FIRRMA that did not take effect immediately upon enactment. Section 1727(c) states that a pilot program may not commence until the date that is 30 days after publication in the Federal Register of a determination by the chairperson of CFIUS of the scope of, and procedures for, the pilot program. This document and the interim rule set forth herein constitute the required determination of the scope of, and procedures for, a CFIUS pilot program relating to critical technologies pursuant to section 1727(c)(2) of FIRRMA.
 
(II) Waiver of Public Comment Requirement for Temporary Provisions 
 
(III) Urgent and Compelling Circumstances for the Pilot Program 
 
(IV) Discussion of the Pilot Program Interim Rule
 
Subpart-by-Subpart Overview of the Pilot Program Interim Rule
 
  The interim rule builds upon existing rules governing CFIUS’s review of transactions for national security considerations and adds a pilot program with two purposes. First, the pilot program expands the scope of transactions subject to review by CFIUS to include transactions subject to a portion of FIRRMA’s “other investments” provision. Second, the pilot program makes effective FIRRMA’s mandatory declarations provision for transactions that fall within the specific scope of the pilot program. The scope, procedures, and terms used in the pilot program are specific to the pilot program and subject to change in the proposed final rule implementing FIRRMA. The following discussion provides an overview of each subpart of the interim rule.
 
Subpart A
  Subpart A sets forth the scope of the pilot program, its applicability based on the timing of certain events relating to a transaction, and the effect of the pilot program on other laws. FIRRMA authorizes the Committee to conduct one or more pilot programs to implement any authority provided pursuant to any provision of, or amendment made by, FIRRMA that did not take effect on the date of its enactment. This pilot program expands the scope of transactions subject to review by CFIUS to include certain investments by foreign persons in certain U.S. businesses that produce, design, test, manufacture, fabricate, or develop one or more critical technologies. The pilot program also requires the submission of declarations with basic information regarding certain covered transactions, unless the parties elect to file a notice instead. The purpose of implementing a pilot program addressing these areas is to confront the rapid changes in certain critical technology industries, the significant growth of certain types of foreign investment in those industries, and the current inability of CFIUS to review non-controlling transactions, which creates an unacceptable risk of undermining U.S. technological superiority in industries with national security implications. The regulations in this interim rule supplement existing regulations implementing section 721 of the DPA, which remain in effect. Consistent with section 1727(c)(1) of FIRRMA, the pilot program implemented through these regulations will end no later than March 5, 2020, the date that is 570 days after the enactment of FIRRMA. These regulations will be amended, replaced, or removed no later than the date on which the pilot program ends.
  As set forth in section 801.103(b), these regulations do not apply to transactions for which the completion date is prior to the pilot program effective date, or transactions for which the parties have executed a binding written agreement or other document establishing the material terms of the transaction prior to October 11, 2018.
  Consistent with CFIUS’s existing regulations under part 800, the pilot program does not affect or limit other authorities of the government.
 
Subpart B
  Subpart B sets forth defined terms used in the remainder of the pilot program regulations. The following discussion describes several key terms from subpart B.
  Section 801.203. FIRRMA defines the term “investment” as including the acquisition of a “contingent equity interest,” but does not define the term “contingent equity interest.” The pilot program interim rule provides a definition for the term contingent equity interest.
  Section 801.204. The term critical technologies is defined consistent with the definition set forth in FIRRMA.
  Section 801.206. The term investment is defined consistent with the definition set forth in FIRRMA.
  Section 801.207. FIRRMA provides clarification that certain types of investments by foreign persons as limited partners or the equivalent on an advisory board or a committee of an investment fund will not be considered “other investments” for the purposes of FIRRMA, as reflected in section 801.304 of these regulations. The term investment fund is defined in subpart B by reference to the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.).
  Section 801.208. In this interim rule, the Committee is implementing the portion of the definition of the term material nonpublic technical information in FIRRMA that is related to critical technologies. The portion of FIRRMA’s definition of the term “material nonpublic technical information” that relates to critical infrastructure is not part of this pilot program.
  Section 801.209. The term pilot program covered investment 
implements most of the definition of “other investment” in FIRRMA. The pilot program, however, does not implement a portion of the third part of the “other investment” definition in FIRRMA regarding involvement, other than through voting of shares, in substantive decisionmaking regarding sensitive personal data of U.S. citizens or critical infrastructure.
  Section 801.210. The term pilot program covered transaction includes the new concept of “pilot program covered investment,” described above. The term pilot program covered transaction also includes transactions that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business, consistent with the language in FIRRMA, but only to the extent that the U.S. business is a pilot program U.S. business.
  Section 801.213. The term pilot program U.S. business includes any U.S. business that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops a critical technology that is either utilized in connection with the U.S. business’s activity in one or more pilot program industries, or designed by the U.S. business specifically for use in one or more pilot program industries. For purposes of the pilot program, this definition has been narrowly scoped to allow CFIUS to assess and address the foreign investment transactions most likely to raise concerns regarding the technological superiority of the United States in industries of national security importance.
 
