;

19-0125 Friday “Daily Bugle”

19-0125 Friday “Daily Bugle”

Friday, 25 January 2019

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
.

[No items of interest noted today.] 

  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. DHS/CBP Announces ACE Maintenance for 26-27 Jan
  4. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  5. UK/ECJU Posts Notice on UK Companies Fined for Illegal Exports
  1. Expeditors News: “Fair Trade with China Enforcement Act Reintroduced to the Senate”
  2. WorldECR: “Wassenaar Proposes New Questions for Companies’ Due Diligence”
  1. J.F. McKenzie: “Section 301 Duty Mitigation Strategies” [Part 2 of 3]
  2. M. Volkov: “Trade Secret Risks, Criminal Prosecutions and Protecting Trade Secrets”
  1. ECTI Presents “Cornerstones of ITAR Compliance: Registration, Empowered Officials & Exemptions” Webinar on 6 March
  2. List of Approaching Events: 96 Events Posted This Week, Including 12 New Events
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: DHS/Customs (14 Jan 2019), DOC/EAR (20 Dec 2018), DOC/FTR (24 Apr 2018), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), DOE/AFAEC (23 Feb 2015), DOE/EINEM (20 Nov 2018), DOJ/ATF (26 Dec 2018), DOS/ITAR (4 Oct 2018), DOT/FACR/OFAC (15 Nov 2018), HTSUS (19 Dec 2018)  
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a1

 
[No items of interest noted today.]

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a11
. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
 

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

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

OGS_a22
Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)

(Source: 
Commerce/BIS)

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

OGS_a03
3. DHS/CBP Announces ACE Maintenance for 26-27 Jan
(Source: CSMS #19-000019, 25 Jan 2019.)
 
ACE will be down for maintenance January 26th 11:00 PM – January 27th 1:00 AM. The portal will remain up and available during this outage.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a4
4. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
(Source: State/DDTC)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a5
5. UK/ECJU Posts Notice on UK Companies Fined for Illegal Exports
(Source: Notice to exporters 2019/02, 25 Jan 2019.)
 
Over the last 7 months, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has issued compound penalties ranging between £1,000 and £4,000 to 3 separate UK Exporters. These related to unlicensed exports of dual-use goods and export breaches controlled by The Export Control Order 2008.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NWSNEWS

(Source:
Expeditors News, 24 Jan 2019.)
 
On January 3, 2019, U.S. Congressman Marco Rubio reintroduced legislation known as the “Fair Trade with China Enforcement Act” into the Senate.
 
The legislation proposes to:
  – Establish a list of certain products receiving support from Government of People’s Republic of China pursuant to Made in China 2025 policy;
  – Prohibit export to the People’s Republic of China national security sensitive technology and intellectual property;
  – Impose a shareholder cap on Chinese investors in United States corporations;
  – Prohibit use of certain telecommunications services or equipment.
 
Additionally, the legislation would allow certain industries and products of the Chinese government’s Made in China 2025 industrial policy to fall under the definition of Countervailing duties.
 
The proposed legislation may be found
here.

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

(Source:
WorldECR, 24 Jan 2019.)
 
Thirty-five due diligence questions companies should ask focus on product, end-user and end use, finance and shipment.
 
The Wassenaar Arrangement has updated its control lists (December 2018), and at the same time updated its list of indicative questions for companies to use “in any export situation”.
 
It says that “being vigilant for signs of suspicious enquiries or orders is vital for countering the risks of the proliferation of sensitive goods and technologies and destabilizing accumulations of conventional weapons.”
 
The 35 questions relate to:
  – The product a company is selling
  – End-user and end use
  – Shipment, and
  – Finance and contract conditions
 
It says: “[C]orresponding answers to any of the questions…should not be considered as the basis for an automatic rejection of an export. The intention of the questions is rather to flag the need for greater scrutiny while examining exports.”
 
See here.

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

COMMCOMMENTARY

(Source:
Baker & McKenzie, 23 Jan 2019.)
 
* Author: John F. McKenzie, Esq., Baker & McKenzie,
john.mckenzie@bakermckenzie.com.
 
[Editor’s Note: Part 1 of this item was included in yesterday’s Daily Bugle, Part 3 will be included in the Monday, 28 Jan 2019, Daily Bugle.]
 
