20-0330 Monday “Daily Bugle”

20-0330 Monday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share 
this subscription link
Monday, 30 March 2020

[No items of interest today.]  

  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition  
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. DHS/CBP: “GUIDANCE: Section 301 Tranche 3 – $200B Eleventh Round of Product Exclusions from China”
  4. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  5. Australia DEC Announces Defence Export Controls Information Regarding COVID-19
  6. EU Amends Restrictive Measures Concerning Libya
  7. Luxembourg Publishes ICP Guidelines
  1. STR: “Customs Changes, Tariff Reduction Among Measures Responding to COVID-19”
  2. The Washington Post: “As Coronavirus Cases Explode in Iran, U.S. Sanctions Hinder Its Access to Drugs and Medical Equipment”
  1. Arent Fox: “Reference Guide: Worldwide Export Controls on Face Masks and Other Medical Personal Protective Equipment”
  2. Holland & Hart: “Beware of Export Control Compliance in COVID-19 Teleworking Environment”
  3. Steptoe: “What You Need to Know About the Impact of COVID-19 on International Trade” (Part II of III)
  4. TLR: “Force Majeure May Be Invoked on Cargo”  
  1. Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 122 Jobs Available – 20 New Job Openings This Week
  1. ECS Presents “ITAR/EAR Boot Camp: Achieving Compliance” on 7-8 Jul in Seattle, WA 
  2. FCC Academy: U.S Export Controls: ITAR, EAR, and FMS  
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Find the Latest Amendments Here. 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 
  4. Submit Your Job Opening and View All Job Openings 
  5. Submit Your Event and View All Approaching Events 

Are You Keeping Up to Date with the Latest Regulations?

Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR and Bartlett’s Annotated FTR are Word documents to down-

load to your laptop to keep you updated on the latest amendments, and contain over 800 footnotes of section history, key cases, practice tips & tricks, and extensive Tables of Contents.
The ITAR amendments to the ITAR that took effect on 9 March and 25 March are included in the current edition of the BITAR.  Subscribers receive updated editions every time the regulations are amended (usually within 24 hours) so you will always have the current versions of the regulations. Subscribe to the BITAR now to guarantee you have an up-to-date ITAR!   

Price: $300
Offer: $275

Buy Here


Price: $200


  Price: $100



[No items of interest today.] 

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


Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Editions 
(Source: Federal Register)
(No items of interest today.)

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

Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)

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

DHS/CBP: “GUIDANCE: Section 301 Tranche 3 – $200B Eleventh Round of Product Exclusions from China”