Subpart C
  Subpart C describes the coverage of the pilot program with a focus on pilot program covered investments. The analysis as to whether a transaction could result in control of a pilot program U.S. business by a foreign person generally follows the same analysis as under part 800, with the additional requirement that the U.S. business in question must be a pilot program U.S. business. The examples provided throughout subpart C are intended to illustrate the application of the definitions to the particular hypothetical situations. The examples are presented for the purpose of aiding the understanding of readers. They neither limit the definitions set forth in subpart B nor exhaust the scenarios to which such definitions could apply.
  Subpart C illustrates that, where CFIUS has concluded all action under section 721 for a pilot program covered investment (regardless of whether the notification was made through a declaration or a notice), any incremental investment that meets the requirements of section 801.209, even if involving the same foreign person in the same pilot program U.S. business, will nevertheless be a pilot program covered investment and subject to this pilot program.
  Subpart C also implements portions of section 1703 of FIRRMA that limit the application of CFIUS authority over certain types of investment fund investments and provides an explicit exception for investments involving air carriers.
 
Subpart D
  Subpart D requires that the parties to a pilot program covered transaction submit to the Committee a declaration regarding the transaction, unless the parties elect to submit a written notice pursuant to subpart E instead. Generally, mandatory declarations must be made at least 45 days before the expected completion date of the transaction. As noted in section 801.401(d), the regulatory safe harbor described in section 800.204(e) is not available for pilot program covered transactions for which the Committee completes all action under section 721 on the basis of a declaration, irrespective of whether the transaction could result in foreign control of a U.S. business. Any subsequent or incremental acquisition that constitutes a pilot program covered transaction must be submitted to CFIUS through a notice or declaration. For the avoidance of doubt, transactions that could result in control of a pilot program U.S. business by a foreign person and that are filed as a written notice, and for which the Committee completes all action under section 721, would receive the benefit of the regulatory safe harbor described in section 800.204(e).
  FIRRMA distinguishes declarations from notices in three primary respects: (1) The length of the submission; (2) the time for CFIUS’s consideration of the submission; and (3) the Committee’s options for disposition of the submission. The interim rule recognizes these distinctions in the manner described below.
  First, section 801.403 sets forth the information required in a declaration, which is consistent with FIRRMA’s requirement that CFIUS establish declarations as “abbreviated notices that would not generally exceed 5 pages in length.” As part of the declaration process, parties will have the opportunity to voluntarily stipulate that the transaction is a pilot program covered transaction and, if so, whether the transaction could result in control of a pilot program U.S. business by a foreign person and whether the transaction is a foreign-government controlled transaction. Such stipulations would streamline certain aspects of CFIUS’s review of a declaration, thereby reducing the burden on CFIUS and potentially leading to a faster resolution for the submitting parties.
  Second, consistent with FIRRMA, section 801.404 requires that the Committee take action on a declaration within 30 days of the Committee’s receipt of the declaration from the Staff Chairperson. The Staff Chairperson will circulate the declaration to the Committee after inspecting the declaration and determining it to be complete. This implements FIRRMA’s distinction that CFIUS complete review of a notice within 45 days and take action upon a declaration within 30 days.
  Finally, section 801.407 implements FIRRMA’s mandate that the Committee take one of four actions with respect to a declaration: (1) Request that the parties file a notice; (2) inform the parties that CFIUS cannot complete action under section 721 on the basis of the declaration, and that they may file a notice to seek written notification from the Committee that the Committee has completed all action under section 721 with respect to the transaction; (3) initiate a unilateral review of the transaction through an agency notice; or (4) notify the parties that CFIUS has completed all action under section 721.
  Section 801.407 also makes clear that parties may not submit more than one declaration for the same or a substantially similar transaction without approval from the Staff Chairperson. The purpose of this is to avoid situations where, due to the abbreviated information requests, a party or parties file a declaration even before the material terms of a transaction have been agreed upon, subsequently complete their negotiations, and attempt to withdraw and resubmit a new declaration for the same or a substantially similar transaction.
  The distinctions between notices and declarations outlined here–that is, the complexity of the submission and the parties’ desired timing–underpin the primary interrelated factors that parties should consider when determining whether a pilot program covered transaction is best notified to the Committee through a declaration or a notice.
  As noted above, the scope, procedures, and certain terms used in the pilot program are specific to the pilot program and subject to change in the proposed final rule implementing FIRRMA.
 