  (c) Alternative Sources of Supply
 
The Section 301 duties apply to those products for which China is the country of origin, under United States country of origin marking rules under section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. §1304, and implemented by Part 134 of the CBP Regulations, 19 C.F.R. Part 134. A stated objective of United States trade policy officials is to reduce supply chain dependence on China, and throughout the public hearings conducted by the USTR on the imposition of Section 301 duties, questions posed by USTR officials to importers were focused especially on the following:
 
  – Are the products that you currently import from China available from sources in countries other than China?
  – How difficult would it be, and how long would it take, for you to shift the manufacture and/or procurement of the products that you currently import from China to another location outside of China?
 
Thus, if a United States importer is able to shift its source of supply of products from a vendor in China to a vendor located in another country, the Section 301 duties may become moot. It must, however, be emphasized that the products procured from a third country source must, in fact, qualify as products of that third country (or some country other than China) to be outside of the scope of the Section 301 duties. Transshipping Chinese origin products through a third country, or shipping products to a third country for processing that amounts to no more than “simple assembly” will not be sufficient to change the country of origin of those products. [FN/6] In those circumstances, even if the products are shipped from the third country directly to the United States, the products must be marked and declared as “products of China”, and, if included on one of the three lists of sanctioned Chinese products, they will be subject to the Section 301 duties when imported into the United States [FN/7].
 
  (d) Third Country Assembly
 
United States companies that import from China complex products assembled from a variety of parts, components, materials and subassemblies should consider the possibility of performing (or having performed) final assembly of those complex products in a third country. If the final assembly operations performed in the third country are sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” of the Chinese origin parts, components, materials and/or subassemblies from which the final product is assembled, then the country of origin of the final product will be that third country, and the Section 301 duties will not be applicable (even if the majority of the parts, components, etc. used in the final product are of Chinese origin). Thus, section 134.1(b) of the CBP Regulations, 19 C.F.R. §134.1(b), provides that the “country of origin” of an imported product:
 
means the country of manufacture, production or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the United States. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the country of origin within the meaning of this part.
 
In pursuing this Section 301 duty mitigation strategy, the critical issue is whether the assembly or processing activity in the third country is sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” of that product. A product assembled from various parts and components will be deemed to have undergone a “substantial transformation” if, as a result of a manufacturing or assembly process, it has been transformed into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character or use distinct from that of the parts and components from which it was so transformed. See 19 U.S.C. § 2518 (country of origin standard for purposes of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979); 19 C.F.R. § 134.35. The application and interpretation of that subjective “substantial transformation” standard is informed by a series of country of origin rulings issued by CBP, under the country of origin marking rules of section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and the U.S. Government procurement rules of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979. In determining whether a manufacturing or assembly operation results in such a “substantial transformation” in a particular case, CBP examines the totality of circumstances surrounding the manufacturing or assembly process, including:
 
  – The complexity of the manufacturing or assembly process.
  – The number of worker hours required to perform the manufacturing or assembly process, and the level of skill and training required by workers to perform that process.
  – Whether complex and sophisticated equipment is used in the manufacturing or assembly process.
  – The number of discrete steps required to complete the manufacturing or assembly process.
  – The cost of labor and materials used in the manufacturing or assembly process, in relation to the overall cost of labor and materials used in all countries for the complete manufacture and assembly of the products (i.e., the local value added).
  – Whether individual components (e.g., of Chinese origin) lose their individual identities through the manufacturing or assembly process, and whether those individual components are functioning devices before being subject to further manufacturing or assembly.
  – Whether the imported components (e.g., from China) undergo a change in tariff classification when manufactured or assembled into the finished product.
 
There has been considerable confusion about the determination of the country of origin of products assembled in Mexico from parts and components of Chinese origin. Sections 102.0 and 134.1(b) of the CBP Regulations indicate that the country of origin of products imported into the United States from another NAFTA country (i.e., Canada or Mexico) is to be determined on the basis of section 102.11 of the CBP Regulations, and the NAFTA rules of origin. In a September 13, 2018 ruling, however, CBP held that, for Section 301 duty purposes, the country of origin of products assembled in Mexico must be determined on the basis of the “substantial transformation” rule described above. See HQ H300226 (September 13, 2018). That CBP ruling
creates the rather unusual situation in which a product
assembled in Mexico from Chinese origin parts and components:
 
  (i) may meet the NAFTA rules of origin for marking purposes (i.e., it has undergone the requisite tariff classification shift); but    
  (ii) has not undergone a “substantial transformation” in Mexico. In those circumstances, the product, when imported into the United States, would have to be marked with Mexico as the country of origin, in order to comply with United States country of origin marking requirements, but would have to be declared as a “product of China” for Section 301 duty purposes.
 