(Source: DHS/CBP)
On March 26, 2020, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) published Federal Register (FR) Notice 85 FR 17158 announcing the decision to grant the eleventh round of certain exclusion requests from the Section 301 duty related to goods from China ($200B Action – Tranche 3).
These product exclusions relate to the imposed additional duties announced in 83 FR 47974 on Chinese goods with an annual trade value of approximately $200 billion. The product exclusions announced in this notice retroactively apply as of the September 24, 2018 effective date of the $200 billion action (Tranche 3), and will extend through August 7, 2020.
The exclusions are available for any product that meets the description as set out in the Annex to 85 FR 17158, (see attachment), regardless of whether the importer filed an exclusion request. Further, the scope of each exclusion is governed by the scope of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 10-digit headings and product descriptions in the Annex; not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion. For ease of reference, a link to the entire Federal Register Notice is embedded in this message.
The functionality for the acceptance of the eleventh round of products of China excluded from Section 301 duties will be available in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) as of 7am eastern standard time, March 31, 2020.
Instructions for importers, brokers and filers on submitting entries to CBP containing products granted exclusions by the USTR from the Section 301 measures as set out in 85 FR 17158 are set out below.
* In addition to reporting the regular Chapters 03, 05, 12, 16, 28, 29, 38, 39, 40, 42, 48, 51, 55, 59, 60, 68, 69, 70, 73, 74, 76, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 90, and 94 classifications of the HTSUS for the imported merchandise, importers shall report the HTSUS classification 9903.88.43 (Articles, the product of China, as provided for in U.S. note 20(vv) to this subchapter, each covered by an exclusion granted by the USTR for imported merchandise subject to the exclusion).
* Importers shall not submit the corresponding Chapter 99 HTS number for the Section 301 duties when HTS 9903.88.43 is submitted.
Imports which have been granted a product exclusion from the Section 301 measures, and which are not subject to the Section 301 duties, are not covered by the Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) provisions of the Section 301 Federal Register notices, but instead are subject to the FTZ provisions in 19 CFR part 146.
Duty exclusions granted by the USTR are retroactive for imports on or after the initial effective date of September 24, 2018. To request a refund of Section 301 duties paid on previous imports of products granted duty exclusions by the USTR, importers may file a Post Summary Correction (PSC) if within the PSC filing timeframe. If the entry is beyond the PSC filing timeframe, importers may protest the liquidation if within the protest filing timeframe.
Reminder: When importers, brokers, and/or filers are submitting an entry summary in which a heading or subheading in Chapter 99 is claimed on imported merchandise, refer them to CSMS 39587858 (Entry Summary Order of Reporting for Multiple HTS when 98 or 99 HTS are required).
For ease of reference, a summary of Section 301 duties and product exclusion notifications as well as the Annex to 85 FR 17158 are attached.
For more information related to the eleventh round of products of China excluded from Section 301 duties, please refer to 85 FR 17158, issued March 26, 2020.
Questions from the importing community concerning ACE entry rejections involving product exclusions should be referred to their CBP Client Representative. Questions related to Section 301 entry-filing requirements, please refer to CSMS message #40969690 (Information on Trade Remedy Questions and Resources) https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDHSCBP/bulletins/27125da

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

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

Australia DEC Announces Defence Export Controls Information Regarding COVID-19

(Source: Australia DEC, 30 Mar 2020) [Excerpts]
Defence Export Controls (DEC) is an essential service and we will continue to operate. We can still be contacted by phone on 1800 66 10 66 and via email at ExportControls@defence.gov.au
In line with Government directives and advice on social distancing, DEC has adopted new ways of working to ensure we can continue to process your applications. As you can appreciate, this may mean there is some disruption or impact on processing timeframes. Our referral agencies are in a similar situation and experiencing similar disruption, which means if your application is complex there may be further implications for processing times. DEC will endeavour to minimise this where possible, but we ask for your understanding throughout this process.
If your application is urgent we ask that you outline your particular circumstances and we will endeavour to meet your requirements where possible.

DEC appreciates the importance of issuing permits in a timely manner to assist in mitigating some of the economic impact of COVID-19, so please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions or concerns. …

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

EU Council Amends Decision Concerning Restrictive Measures in View of the Situation in Libya
* Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/458 of 27 March 2020 amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya.

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

Luxembourg Publishes ICP Guidelines

Luxembourg Government, 23 Mar 2020) [Excerpts]
The internal compliance program (PIC) allows companies to use a risk-based approach to comply with export controls.
The PIC creates a valuable knowledge base for internal compliance and export staff and should serve as a working basis for audits and risk assessments.
Find the guidelines for Luxembourgish exporters in a
brochure made available by the Ministry of the Economy.

Also find a model of product classification sheet. This document indicates the different steps that must be followed during the classification process. 

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


STR: “Customs Changes, Tariff Reduction Among Measures Responding to COVID-19”

(Source: Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, 30 Mar 2020) [Excerpts]
Countries around the world are taking a variety of measures to ensure adequate access to and supplies of medical goods to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. …
Imposing Export Restrictions
. The European Union has introduced measures that prohibit the export of personal protective equipment (e.g., masks, protective glasses, and garments) without prior regulatory approval. India has restricted exports of 26 pharmaceutical components as well as medicines and vitamins made from them. …
Reducing Tariffs
. The U.S. has removed some of its Section 301 tariffs on medical goods from China, but the Trump administration has come under pressure to remove or suspend others as well. …
Revising Import Procedures
. Most countries regulate imports of medical goods for public health and safety reasons, but some have taken steps to streamline their customs procedures to address issues that could delay access to medical goods. …