Subpart E
  Subpart E generally applies the existing CFIUS procedural regulations in part 800 to notices of pilot program covered transactions. This subpart recognizes that parties, at their discretion, may elect to file a notice for a pilot program covered transaction instead of a declaration. The purpose of the subpart is to clarify that, where parties elect to file a notice instead of a declaration, or file a notice for a pilot program covered transaction following the Committee’s action on a declaration, the procedural elements of CFIUS’s existing regulations under part 800 generally will apply to that notice. Certain additional information will be required from the parties with respect to any pilot program covered investment notified to the Committee through a notice.
  For the avoidance of doubt, while the pilot program implements certain provisions of FIRRMA that allow CFIUS to review certain non-controlling transactions involving critical technology in specified industries, it does not change CFIUS’s analysis with respect to a transaction that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business under the regulations at part 800.
  Additionally, a party (or parties) to a pilot program covered transaction that has filed a written notice pursuant to section 800.401(a) regarding the transaction may not submit to the Committee a declaration regarding the same transaction, or a substantially similar transaction, without the approval of the Staff Chairperson. The purpose of the declaration is to allow for an assessment of certain information relating to certain transactions that may not, because of the scope and other factors, necessitate the collection of all of the information set forth in section 800.402(c). As noted above, parties should consider whether the transaction is of the type that would be appropriate for a declaration, or whether it would be more appropriate to notify the Committee of the transaction by filing a written notice.
 
Subpart F
    Subpart F implements authorities provided pursuant to, and amendments made by, FIRRMA. … 
 
    Dated: October 4, 2018.
Steven T. Mnuchin, Secretary.

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

EXIM_a2

2

Treasury Amends Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons to Reflect FIRRMA Provisions 

(Source: 
Federal Register, 11 Oct 2018.) [Excerpts.] 
 
83 FR 51316-51322: Provisions Pertaining to Certain Investments in the United States by Foreign Persons
 
* AGENCY: Office of Investment Security, Department of the Treasury.
* ACTION: Interim rule.
* SUMMARY: This interim rule sets forth amendments to the regulations in part 800 of 31 CFR that implement, and make updates consistent with, certain provisions of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA). Among other things, this interim rule implements certain provisions of FIRRMA that became immediately effective upon its enactment and provides clarity as to the current process and procedures with respect to the reviews and investigations undertaken by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States pursuant to part 800, in light of FIRRMA.
* DATES: Effective date: 
These provisions are effective October 11, 2018.
  – Applicability date: See Sec.  800.103.
  – Comment date: Written comments must be received by November 10, 2018.
* ADDRESSES: Written comments on the interim rule may be submitted through one of two methods:
  – Electronic Submission of Comments: Interested persons may submit comments electronically through the Federal government eRulemaking Portal at 
https://www.regulations.gov. Electronic submission of comments allows the commenter maximum time to prepare and submit a comment, ensures timely receipt, and enables the Department to make them available to the public. Comments submitted electronically through the 
https://www.regulations.gov website can be viewed by other commenters and interested members of the public.
  – Mail: Send to U.S. Department of the Treasury, Attention: Thomas Feddo, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20220.
  In general, Treasury will post all comments to 
www.regulations.gov without change, including any business or personal information provided, such as names, addresses, email addresses, or telephone numbers. All comments received, including attachments and other supporting material, will be part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should only submit information that you wish to make publicly available.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this interim rule, contact: Thomas Feddo, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security; Laura Black, Director of Investment Security Policy and International Relations; Meena Sharma, Senior Policy Advisor; or Juliana Gabrovsky, Policy Advisor, at U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20220, telephone: (202) 622-3425, email: 
CFIUS.FIRRMA@treasury.gov.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: … On August 13, 2018, President Trump signed into law the Foreign 
Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA), Subtitle A of Title XVII of Pub. L. 115-232 (Aug. 13, 2018), which amends section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA). Pursuant to section 1727 of FIRRMA, a number of provisions of FIRRMA took effect immediately upon enactment of the statute, while the effectiveness of other provisions is delayed. A number of the immediately effective provisions of FIRRMA required revisions to certain provisions of part 800. This interim rule amends part 800 to make such revisions and makes several other updates consistent with FIRRMA.
  This interim rule is intended to provide clarity regarding the processes and procedures of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS, or the Committee) pending the full implementation of FIRRMA. 
 