There may also be some confusion as to the circumstances in which the loading of operating system software onto an electronic device is sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” of that device. For purposes of developing a Section 301 duty mitigation strategy, the loading of operating system software onto an electronic device may be particularly important where the hardware portion of the device is manufactured and assembled in China, and then the hardware is shipped to a third country where the operating system software is loaded onto the device. In those circumstances, the operating system software may be essential to the functioning of the device, and may constitute a very large portion (perhaps most) of the total value of the finished device.
 
In its decision in Data General Corp. v. United States, 4 CIT 182 (1982), the Court of International Trade held that the programming of an electronic device (in that case a programmable read only memory chip or PROM) constituted a substantial transformation of that device for country of origin purposes. In reliance upon that Data General decision, it may have been assumed that the downloading of operating system software onto an electronic device was sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” of the device. That approach, however, was rejected by CBP in HQ H241177 (December 10, 2013). In that ruling, CBP confirmed that the “programming” of an electronic device may constitute a “substantial transformation” of that device, but held that the downloading of software to a device does not equate with “programming” that device. To the contrary, for substantial transformation purposes, programming of an electronic device in a particular country will be deemed to occur only if (i) the software is developed and written in that country; and (ii) the software is then downloaded to the electronic device in that same country. [FN/8]
 
It should be emphasized that simple assembly or minor processing, as those concepts are defined in section 102.1 of the CBP Regulations, 19 C.F.R. §102.1, will not be sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” for United States country of origin purposes. For that reason, United States importers that procure products from offshore suppliers or contract manufacturers should view with a good deal of skepticism “facile” solutions that may be offered by those suppliers or contractors to change the country of origin of their products from China to a third country, in order to avoid the impact of the Section 301 duties. Any “substantial transformation” analysis to determine the country of origin of a particular product must be performed on a case-by-case, product-by-product basis with reference to all of the relevant parts and circumstances, especially a detailed consideration of the third country manufacturing or assembly processes.
 
———-
  [FN/6] Section 102.1(o) of the CBP Regulations, 19 C.F.R. § 102.1(a) defines “simple assembly” as, “the fitting together of five or fewer parts all of which are foreign (excluding fasteners such as screws, bolts, etc.) by bolting, gluing, soldering, sewing or by other means without more than minor processing.” Even assembly processes that involve more than “simple assembly,” as defined in that section 102.1(o) of the CBP Regulations may not meet the “substantial transformation” standard for country of origin purposes.
  [FN/7] Incorrectly declaring the country of origin of imported merchandise for the purpose of avoiding Section 301 duties may constitute “customs fraud” under section 592 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. §1592. A fraudulent violation of section 592 is subject to a civil penalty in an amount equal to the total value of the imported merchandise. For purposes of section 592, the CBP Regulations define ‘fraud’ as follows: “A violation is determined to be fraudulent if a material false statement, omission or act in connection with the transaction was committed (or omitted) knowingly, i.e., was done voluntarily and intentionally, as established by clear and convincing evidence.” 19 C.F.R. Part 171, Appendix B, ¶ (C)(3).
  [FN/8] Depending on the relevant parts and circumstances, the downloading of operating system software in a particular country, together with significant hardware assembly operations performed in that country, may be sufficient to constitute a “substantial transformation” of the final product from the parts and components from which it is assembled. See, e.g., HQ H282390 (January 30, 2018).

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

(Source:
Volkov Law Group Blog, 24 Jan 2019. Reprinted by permission.)
 
* Author: Michael Volkov, Esq., Volkov Law Group,
mvolkov@volkovlaw.com, 240-505-1992.
 
Businesses understand that their trade secrets are valuable assets. However, businesses fail to understand how vulnerable their trade secrets are to misappropriation and straight-out theft.
 