The Washington Post: “As Coronavirus Cases Explode in Iran, U.S. Sanctions Hinder Its Access to Drugs and Medical Equipment”
(Source: The Washington Post, 29 Mar 2020) [Excerpts]
Sweeping U.S. sanctions are hampering Iranian efforts to import medicine and other medical supplies to confront one of the largest coronavirus outbreaks in the world, health workers and sanctions experts say.
The broad U.S. restrictions on Iran’s banking system and the embargo on its oil exports have limited Tehran’s ability to finance and purchase essential items from abroad, including drugs as well as the raw materials and equipment needed to manufacture medicines domestically. …
The tough measures are part of a U.S. “maximum pressure campaign” against Iran, adopted by the Trump administration after it unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal Iran had signed with world powers. …
Iranian leaders have come under fire for what critics say was a botched response to the outbreak, including initially refusing to quarantine affected areas or close religious shrines, measures that probably allowed the deadly pathogen to spread. …


Arent Fox: “Reference Guide: Worldwide Export Controls on Face Masks and Other Medical Personal Protective Equipment”

Arent Fox Updates, 27 Mar 2020) [Excerpts]
* Author:
Kay Georgi, Esq., Arent Fox, 1- 202-857-6293
As the COVID-19 pandemic has expanded exponentially, so too has the demand by hospitals and other healthcare providers for masks and other medical personal protective equipment (PPE) to protect doctors, nurses, and other healthcare workers. A number of governments have imposed export controls on the export of a variety of medical (and industrial) PPE. In other words, if you want to import face masks into the US from a European country, you need a license to export them from the EU first.   

Countries Committed to Keeping Medical PPE Supply Chains Open

Notably, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Myanmar, New Zealand, and Singapore have released a statement committing “to keep supply chains open and remove any existing trade-restrictive measures on essential goods, especially medical supplies, in the face of the Covid-19 crisis, at this time.”

International trade lawyers from law firms around the world have cooperated to create a chart so that persons seeking to source medical PPE have information regarding which countries have laws restricting the export of medical PPE and how to get licenses. The chart below explains which medical PPE is restricted by whom, and provides the law as well as a law firm that can help. As a caveat, we want to be sure you are aware that the laws and guidance in this area are changing day by day, hour by hour, so the chart is intended as a helpful reference, but not intended to replace obtaining up to the date legal guidance from local counsel.


What the Chart Shows 

For select countries, the chart shows what medical PPE items are subject to export controls, whether you can obtain a license or whether exports are simply prohibited, where to find the applicable law and other relevant links, and the name and contact information for a lawyer in the country who can help.

The chart also shows a few key countries that do NOT have export controls on their medical PPE and therefore can be used as sources for medical PPE provided the laws do not change: China, Hong Kong, and Japan.  . . .
* * * * * * * * * *