(II) Waiver of Public Comment Requirement for Temporary Provisions… 
 
(III) Urgent and Compelling Circumstances for Interim Rule … 
 
(IV) Discussion of Interim Rule
 
Overview of Key Amendments to the Regulations at Part 800
 
  This interim rule makes amendments to the regulations at part 800 that are largely technical in nature. It implements certain immediately effective provisions of, and makes updates consistent with, FIRRMA. The discussion below summarizes the key changes made by this interim rule.
  Section 800.103. This section is amended to provide clarity with respect to the applicability of the amendments to part 800 included in this interim rule. These amendments apply with respect to any covered transaction the review of which is initiated under section 721 on or after October 11, 2018. Certain of the provisions in FIRRMA that are addressed in this interim rule, however, took effect upon enactment of the statute. Most notably for transaction parties, FIRRMA’s extension of the CFIUS review period from 30 days to 45 days went into effect immediately, and this interim rule updates part 800 to reflect the current practice of CFIUS. As indicated on the CFIUS website of the Department of the Treasury on August 13, 2018, upon the enactment of FIRRMA, CFIUS began applying the 45-day review period with respect to any covered transaction the review of which is initiated under section 721 on or after the date of FIRRMA’s enactment.
  Section 800.104. FIRRMA expands the definition of “covered transaction” to include transactions, transfers, agreements, or arrangements, the structure of which is designed or intended to evade or circumvent the application of section 721. Therefore, section 800.104, which addressed transactions or devices for avoidance, has been removed.
  Section 800.202. The amendment to this section implements section 1720 of FIRRMA and expressly provides for the application of section 1001 of title 18, United States Code, to all information provided to the Committee under section 721 by any party to a covered transaction.
  Section 800.207. The revision to the definition of “covered transaction” is consistent with the language in FIRRMA.
  Section 800.209. The revision to the definition of “critical technologies” is consistent with the language in FIRRMA, including, and in particular, adding a sixth category as subpart (f) to capture emerging and foundational technologies controlled pursuant to section 1758 of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018.
  Section 800.224. The revision to the definition of “transaction” is consistent with the language in FIRRMA defining a “covered transaction” to include certain changes in rights that a foreign person has with respect to a U.S. business in which the foreign person has an investment, as well as transactions the structure of which is designed or intended to evade or circumvent the application of section 721. Corresponding changes are made to the definition of “party or parties to a transaction” in section 800.220.
  Sections 800.301 and 800.302. The revisions to these sections add examples that are intended to illustrate the application of the expanded scope of “covered transactions” to the particular hypothetical situations. The examples are presented for the purpose of aiding the understanding of readers. They neither limit the definition set forth in subpart B of part 800 nor exhaust the scenarios to which such definition could apply.
  Section 800.401. The revisions to this section implement a shift to electronic submissions of voluntary notices, rather than requiring a hardcopy submission, which is consistent with the focus of FIRRMA on ensuring that the procedures of the Committee enable the Committee’s efficient operation.
  Section 800.402. The revisions to section 800.402 modify certain of the requirements regarding the content of voluntary notices based on FIRRMA including, and in particular, adding a provision allowing parties to stipulate that the transaction that is the subject of the voluntary notice is a covered transaction and, as relevant, a foreign government-controlled transaction. The Committee notes that stipulating that a transaction is covered or foreign government-controlled allows the Committee to expend fewer resources in determining whether the transaction meets these criteria, potentially speeding the resolution of a review. Although the parties, by stipulating, are averring that they view the transaction to be covered and/or foreign government-controlled, neither the Committee nor the President is bound by the parties’ stipulations.
  Section 800.502. The revision to the timing of the review period, extending the period from 30 days to 45 days, is consistent with FIRRMA. This change is reflected in certain other sections of part 800 that are updated by this interim rule.
  Section 800.506. The revisions to this section are consistent with FIRRMA and define the “extraordinary circumstances” pursuant to which an investigation period can be extended by one 15-day period.
  Section 800.702. The revisions to this section are consistent with FIRRMA, including, and in particular, incorporating additional exceptions with respect to information sharing.
  Section 800.801. The revisions to this section are consistent with FIRRMA including, and in particular, removing the language “intentionally or through gross negligence” in the provisions allowing for the imposition of civil penalties. By their terms, the revisions do not apply the new standard to material misstatements, omissions, or certifications made preceding the implementation of this rule, or to violations occurring after the implementation of this rule, in connection with mitigation agreements, material conditions, or orders entered into or imposed prior to the implementation of this rule.
  Section 800.802. The addition of this section is consistent with FIRRMA including authorizing the Committee to, in addition to other remedies, negotiate a remediation plan for lack of compliance with a mitigation agreement or condition entered into or imposed under section 721(l), require filings for future covered transactions for five years, or seek injunctive relief. … 
 
  Dated: October 4, 2018.
Heath Tarbert, Assistant Secretary for International Markets.

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a13
. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
 

(Source:
Federal Register)
 
[No items of interest noted today.]

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

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

OGS_a03
5. 
DHS/CBP Releases Harmonized System Update 1816 

(Source: 
CSMS# 18-000599, 11 Oct 2018.) 
 
Harmonized System Update (HSU) 1816 was created on October 10, 2018 and contains 6,042 ABI records and 1,516 harmonized tariff records.