The US Justice Department has been beefing up its enforcement in this area, relying on new and existing prosecution and investigation tools.
 
Companies have to act with vigilance by protecting their confidential and sensitive trade secrets, and aggressively prosecuting civil misappropriation and referring criminal cases when appropriate. This requires careful calibration and design of data storage security requirements.
 
The Justice Department has been aggressively prosecuting Chinese economic espionage cases. The Justice Department’s enforcement efforts are part of the Administration’s tough trade policy against China.
 
In the last quarter of 2018, the Justice Department brought four separate indictments involving Chinese economic espionage schemes. In the last case of 2018, the Justice Department charged two companies – a Chinese and a Taiwan company, along with three individuals for trade secret theft, conspiracy, economic espionage and related crimes.
 
The indictment alleges that the defendant stole trade secrets from Micron Technologies relating to the research and development of dynamic random-access memory (DRAM), a technology used to store data in electronic devices. China has identified DRAM technology as a national priority because Chinese companies have not been able to develop similar technology.
 
The Chinese and Taiwan companies recruited former Micron employees who allegedly downloaded and stole Micron information relating to eight different trade secrets (totaling almost 1000 files). The charged companies used the trade secrets to advance the development of DRAM technology products and production techniques, including filing of five patents containing the same or very similar technology set forth in Micron’s trade secrets.
 
Along with the criminal case, the Department of Commerce added the offending companies to its Entity List and the Justice Department filed a companion civil case seeking an injunction to prevent the companies from exporting, selling or importing to the US any product containing DRAM manufactured by the companies.
 
In a separate matter, on December 20, 2019, the Justice Department arrested an engineer who stole trade secrets from his employer in Oklahoma and planned to transfer the information to a competitor in China. The allegation is the tenth case brought against Chinese officials or companies for industrial espionage.
 
A supervisor at Phillips 66 became suspicious when Hongjin Tan, an employee, gave his notice and stated he was moving back to China. Tan’s resignation triggered an automatic revocation of his access to company data and a review of his recent activity. The review revealed that Tan had accessed hundreds of files relating to a valuable and unique product produced by Phillips 66 and its plans for marketing the product in China. Tan used an unauthorized personal USB memory stick to download and copy of the files.
 
A subsequent FBI search of Tan’s work computer located a work agreement between Tan and a Chinese company offering him compensation for the sensitive trade information he planned to bring with him to China. Tan started to steal sensitive trade information weeks before his announced departure.
 
The recent prosecutions underscore the importance of companies taking affirmative steps to protect their trade secrets and sensitive information. Companies have to classify, control access, block transmission and exporting of sensitive information, and actively monitor sensitive files. To preserve the ability to prosecute such cases, companies have to classify sensitive documents and designate them as sensitive. Access to documents and files have to be controlled as a way to prevent theft. Passive monitoring techniques have to be replaced with active monitoring so that companies learn real-time that files may be improperly transferred. To reinforce these protections, companies have to adopt important policies regarding access to confidential trade information and secure appropriate protections through non-disclosure agreements with its employees and third-party partners.

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

TEEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

(Source: Danielle Hatch,
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com)
* What: Cornerstones of ITAR Compliance: Registration, Empowered Officials & Exemptions
* When: March 6, 2019; 1:00 p.m. (EST)
* Where: Webinar
* Sponsor: Export Compliance Training Institute (ECTI)
* ECTI Speaker: Scott Gearity
* Register: Here or Danielle Hatch, 540-433-3977, danielle@learnexportcompliance.com.

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

TE_a311. 
List of Approaching Events: 96 Events Posted This Week, Including 12 New Events
(Sources: Editor and Event Sponsors)

Published every Friday or last publication day of the week, o
ur overview of Approaching Events is organized to list c
ontinuously available training, training events, s
eminars & conferences, and 
webinars. 
 