Holland & Hart: “Beware of Export Control Compliance in COVID-19 Teleworking Environment”
Holland & Hart: “Beware of Export Control Compliance in COVID-19 Teleworking Environment”
(Source: Holland & Hart LLP, 25 Mar 2020)
* Principal Author: David Glynnd, Esq., 1-303-295-8071, Holland & Hart LLP
What is the issue?
As increasingly more employees telework and work remotely outside the office, it is important for organizations to ensure export compliance remains at the forefront. Sometimes, employees may be unaware that U.S. export controls continue to apply when working outside the office. Teleworking presents potential risks for inadvertent unauthorized transfers of technology and technical data by employees who may not fully understand the export controls under federal law on such transfers and the multiple means by which such transfers may occur.
Issues to Consider
1) Working Remotely and Exchanging Technical Specifications about a Product with a U.S. Person located outside the United States or with a Non-U.S. Person located anywhere:
Questions: If I share from the U.S. technical specifications of a product or operating software for a product with a person outside the United States, who is an employee of my company or an independent contractor hired by my company, might I require prior approval from the U.S. Government? Yes.
Might export restrictions under federal law apply to such a transfer to a non-U.S. Person within the United States? Yes.
U.S. export control regulations govern transfers of controlled technology, technical data, and software, including but not limited to, physical shipments or transfers and electronic transmissions of the controlled technology, technical data, and software.
The principal U.S. export control regulations include (a) the U.S. Export Administration Regulations (the “EAR”) administered and enforced by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) and (b) the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”) enforced and administered by the U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (“DDTC”). The EAR generally regulates the export of “dual use” goods, software, and technology, i.e., items which have principally civil application, but which may have military or other application. The ITAR regulates the export of certain defense and military related items and services, i.e., “defense articles” and “defense services.”
In addition, U.S. economic sanctions regulations and executive orders administered and enforced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) may function, in effect, as export controls. The U.S. Government also maintains more specialized export control regulations administered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy related to exports or imports of nuclear material or equipment and exports of technology and services for the development, production, or use of nuclear reactors, equipment and material.
(2) Determining whether an Export of Information-Technical Data or Software-is Controlled or Regulated by Federal Law:
Question: What are the key factors to determine whether a U.S. Government license or authorization is required to transfer technical data, technology, or software to a foreign person either within the U.S. or outside the U.S.?
The first step in determining whether a license or authorization may be required is to determine whether the technical data, technology, or software is subject to the ITAR or EAR. If subject to the ITAR, prior authorization generally must be obtained from DDTC to transfer technical data, technology, or software to a foreign person either within the U.S. or outside the U.S. BIS license requirements are dependent upon an item’s technical characteristics, the destination, end user, and end-use of the item.
In general, the key factors to consider when determining whether a license or authorization is required are:
Does your conduct or transfer of an item or information constitute an “export”? * What technical data, technology, or software are you exporting? Is such technical data, technology, or software subject to the ITAR or the EAR? If so, within which category of the ITAR’s U.S. Munitions List or within which Export Control Classification Number of the EAR’s Commerce Control List does the technical data, technology, or software fall? * To what foreign nation is the technical data, technology, or software going? If the technical data, technology or software will remain in the U.S., will a non-U.S. person receive or have access to it? * Who will receive it? * What will the technical data, technology, or software be used for?
(3) Maintenance of Controlled Technical Data, Technology, or Software Outside the United States
Question: If my company stores technical data, technology, or software in the “cloud” or a computer server outside the U.S., might transfers to such storage and maintenance of our technical data, technology, or software outside the U.S. be considered an “export” controlled by U.S. law and requiring a U.S. Government license or authorization? Yes.
Uploading data to a cloud storage or computer server outside the United States, except as noted below, is generally considered an export and may require a U.S. Government license or authorization. In addition to possible U.S. government licensing requirement raised by the transfer of data to a non-U.S. computer server, the use of a computer server in certain foreign nations or under the control of certain non-U.S. persons may present compliance risks and may be prohibited by federal statute.
However, under the EAR and ITAR (effective March 25, 2020), the transfer of technology and technical data outside of the United States using end-to-end encryption is not considered an export provided that the technology and technical data is encrypted in accordance with certain specified criteria in the applicable regulation (See, 15 C.F.R. Section 734.18; 22 C.F.R. Section 120.54(a)(5).
(4) Medical Research and Testing:
Question: If I am involved in medical research or medical testing, are there export controls under federal law applicable to the transfer or export of medical samples, such as a coronavirus / SARS-CoV-2 sample? Yes.
In a report published on February 7, 2020, the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) classified the causative agent of COVID-19 respiratory disease as SARS-CoV-2 virus. BIS currently considers SARS-CoV-2 to be distinct from the SARS-CoV virus and as such will continue to classify the SARS-CoV-2 and its specific genetic elements as EAR99. Assuming that no prohibited use or user is involved, an export license is generally not required for export of this virus or its genetic elements to most destinations outside the United States.
(5) Enforcement and Penalties:
Question – Are there civil and criminal penalties applicable to violations of these federal regulations and laws? Yes.
Both violations of the ITAR and EAR may be subject to criminal prosecution and administrative or civil penalties. For each, a criminal violation may be subject to 20 years imprisonment, a $1 million fine, and additional penalties, including debarment and denial of export privileges. Administrative penalties for a violation of the ITAR may include a monetary penalty of up to $1.18 million, debarment, and other penalties. Administrative penalties for a violation of the EAR may reach up to $300,000 per violation or twice the value of the transaction, whichever is greater. Violators may also be subject to the denial of their export privileges.
See the following information provided by the U.S. Government concerning its investigations and enforcement actions relating to export control violations:
Bureau of Industry of Security (BIS)
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)
U.S. Department of Justice
(6) Status of Operations
Question – Have the DDTC and BIS notified the public of possible delays in processing license applications or other regulatory activity due to the COVID-19 pandemic? Yes.
Due to reduced work forces and employees working from home, DDTC and BIS have informed the public to anticipate delays in licensing processing, commodity jurisdiction and general correspondence requests, and other approval requests.
Information on Status of Operations:

Steptoe: “What You Need to Know About the Impact of COVID-19 on International Trade” (Part II of III)
, 25 Mar 2020) [Part III will be published tomorrow]
* Principal Author:
Eric C. Emerson
, Esq., 1-202-429-8076,
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
How is COVID-19 affecting US international trade negotiations?
A March 12, 2020 press release by the UK Department of International Trade (DIT) signaled that the United States and United Kingdom would proceed with the negotiations: “The government is expected to begin negotiating a UK-US free trade agreement this month.” However, a USTR spokesperson said that “Both the United States and the United Kingdom are committed to starting trade negotiations as soon as possible…At the present time, both our governments are rightfully focused on stemming the spread of the coronavirus, protecting the health and safety of our citizens, and finding innovative solutions to combat this outbreak.” The spokesperson added that the United States and United Kingdom “will begin active trade negotiations at an appropriate time in the near future,” noting that “both sides remain in regular contact on when to proceed with the negotiations as the developing situation with the coronavirus becomes clearer.”
After signing the Phase One Trade Agreement, USTR indicated its intention to begin negotiating a Phase Two agreement promptly. Shortly after that announcement, both countries – first China, then the United States – were impacted by COVID-19, and these negotiations do not appear to have progressed. However, it is unclear whether the lack of progress in these talks is a result of the pandemic, or of a lack of mutual desire to engage on these more intractable issues.
There is no evidence of any ongoing talks between the United States and the European Union with respect to a bilateral trade deal. More specifically, there is no evidence of any talks to resolve the aircraft dispute, which under any circumstances are unlikely to commence until a World Trade Organization (WTO) arbitration panel issues its decision later this year on the amount of duties that the European Union can impose on US imports as a result of a compliance panel finding that a Washington state tax measure is inconsistent with WTO rules.
On March 17, 2020, USTR issued a press release announcing that it had notified Congress of its intent to negotiate a free trade agreement with Kenya, pursuant to the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA Act). In accordance with the TPA Act, USTR will publish objectives of the negotiations with Kenya at least 30 days before formal trade negotiations begin. USTR wrote in its notification that it would not begin negotiations with Kenya for at least 90 days from the date of the notification, putting the earliest start date in mid-June 2020. Neither the USTR press release nor the letters notifying the congressional leadership mentioned the COVID-19 pandemic.
UK-EU (Brexit)
The second round of Brexit negotiations, planned for the third week of March, had to be cancelled due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Both the United Kingdom and the European Union chief negotiators are currently respecting a self-quarantine period. As a result, talks have been put on hold with no indication of when they would resume. These developments will significantly delay the already tight schedule of negotiations. The UK government said in a statement that “Both sides remain fully committed to the negotiations and we remain in regular contact with the European Commission to consider alternative ways to continue discussions.” The UK government furthermore expressed its intention to stand by its plan to begin trading on WTO terms with EU Member States effective January 1, 2021 should the parties fail to reach an agreement. However, the press has reported a growing number of requests by stakeholders to extend the negotiating period in light of the COVID-19 crisis.
The Trump administration has indicated its intention for the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement to take effect on June 1, 2020, but a number of stakeholders have requested a delay in the implementation on account of the COVID-19 crisis.
Major auto industry groups (Alliance for Automotive Innovation, National Automobile Dealers Association, Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association) requested in a March 23 letter to congressional leadership that a number of provisions be included in any economic stimulus package, including “Delaying the June 1st date of entry into force for the USMCA.” No such provisions have been included in any stimulus package to date, including the pending $2 trillion package. Additional stimulus packages are currently being considered by Congress.
The Senate Finance Committee’s chairman and ranking member, Chuck Grassley and Ron Wyden, both pushed back against a June 1 implementation deadline in comments on March 16. Wyden told reporters the June 1 deadline would be premature because it “jeopardizes the benefits of the agreement that are hard fought wins.” Grassley told reporters the administration “would be wise to reconsider” the June 1 deadline. In remarks on the Senate floor on March 18, Grassley said that he was also “eager” to see USMCA kick in, but stressed that “we must first ensure that Canada and Mexico are complying with their commitments,” and that he is “especially concerned that June 1 presents unique challenges for the auto industry when it’s already facing significant supply chain disruptions due to COVID-19…I urge the administration to take seriously the concerns expressed by the highest levels of the auto industry to ensure a reasonable timeline for entry into force of the USMCA auto regulations.”
In a March 21 tweet, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said he proposed accelerating USMCA implementation in a call with President Trump that day, arguing that it would help both countries’ economies bounce back from COVID-19-related downturns. Mexican Economy Minister Graciela Márquez Colín said on March 25 that the three parties were working together, and “advancing very, very quickly to have all of the procedures ready for entry into force,” including the preparation of internal legislation, customs procedures, and uniform regulations.
How is COVID-19 affecting other USTR proceedings?
On March 18, USTR announced that it would postpone its scheduled April 7 and April 9, 2020, field hearings, in Florida and Georgia, respectively, consistent with recommendations from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The hearings, to be co-hosted by the US Departments of Commerce and Agriculture, were part of an administration effort to consider the possibility of providing relief to seasonal producers who allege that they have been harmed by trade-distorting practices, especially from Mexico. USTR also postponed the March 26, 2020, deadline for interested parties to submit comments and information ahead of the hearings.
How is COVID-19 affecting pending WTO proceedings?
The WTO has suspended all meetings through the end of April, restricted access to its premises, and told “all WTO Secretariat staff (except on-site critical staff)” to work remotely through the end of March.
The WTO has also indefinitely postponed its 12th Ministerial Conference, which had been scheduled to take place from June 8-11, 2020, in Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan. No new date has yet been announced. Many parties had hoped to make progress on the longstanding WTO fisheries negotiations at the ministerial.