This update includes modifications made as a result of H.R. 4318: Miscellaneous Tariff Bill Act of 2018. The modifications are effective October 13, 2018 and the bill can be accessed via this 
link.

Adjustments required by the verification of the 2018 Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) are included as well.

The modified records are currently available to all ABI participants and can be retrieved electronically via the procedures indicated in the CATAIR. For further information about this process, please contact your client representative. For all other questions regarding this message, please contact Jennifer Keeling via email at 
Jennifer.L.Keeling@cbp.dhs.gov

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

OGS_a04
6. 
DoD/DSCA Posts Policy Memo 18-38

(Source: 
DoD/DSCA, 11 Oct 2018.) 

* DSCA Policy Memo 18-38 
Interim Clarification on 10 USC § 333 has been posted. This memorandum provides interim execution guidance for programs utilizing the Section 333 authority while a comprehensive revision to Chapter 15 of the Security Assistance Management Manual is underway. 

This memo adds/revises the following LOA notes:

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

OGS_a05
7. 
Justice: “Chinese Intelligence Officer Charged with Economic Espionage Involving Theft of Trade Secrets from Leading U.S. Aviation Companies”

(Source: 
Justice, 10 Oct 2018.) [Excerpts.] 
 
A Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS) operative, Yanjun Xu, aka Qu Hui, aka Zhang Hui, has been arrested and charged with conspiring and attempting to commit economic espionage and steal trade secrets from multiple U.S. aviation and aerospace companies.  Xu was extradited to the United States yesterday. … 

  “This indictment alleges that a Chinese intelligence officer sought to steal trade secrets and other sensitive information from an American company that leads the way in aerospace,” said Assistant Attorney General Demers.  “This case is not an isolated incident.  It is part of an overall economic policy of developing China at American expense.  We cannot tolerate a nation’s stealing our firepower and the fruits of our brainpower.  We will not tolerate a nation that reaps what it does not sow.” … 

  “This unprecedented extradition of a Chinese intelligence officer exposes the Chinese government’s direct oversight of economic espionage against the United States,” said Assistant Director Priestap.

Yanjun Xu is a Deputy Division Director with the MSS’s Jiangsu State Security Department, Sixth Bureau.  The MSS is the intelligence and security agency for China and is responsible for counter-intelligence, foreign intelligence and political security.  MSS has broad powers in China to conduct espionage both domestically and abroad.

Xu was arrested in Belgium on April 1, pursuant to a federal complaint, and then indicted by a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Ohio.  The government unsealed the charges today, following his extradition to the United States.  The four-count indictment charges Xu with conspiring and attempting to commit economic espionage and theft of trade secrets. 

 

According To The Indictment


Beginning in at least December 2013 and continuing until his arrest, Xu targeted certain companies inside and outside the United States that are recognized as leaders in the aviation field. This included GE Aviation. He identified experts who worked for these companies and recruited them to travel to China, often initially under the guise of asking them to deliver a university presentation. Xu and others paid the experts’ travel costs and provided stipends. … 

 
Attachment(s): 
 

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

OGS_a6
8. 
State/DDTC: (No new postings.)

(Source: 
State/DDTC)

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

OGS_a7
9. 
EU Council Adopts Tougher Rules on Money Laundering

(Source: 
Council of the European Union, 11 Oct 2018.) 
 
The Council today adopted a new anti-money laundering directive. This directive introduces new criminal law provisions which will disrupt and block access by criminals to financial resources, including those used for terrorist activities.
 
The new rules include:
  – establishing minimum rules on the definition of criminal offences and sanctions relating to money laundering. Money laundering activities will be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 4 years,and judges may impose additional sanctions and measures (e.g. temporary or permanent exclusion from access to public funding, fines, etc.). Aggravating circumstances will apply to cases linked to criminal organizations or for offences conducted in the exercise of certain professional activities.
  – the possibility of holding legal entities liable for certain money laundering activities which can face a range of sanctions (e.g. exclusion from public aid, placement under judicial supervision, judicial winding-up, etc.)
  – removing obstacles to cross-border judicial and police cooperation by setting common provisions to improve investigations. For cross-border cases, the new rules clarify which member state has jurisdiction, and how those member states involved cooperate, as well as how to involve Eurojust. 
 
Next Steps
 
Once the directive is published in the EU official journal, member states have up to 24 months to transpose it into national law.
 
Background
 

This directive complements, on the criminal law aspects, the directive on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing which was formally adopted in May 2018. 

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

NWSNEWS

(Source: 
American Shipper, 11 Oct 2018.) [Excerpts.] 
 
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is expanding reviews of foreign acquisitions involving sensitive U.S. technologies and intellectual property.
 