Please, submit your event announcement to Alexander Witt, Events & Jobs Editor (email: 
awitt@fullcirclecompliance.eu
), composed in the below format:
 
# DATE: LOCATION; “EVENT TITLE”; EVENT SPONSOR; WEBLINK; CONTACT DETAILS (email and/or phone number)
 

#” = New or updated listing  

 
Continuously Available Training
 
* E-Seminars: “US Export Controls” / “Defense Trade Controls“; Export Compliance Training Institute; danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 

* Webinar: ”
Company-Wide US Export Controls Awareness Program“; Export Compliance Training Institute;
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 

* E-Seminars: “ITAR/EAR Awareness“; Export Compliance Solutions;
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
* Online: “Simplified Network Application Process Redesign (SNAP-R)“; Commerce/BIS; 202-482-2227
* E-Seminars: “Webinars On-Demand Library“; Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.
* Online: “International Trade Webinars“; Global Training Center
*
 
Online: “On-Demand Webinars“; “General Training“; Center for Development of Security Excellence; Defense Security Service (DSS)
* Online: “ACE Reports Training and User Guide“; DHS/CBP

* Online: ”
Increase Your International Sales – Webinar Archive“; U.S. Commercial Service

* Web Form: “Compliance Snapshot Assessment“; Commonwealth Trading Partners (CTP)
* Online: “
Customs Broker Exam Prep Course
“; The Exam Center
 
 
Seminars and Conferences

 
 
 


* Jan 28-Apr 8: Wilmington, CA; “
Customs Brokers License Exam Course
;” FTA

* Jan 29; New York, NY; “
Trade and Customs Update
“; KPMG LLP


Jan 29: Rotterdam, The Netherlands; “
Awareness training Export Control, Dual-use en Sancties
“; FENEX

* Jan 29-30: Toronto, ON; “U.S. Export & Re-Export Compliance for Canadian Operations;” The Canadian Institute

* Jan 30-31, 2019: Pittsburgh, PA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Jan 30-31: Washington, DC; “
5th National Forum on CFIUS
;” American Conference Institute (ACI)

#
Jan 31: New York; “
Avoiding Trump’s Tariffs New York City Seminar
“;
Gonzalez Rolon Valdespino & Rodriguez, LLC;

*
 
Feb 5; Bruchem, the Netherlands; “
Designing an Internal Compliance Program for Export Controls & Sanctions
“; Full Circle Compliance 

* Feb 6-7: Scottsdale, AZ;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
*
 
Feb 6-7: Washington , D.C.; “International Technology Transfers, Cloud Computing & Deemed Export Compliance“; American Conference Institute

* Feb 11-12: Orlando, FL; “
Boot Camp: Achieving ITAR/EAR Compliance
“; Export Compliance Solutions (ECS)

* Feb 12-13: Washington, D.C.; “
2019 Legislative Summit
“; National Association of Foreign Trade Zones (NAFTZ)
 

* Feb 13: Plymouth, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners course
“; UK/DIT

* Feb 13: Southampton; “
UK Export Control Awareness Breakfast
“; Hampshire Chamber of Commerce, ECJU, and Trethowans LLP

* Feb 14: Plymouth, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT
* Feb 14: Plymouth, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT

* Feb 18-21: Orlando, FL; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
“; ECTI

* Feb 20-22: Houston, TX; “
Advanced Topics in Customs Compliance 2019 Conference
“; Braumiller;

#
Feb 20: Miami, FL; “
ABC’s of Protecting Your Brand
“; Diaz Trade Consulting

* Feb 26-27; Chicago, IL; “
CTPAT Training
“; SCS America

* Feb 26-27: Miami, FL; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Feb 28; Liverpool, UK; “
You Can Export: How to Manage Agents & Distributors
“; UK/DIT


Mar 4-6: Savannah, GA; “
2019 Winter Back to Basics Conference
“; SIA

* Mar 5-6: San Diego, CA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

*
Mar 5-7:  Orlando, FL; “
‘Partnering for Compliance’ Export/Import Control Training and Education Program
“; Partnering for Compliance

* Mar 6-7: San Diego, CA;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Mar 7-8: Dallas, TX; “
CTPAT Training
“; SCS America

*
 Mar 9: Orlando, FL; “
Customs/Import Boot Camp
;” Partnering for Compliance

* Mar 11: Hoofddorp, NL; “
Export Control, Dual-use en Sancties
“; Fenex

* Mar 12-14: Dallas, TX;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
* Mar 12-14: Dallas, TX;

How to Build an Export Compliance Program
“; Commerce/BIS

* Mar 13: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners course
“; UK/DIT
* Mar 14: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT
* Mar 14: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT

* Mar 18-21: Las Vegas, NV; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
“; ECTI

#
Mar 20: Miami, FL; “
CHINA TARIFFS/AD/CVD 101
“; Diaz Trade Consulting

* Mar 26-27: Scottsdale, AZ; “
Managing ITAR/EAR Complexities
“; Export Compliance Solutions
 

* Mar 27-28: San Francisco, CA; “Global Encryption, Cloud & Cyber Trade Controls;” American Conference Institute

* Apr 1: Eindhoven, NL; “
Export Control, Dual-use en Sancties
“; Fenex

* Apr 1-4: Washington, DC;ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar“; ECTI

* Apr 3-4: Denver, CO;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Apr 4-5; Miami, FL; “
CTPAT Training
“; SCS America

*
 
Apr 9: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “Awareness Course U.S. Export Controls: ITAR & EAR from a Non-U.S. Perspective“; Full Circle Compliance

#
Apr 17: Miami, FL; “
CBP COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT
“; Diaz Trade Consulting
#
Apr 17-18; Miramar, FL; “
11th Maritime Forwarding, Freight Logistics & Global Chain Supply Workshop
“; ABS Consulting;

* Apr 23-24: Portsmouth, NH;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
Apr 25: Portsmouth, NH;

Technology Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

*
 Apr 30-May 1: Nashville, TN: “Mastering ITAR/EAR Challenges“; Export Compliance Solutions (ECS);

* May 2-3: Washington DC; “Economic Sanctions Enforcement and Compliance;” American Conference Institute

* May 5-7: Savannah, GA; “2019 Spring Seminar“; National Association of Foreign Trade Zones (NAFTZ)

May 6-7: Atlanta, GA; “
2019 Spring Conference
“; SIA
*
 
May 7: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “An Introduction to EU / Dutch Dual-Use and Military Export Controls“; Full Circle Compliance

* Jun 5-6: Seattle, WA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

*
 
Jun 10: Cleveland, OH; “
Letters of Credit
“; Global Training Center
*
 
Jun 11: Cleveland, OH; “
Export Doc & Proc
“; Global Training Center
*
 
Jun 12: Cleveland, OH; “
Tariff Classificatio
n“; Global Training Center
*
 
Jun 13: Cleveland, OH; “
NAFTA Rules of Origin
“; Global Training Center
*
 
Jun 14: Cleveland, OH; “
Incoterms® 2010 Rules
“; Global Training 
* Jun 17-20: San Diego, CA; “ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls“; ECTI

Jul 8 – 10: National Harbour, MD; “
2019 Summer Back to Basics Conference
“; SIA

*
Jul 10-11: Seattle, WA: “Boot Camp: Achieving ITAR/EAR Compliance“; Export Compliance Solutions (ECS);

* Aug 20-21: Cincinnati, OH;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Aug 20-21: Milpitas, CA;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“;
Commerce/BIS
* Aug 22: Milpitas, CA:

Encryption Controls
“;
Commerce/BIS

* Sep 8-11: Chicago, IL; “2019 Annual Conference and Exposition“; National Association of Foreign Trade Zones (NAFTZ)

* Sep 16-19: Austin, TX; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls (Sep 18-19) Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977


Sep 17-19: Annapolis, MD; “
The ECS 2nd Annual ITAR/EAR Symposium
“; ECS

* Sep 30 – Oct 3; Amsterdam, NL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR/OFAC Commercial and Military Controls
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977

*
 
Oct 1: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective“; Full Circle Compliance

* Oct 14-17; Columbus, OH; “
University Export Controls Seminar
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977


Oct 28-29: Washington D.C.; “
2019 Fall Advanced Conference
“; SIA

* Oct 28-31; Phoenix, AZ; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977
* Nov 11-14; Washington, DC; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977

*
 
Nov 26: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (EAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective“; Full Circle Compliance
* Dec 4-5: New York, NY; “10th Annual New York Forum on Economic Sanctions;” American Conference Institute

* Dec 9-12; Miami, FL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977

 

 
Webinars 


 

* Jan 31: Webinar: “Safeguarding Your First Sale Savings in a Section 301 Enforcement Environment;” Sandler Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.