The WTO “is reviewing alternatives for arranging virtual meetings to enable members to participate remotely.” The Australia trade policy review was held virtually on March 11 and March 13, 2020, and a fisheries negotiations meeting was scheduled to be conducted similarly on March 20, 2020. That fisheries meeting, which would have been the first instance of a digitally-conducted WTO negotiation, was canceled due to a combination of technical difficulties and Swiss health-related restrictions on human travel and gatherings. Ambassador Santiago Wills, the chair for the Doha Rules negotiating group, proposed on March 19 the continuation of work on the fisheries issue by written exchange, suggesting a “written procedure for an exchange of views on the new proposals from India and the LDC (least-developed countries) group.” No other WTO meetings are currently scheduled to be conducted digitally.

TLR: “Force Majeure May Be Invoked on Cargo”

(Source: Author) [Excerpts]
* Author:
Judy Haggin
, VP Compliance,
Total Logistics Resource, Inc
., 1-971-634-1477
Rumors are circulating in the global shipping community about the invocation of “force majeure”. Although it is rarely used, force majeure can cause serious disruption in the supply chain. Worse yet, it can add a considerable expense to the consignee.  
In broad terms,
force majeure
refers to unforeseeable circumstances that prevents someone from fulfilling a contract. In the shipping industry, force majeure is a clause in the bill of lading contract that is designed to, in part or in whole, absolve a party from liability for failing to fulfill their obligations because of extraordinary events and circumstances. Force majeure does not excuse a party for failure to perform under normal conditions and can only be deployed for specific, named conditions within the contract.
For example, when Hurricane Sandy struck the east coast, several terminals were unable to accept vessels and cargo due to damage caused by the storm. Citing the hurricane as an “Act of God”, steamship lines declared force majeure and discharged the cargo at different ports. “Acts of God” refer to unavoidable and catastrophic weather conditions and is a standard named condition under the force majeure clause.  
It is crucial that the consignee, importer, and exporter understand which situations are specifically named within the force majeure clause of a contract. For instance, COVID-19 is a pandemic. If a pandemic is not specifically mentioned in the force majeure clause of a contract, it would be left up to the courts to determine if it can be applied to the contract. If force majeure is declared on a shipment, the consignee would most likely be responsible for any additional charges to get the cargo from the port of involuntary discharge to the original named destination. Among other things, these fees can include terminal charges, demurrage, storage, drayage, and additional shipping costs. As you can imagine, this can become expensive very quickly.  
However, there is an alternative to help protect businesses from these additional expenses – cargo insurance.   While force majeure may not be specifically named in the policy, additional freight charges for the purpose of completing delivery as well as potentially other associated costs may be paid by cargo insurers. Your cargo insurance policy generally has terms and conditions to cover costs relating to minimizing loss or damage and ensuring cargo arrives safely to its intended destination.  
Right now, is a great time to contact your insurance provider with questions about your specific coverage. The more familiar you are with the terms of your insurance, the better prepared you can be for potential disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. …


Monday List of Ex/Im Job Openings: 122 Jobs Available – 20 New Job Openings This Week

(Source: Events & Jobs Editor)
New Job Openings:
* Abbott; Machelen, Belgium;
Emea Customs & Trade Compliance Analyst
; Requisition ID: 30946375
* Amazon; Seattle, WA;
Export Compliance Specialist (ECCN)
Requisition ID: 997908
* BNP Paribas; Seoul, South Korea;
Trade Services Operations Staff
; Requistion ID: BIL000036
* Brenntag; Essen, Germany;
Trade Compliance Officer (m/f/d)
; Contact Details:
Angelika Rester
* CSL Behring; King of Prussia, PA;
Global Trade Compliance Sr. Analyst
; Contact Details: Tomas M. De Sousa
* Dover Corporation; Grand Rapids, MI;
Trade Compliance Manager
* Ericsson; Plano, TX;
Trade Compliance Advisor
; Contact Details:
Anna Moberg
* IPG Photonics; Marlborough, MA;
Trade Compliance Manager
* JetBrains; Prague, Czech Republic;
Compliance Officer
* K-Recruiting GmbH; Basel, Switzerland;
Global Customs and Trade Compliance Expert
* MicroSecure Corporation; Adelaide, Australia;
Cost Schedule Analyst
* Mitsubishi Heavy Industries; Lake Mary, FL;
Corporate Compliance Manager; Requisition ID
: 1140BR
* Nicholas Howard; Havant, UK;
International Trade & Compliance Manager
(Defence); Requisition ID: AC-3541071
* Nidec; Greater St Louis, MO;
Trade Compliance Counsel
; Contact Details: Nicholas Emas
* Nova Southeastern University; Fort Lauderdale, FL;
Export Controls Manager
; Requisition ID: #992048
* Philips; Amsterdam, Netherlands;
Export Controls & Sanctions SME
; Requisition ID: 343581; Contact Details:
* Qualcomm; Shenzhen, China;
China Export Compliance Manager
; Requisition ID: N1980891
* Sensata; Thousand Oaks, CA;
Global Trade Compliance Specialist – Export Controls
; Contact Details:

* Shell; Krakow, Poland; Joint Venture Manager Shell Aviation; Requistion ID: 135456BR 

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


ECS Presents “
ITAR/EAR Boot Camp: Achieving Compliance
” on 7-8 Jul in Seattle, WA

(Source: ECS)
*What:  ITAR/EAR Boot Camp:  Achieving Compliance
*When: July 7-8, 2020
*Where:  Sheraton Grande; Seattle, WA
*Sponsor: Export Compliance Solutions & Consulting
*Presenter: Suzanne Palmer, Mal Zerden

 or by calling 866-238-4018 or email 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TE_a216. FCC Academy: U.S. Export Controls: ITAR, EAR, and FMS

U.S. Export Controls: ITAR

Tuesday, 7 April 2020, Online
More Info

U.S. Export Controls: EAR

Wednesday, 8 April 2020, Online
More Info

The ABC of Foreign Military Sales (FMS)

Tuesday, 9 April 2020, Online
More Info


EN_a117. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)


* Sam Walton (Samuel Moore Walton; 29 Mar 1918 – 5 Apr 1992; was an American businessman and entrepreneur best known for founding the retailers Walmart and Sam’s Club. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. grew to be the world’s largest corporation by revenue as well as the biggest private employer in the world. For a period of time, Walton was the richest man in America.)
– “High expectations are the key to everything.”
* Vincent Van Gogh (Vincent Willem van Gogh 30 Mar 1853 – 29 Jul 1890; was a Dutch post-impressionist painter who is among the most famous and influential figures in the history of Western art. In just over a decade, he created about 2,100 artworks, including around 860 oil paintings, most of which date from the last two years of his life. He was not commercially successful, and his suicide at 37 came after years of mental illness and poverty.)
– “As we advance in life it becomes more and more difficult, but in fighting the difficulties the innermost strength of the heart is developed.”
Monday is Pun Day:

* I ran out of toilet paper and had to start using old newspapers. Times are rough!
* If there’s a baby boom nine months from now, what will happen in 2033? There will be a whole bunch of quaranteens.
* What should you do if you don’t understand a coronavirus pun?  Be patient.
* The grocery stores in France look like tornadoes hit them. All that’s left is de brie.
* So many coronavirus jokes out there, it’s a pundemic.

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

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 are listed below.
Latest Update 
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.
5 Apr 2019:84 FR 13499: Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation.


24 Feb 2020:
85 FR 10274
: Amendments to Country Groups for Russia and Yemen Under the Export Administration Regulations.


DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30.   Last Amendment: 24 Apr 2018: 83 FR 17749: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on the Collection and Confidentiality of Kimberley Process Certificates.


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.)  

23 Feb 2015: 80 FR 9359, comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. 

15 Nov 2017, 82 FR 52823: miscellaneous corrections include correcting references, an address and a misspelling.


DOJ ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War.

14 Mar 2019: 84 FR 9239: Bump-Stock-Type Devices.

DOS INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR): 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130.  26 Dec 2019: 84 FR 70887; 23 Jan 2020: 85 FR 3819: Encryption rule and USML Categories I, II, III, and related sections regarding guns & ammo. 
DOT FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR): 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders

13 Mar 2020:
85 FR 14572:
General Licenses Issued Pursuant to Venezuela-Related Executive Order 13835.


1 Jan 2019: 19 USC 1202 Annex.
  – HTS codes for AES are available here.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Daily Bugle Archive

Are you searching for updates from the past editions of the Daily Bugle? 

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance job openings every day.

Submit your job for free.
PermanentJobListView All Job Openings

Are you looking for a new job in trade compliance?
Click here to see the current job openings.

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance events every day. Submit your event for free.

PermanentJobListView All Events

Are you looking for an upcoming event?   
Click here to see upcoming events.

Scroll to Top