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) has initiated a pilot program that will expand its reviews of foreign acquisitions involving sensitive U.S. technologies and intellectual property.    This regulatory expansion was part of the 2018 Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA), which passed by a majority vote in the Congress and was signed into law by President Donald Trump in August.

FIRRMA authorizes CFIUS, which is chaired by the Treasury Department and comprises representatives from a dozen Cabinet-level agencies and departments, to conduct pilot programs to implement provisions in the legislation that did not take effect immediately upon enactment. Full implementation of FIRRMA will occur by February 2020.

Before FIRRMA, CFIUS’ authority to review foreign investments in U.S. technologies for national security purposes was limited. … 
 
[Editor’s Note: Due to copyright restrictions, we are not authorized to include the entire item. To read the remaining sections, click on the source link below the item title.]

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

NWS_a211
Defense News: “U.S. Senators Order Magnitsky Probe as Riyadh’s Capitol Hill Clout Plummets”

(Source: 
Defense News, 11 Oct 2018.) [Excerpts.]
 
The leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and 18 other senators have sent a 
letter to President Donald Trump that could pave the way for sanctions in the disappearance of a dissident Saudi journalist.
 
Committee chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and ranking member Bob Menendez, D-N.J., are leading a call to probe whether 
Saudi Arabia was responsible for “an extrajudicial killing, torture, or other gross violation of internationally recognized human rights against an individual exercising freedom of expression” under the Global Magnitsky Act.
 
The lawmakers ask the Trump administration to report back in 120 days. “Our expectation is that in making your determination you will consider any relevant information, including with respect to the highest ranking officials in the Government of Saudi Arabia,” the letter reads.
 
Any resulting sanctions would freeze any assets the individuals or entities hold in the U.S. and also prevent them from using any American financial institution for banking or other purposes. Since the United States financial system has such broad global reach, the sanctions make it difficult for the individuals to use major banks anywhere in the world.
 
The move is a sign Saudi Arabia’s credibility with the U.S. Congress has hit a new low in the wake of reports Riyadh is suspected in the death of Jamal Khashoggi, a contributor to the Washington Post. While the lawmakers do not explicitly reference arms sales, the move also calls into question future U.S. sales to the kingdom, which seem at least for now to be frozen. … 
 
On Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., cited Khashoggi’s disappearance to 
announce he would force a vote on planned U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia the next time the administration notifies Congress of one. … 
 
Paul could force a vote on a future arms sale under the Arms Export Control Act. He could bring the measure to the Senate floor after giving the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 10 days to consider it.

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

NWS_a312
ST&R Trade Report: “Imports of 28 Chemical Substances to Require Advance Notice”

(Source: 
Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg Trade Report, 11 Oct 2018.)
 
The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a 
direct final rule that will require persons who intend to manufacture (including import) or process any of 28 specified chemical substances for an activity designated as a significant new use by this rule to notify the EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. Persons may not commence manufacture or processing for the significant new use until the EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination, and taken such actions as are required with that determination.
 
Importers must certify that shipments of these substances comply with all applicable rules and orders under the Toxic Substances Control Act, including any SNUR requirements. In addition, any persons who export or intend to export any of these substances on or after Nov. 9 are subject to the export notification provisions of 15 USC 2611(b) and must comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.
 
These rules will be effective as of Dec. 10. However, if the EPA receives written adverse or critical comments, or notice of intent to submit such comments, by Nov. 9 it will withdraw the relevant sections of this rule before Dec. 10 and proceed with a related proposed rule.

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

COMMCOMMENTARY

(Source: 
Volkov Law Group Blog, 10 Oct 2018. Reprinted by permission.) 
 
* Author: Michael Volkov, Esq., Volkov Law Group, 
mvolkov@volkovlaw.com, 240-505-1992. 
 
The United Technologies FCPA settlement underscored, once again, the harm to a company when lawyers fail to do their job.
 
As outlined in the SEC settlement, an in-house attorney at Otis Elevator was required to review and approve a contract with a third-party, where a cursory due diligence review would have uncovered major red flags.  The in-house attorney reviewed the contract without inquiring about the third-party or whether due diligence had been conducted.
 
In another incident, an Otis Elevator attorney was asked to review and approve a contract engaging the local government customer to assist in selling products in other areas in Kazakhstan.  The attorney correctly asked the business why the company needed to retain the new intermediary.  In the face of resistance, the attorney eventually backed down and approved the arrangement.
 
The Otis Elevator attorney is not the first occasion of an attorney failing to do his or her job. Last year, an in-house attorney at Keppel Marine plead guilty to an FCPA violation for drafting a contract for a third-party with specific knowledge that the third-party was facilitating bribery payments.  Of course, the Keppel Marine case is an outlier but an important warning flag.
 