* Jan 31: Webinar: “
The Top 6 Global Supply Chain Expectations for 2019
;” Amber Road

#
Feb 5: Webinar: “
Navigating the challenge of changing global sanctions regimes
“; Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

#
Feb 28: Webinar: “The Fundamentals of Product Classification“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

 

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a112
. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)

* Robert Burns (25 Jan 1759 – 21 Jul 1796; was a Scottish poet and lyricist. He is widely regarded as the national poet of Scotland and is celebrated worldwide.)
  – “Suspense is worse than disappointment.”
  – “I pick my favourite quotations and store them in my mind as ready armour, offensive or defensive, amid the struggle of this turbulent existence.”
 
Helvetius (Claude Adrien Helvetius; 26 Jan 1715 – 26 Dec 1771; was a French philosopher and littérateur. His magnum opus, a work called De l’esprit (On Mind), claimed that all human faculties are attributes of mere physical sensation, and that the only real motive is self-interest, therefore there is no good and evil, only competitive pleasures. Its atheistic, utilitarian and egalitarian doctrines raised a public outcry, and the Sorbonne publicly burned it in 1759, forcing Helvétius to issue several retractions.)
  – Genius is nothing but continued attention.”
 
Friday’s proverbs:
* The most beautiful fig may contain a worm.
 | Zulu Proverb
* Change yourself and fortune will change.
 | Portuguese Proverb
* Whoever gossips to you will gossip about you.
 | Spanish Proverb
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

EN_a213. 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.
 

*
DHS CUSTOMS REGULATIONS
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.  Implemented by Dep’t of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs & Border Protection.
  – Last Amendment:
14 Jan 2019: 84 FR 112-116: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Certain Archaeological and Ecclesiastical Ethnological Material from Bulgaria; and 84 FR 107-112: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Certain Archaeological Material From China.
 

DOC EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR)
: 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774. Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, Bureau of Industry & Security.
  – Last Amendment: 20 Dec 2018: 
83 FR 65292-65294
: Control of Military Electronic Equipment and Other Items the President Determines No Longer Warrant Control Under the United States Munitions List (USML); Correction [Concerning ECCN 7A005 and ECCN 7A105.]
 
*
DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR)
: 15 CFR Part 30.  Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau.
  – 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 (1 Jan 2019) 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
.  
 

DOD NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM)
: DoD 5220.22-M. Implemented by Dep’t of Defense.
  – 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
.) 
 

DOE ASSISTANCE TO FOREIGN ATOMIC ENERGY ACTIVITIES
: 10 CFR Part 810; Implemented by Dep’t of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
  – Last Amendment: 23 Feb 2015:

80 FR 9359
, comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. This rule also identifies destinations with respect to which most assistance would be generally authorized and destinations that would require a specific authorization by the Secretary of Energy.
 

DOE EXPORT AND IMPORT OF NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL
; 10 CFR Part 110; Implemented by Dep’t of Energy, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
  – Last Amendment: 20 Nov 2018, 10 CFR 110.6, Re-transfers.
 

DOJ ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS
: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War.  Implemented by Dep’t of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives.
  – Last Amendment: 26 Dec 2018: 
83 FR 66514-66554
: Bump-Stock-Type Devices
 

DOS INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR)
: 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130. Implemented by Dep’t of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls.
  – 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: 1 Jan 2019) 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.
 
*
DOT FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR)
: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders. 
Implemented by Dep’t of Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
  – Last Amendment: 15 Nov 2018: 
83 FR 57308-57318
: Democratic Republic of the Congo Sanctions Regulations
  
*
USITC HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA)
, 1 Jan 2018: 19 USC 1202 Annex. Implemented by U.S. International Trade Commission. (“HTS” and “HTSA” are often seen as abbreviations for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated, shortened versions of “HTSUSA”.)
  – Last Amendment: 19 Dec 2018: 
Harmonized System Update (HSU) 1820
, containing 19,061 ABI records and 3,393 harmonized tariff records.
  – HTS codes for AES are available 
here
.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available 
here
.

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

EN_a314
. 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 6,500 readers of changes to defense and high-tech trade laws and regulations. We check the following sources daily: Federal Register, Congressional Record, Commerce/AES, Commerce/BIS, DHS/CBP, 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