Another example of in-house attorney miscues is the VimpelCom case in which an in-house attorney approved a transaction involving a shell company which was owned by the Uzbekistan President’s daughter.  VimpelCom’s in-house attorney signed off on the transaction, notwithstanding the obvious red flags.
 
An in-house attorney serves an important gatekeeper role in protecting a company’s culture and its compliance program.  When an in-house attorney fails to do so, or succumbs to business pressure, the company suffers.  An in-house attorney subjected to this kind of pressure reflects poorly on the company’s culture.  Those companies that ignore their lawyers are doomed to suffer real and significant consequences.
 
An in-house attorney needs the support of his/her supervisors, and the company’s leadership. When an in-house attorney folds in the face of business pressure, such a dynamic reflects the absence of a culture that values ethics and compliance.  A company with a singular focus on the next business deal without any consideration of legal risks is asking for trouble.  The company may not get caught in the immediate circumstance, but the company’s culture will suffer and overall performance may deteriorate.
 
Corporate gatekeepers are routinely subject to business pressure.  These gatekeepers have to withstand the pressure and explain to the business why compliance is important.  If necessary, the gatekeeper has to enlist his/her supervisor to support the gatekeeper’s position.
 
When gatekeepers buckle and give in to the business, the company is likely suffering from a deeper culture problem.  Companies that do not respect the importance of ethics and compliance while focused on the next business deal do not have basic ethical values embedded in the company’s culture.
 

A company with this culture and compliance problem will suffer.  The company may or may not be investigated by the government.  There are many companies engaging in misconduct without being caught by the government.  However, a company suffering from a poor culture will experience higher rates of misconduct, lower reporting rates, higher turnover and eventually lower performance.  If the company connects these trends and links them to its poor culture, a business-dominated corporation is unlikely to address the problem without a major shake-up or intervening event.

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

(Source: 
Torres Law, 11 Oct 2018.) 
 
* Authors: Olga L. Torres, Managing Member, Maria Alonso, Associate, Pierfilippo Natta, Legal Intern. All of Torres Law. Contact Torres Law via 
here
 
On October 10, 2018, the U.S Department of the Treasury issued temporary regulations to conduct pilot programs to implement provisions of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (“FIRRMA”), [FN/1] which became effective August 13, 2018, and amended section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 specifically to protect American technology companies and intellectual property. As Torres Law previously discussed in 
several articles, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) reviews foreign investment in U.S. companies for national security considerations, and FIRRMA has significantly expanded CFIUS jurisdiction.
 
For context, prior to FIRRMA, CFIUS’s review authority did not sufficiently address new and emerging risks due to changes in technology and foreign direct investment methods. CFIUS could only review foreign transactions that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business. These transactions were typically limited to conventional foreign acquisitions and mergers involving a U.S. business, but CFIUS had no authority to prevent a foreign entity from acquiring a non-controlling interest in critical technologies. 
CFIUS under FIRRMA can now review “other investments” made by foreign persons in 
Pilot Program industries, including non-controlling foreign investments in a U.S. business involved in “critical infrastructure,” “critical technology,” or a U.S. business that maintains or collects “sensitive personal data” of U.S. persons.
 
Starting November 10, 2018, CFIUS will be empowered to review non-controlling critical technology foreign investments, including any equity interest in which a foreign person has access to sensitive personal data of U.S. persons or membership/observer rights on a governing body. [FN/2] The new temporary Pilot Program will require foreign investors to file mandatory declarations for transactions that fall within the scope of the Pilot Program, and failure to do so could result in civil monetary penalties up to the value of the transaction. The mandatory declarations are abbreviated notices that generally should not exceed five pages in length. Foreign investors, from any country, are required to make the mandatory declarations either by making the mandatory declaration at least 45 days before the expected completion date of the transaction or by filing a notice under CFIUS’ standard procedures. CFIUS will have 30 days to act.
 
The temporary Pilot Program covers foreign investments that would give the foreign investor:
  – Access to any material nonpublic technical information in the possession of the target U.S. business;
  – Membership or observer rights on the board of directors or equivalent governing body of the U.S. business, or the right to nominate an individual to a position on the board of directors or equivalent governing body of the U.S. business; or
  – Any involvement, other than through voting of shares, in substantive decision-making of the U.S. business regarding the use, development, acquisition, or release of critical technology.
 
Moreover, the U.S. critical technology businesses covered include any U.S. business that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops a critical technology that is either: 1) utilized in connection with the U.S. business’s activity in one or more Pilot Program industries; or 2) designed by the U.S. business specifically for use in one or more Pilot Program industries. The term “critical technology” is defined by FIRRMA, which includes: 1) defense articles or defense services included on the U.S. Munitions List of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”); 2) items included on the Commerce Control List of the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”) that are controlled by multilateral regimes or for reasons relating to regional stability or surreptitious listening; 3) nuclear equipment, facilities, materials, software, and technology subject to export regulations by the Department of Energy or Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 4) select agents and toxins; and 5) “emerging and foundational technologies controlled pursuant to the Export Control Reform Act of 2018.”[FN/3]  The Pilot Program covers 27 industries, identified by their respective North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code. [FN/4] 
Annex A[FN/5] to Part 801 lists the 27 industries.
 
Lastly, effective October 11, 2018, to conform to FIRRMA Treasury issued several amendments to existing CFIUS regulations, 31 C.F.R. Part 800.[FN/6] The temporary Pilot Program will end no later than March 5, 2020. Parties who wish to submit written comments on the interim rule may do so by November 10 via the Federal government eRulemaking Portal at 
www.regulations.gov and by mail. [FN/7] CFIUS will consider any comments received and will address comments in the final rule.
———-  
  [FN/1] 
See Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury, Treasury Releases Interim Regulations for FIRRMA Pilot Program, (Oct. 10, 2018) (available 
here).
 [FN/2] Determination and Temporary Provisions Pertaining to a Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies, 83 Fed. Reg. 51,322 (Oct. 11, 2018) (to be codified at 31 C.F.R. pt. 801).
 [FN/3]The Export Controls Act of 2018 (ECA), which is not part of FIRRMA, will control “emerging and foundational technologies” not covered under existing export control authorities such as the EAR or the ITAR. The ECA does not define “emerging and foundation technologies” further than technologies that are essential to U.S. national security, but are not considered “critical technology” under FIRRMA.
 [FN/4] 
See Determination and Temporary Provisions Pertaining to a Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies, 83 Fed. Reg. 51,322, 51,333 (Oct. 11, 2018) (to be codified at 31 C.F.R. pt. 801).
 [FN/5] Scroll down to page 12 in pdf of Federal Register, 83 Fed. Reg. 51,322, 51,333.
 [FN/6] Provisions Pertaining to Certain Investments in the United States by Foreign Persons, 83 Fed. Reg. 51,316 (Oct. 11, 2018) (to be codified at 31 C.F.R. pt. 800).
 [FN/7] Send to U.S. Department of Treasury, Attention: Thomas Feddo, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20220.

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a115
. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)
Eleanor Roosevelt (Anna Eleanor Roosevelt; 11 Oct 1884 – 7 Nov 1962; was an American political figure, diplomat and activist.  She served as the First Lady of the United States from March 1933 to April 1945 during her husband President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s four terms in office, making her the longest serving First Lady of the United States.  She served as United States Delegate to the United Nations General Assembly from 1945 to 1952.)
  – “You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, ‘I lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along.”
  – “A woman is like a tea bag – you can’t tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water.”

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

EN_a216. 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.  The latest amendments 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: 19 Sep 2018: 
83 FR 47283-47284
: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Archaeological Material From Cambodia 
 
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: 26 Sep 2018: 83 FR 48532-48537: Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List, Revision of an Entry on the Entity List and Removal of an Entity From the Entity List

 

FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR): 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders

  – Last Amendment:
29 June 2018: 83 FR 30541-30548: Global Magnitsky Sanctions Regulations; and 83 FR 30539-30541: Removal of the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations and Amendment of the Terrorism List Government Sanctions Regulations 

 

FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30  

  – Last Amendment: 24 Apr 2018:
83 FR 17749-17751
: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on the Collection and Confidentiality of Kimberley Process Certificates

  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available 
here.
  –
The latest edition (30 April 2018) 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 approximately 250 footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, Census/AES guidance, and explanations of the numerous errors contained in the official text. Subscribers receive revised copies in Microsoft Word 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. Government employees (including military) and employees of universities are eligible for a 50% discount on both publications at www.FullCircleCompiance.eu
 
* HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA), 1 Jan 2018: 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: 
11 Oct 2018: 
Harmonized System Update 1816
, containing 6,042 ABI records and 1,516 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: 
4 Oct 2018: 
83 FR 50003-50007
: Regulatory Reform Revisions to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 4 Oct 2018) 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_a317
. 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, Alex Witt. The Ex/Im Daily Update is emailed every business day to approximately 6,000 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, DOE/NRC, DOJ/ATF, DoD/DSS, DoD/DTSA, FAR/DFARS, 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, provided attribution is given to “The Export/Import Daily Bugle of (date)”. Any further use of contributors’ material, however, must comply with applicable copyright laws.  If you would to submit material for inclusion in the The Export/Import Daily Update (“Daily Bugle”), please find instructions here.

* 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.

* BACK ISSUES: An archive of Daily Bugle publications from 2005 to present is available HERE.

* TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Use the Safe Unsubscribe link below.

Scroll to Top