;

20-0528 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

20-0528 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share 
this subscription link
Thursday, 28 May 2020

  1. Justice/ATF Requests Comments on Application for Federal Firearms License
  2. Treasury/OFAC: Notice of Sanctions Actions
  3. USTR Publishes Notice of Product Exclusions Amendments
  4. USTR Publishes Notice of Product Exclusions
  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)
  3. DHS/CBP Publishes Guidances on Section 301 China Extension of Certain Product Exclusions
  4. State/DDTC: “Outage Notice 29 May-1 Jun”
  5. Treasury/OFAC: “Non-Proliferation Designations; Iran-related Designations; Issuance of Iran-related FAQ”
  6. Australia DEC: “Upcoming Public Holidays 1-8 Jun”
  7. Singapore Customs: “TradeNet Extended Downtime on 14 Jun”
  1. Washington Post: “Canadian Court Rules Extradition Case Against Huawei Executive Meng Can Proceed”
  1. BakerMcKenzie: “United States: A New Approach to OFAC’s Rejected-Transactions Reporting” (Part II of II)
  2. Sidley Austin: “The End of Hong Kong’s Special Trade Status? (And Implications for Section 301)”
  3. Steptoe: “BIS Expands Entity List Jurisdiction Covering Huawei and Affiliates”
  1. Keith Melchers Retires
  1. ECTI Presents: e-Seminar sale – 20% off all e-Seminar Training
  2. ECTI Presents: UK/EU Export Controls and Sanctions 101 Webinar; 30 Jun
  3. FCC Academy Presents June Webinars: “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!    
 

Combo
BITAR + BAFTR
Price: $300
Offer: $275

 
Buy Here

BITAR

Price: $200

BAFTR

  Price: $100

EXIM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

(Source:
Federal Register, 28 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* 85 FR 32049: 30-Day notice.
* AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.
* ACTION: 30-Day notice.
* SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
* DATES: Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until June 29, 2020. …

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

(Source:
Federal Register, 28 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* 85 FR 32101:
Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions  
* AGENCY: Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control
* ACTION: Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
* SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List based on OFAC’s determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; or Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855.

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

EXIM_a33. USTR Publishes Notice of Product Exclusions Amendments 

(Source:
Federal Register, 28 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* 85 FR 32098: Notice of product exclusion amendments.
* AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
* ACTION: Notice of product exclusion amendments.
* SUMMARY: On August 20, 2019, at the direction of the President, the U.S. Trade Representative determined to modify the action being taken in the Section 301 investigation of China’s acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation by imposing additional duties of 10 percent ad valorem on goods of China with an annual trade value of approximately $300 billion. The additional duties on products in List 1, which is set out in Annex A of that action, became effective on September 1, 2019. On August 30, 2019, at the direction of the President, the U.S. Trade Representative determined to increase the rate of the additional duty applicable to the tariff subheadings covered by the action announced in the August 20 notice from 10 percent to 15 percent. On January 22, 2020, the U.S. Trade Representative determined to reduce the rate from 15 percent to 7.5 percent. The U.S. Trade Representative initiated a product exclusion process in October 2019, and interested persons have submitted requests for the exclusion of specific products. This notice announces the U.S. Trade Representative’s determination, as specified in the Annex to this notice, to correct technical errors in previously announced exclusions. The U.S. Trade Representative will continue to issue decisions on pending requests on a periodic basis.
* DATES: The product exclusions announced in this notice will apply as of September 1, 2019, the effective date of List 1 of the $300 billion action, and will extend to September 1, 2020.

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

(Source:
Federal Register, 28 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* 85 FR 32094: Notice of product exclusion.
* AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
* ACTION: Notice of product exclusions.
* SUMMARY: In September 2018, the U.S. Trade Representative imposed additional duties on goods of China with an annual trade value of approximately $200 billion as part of the action in the Section 301 investigation of China’s acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation. The U.S. Trade Representative initiated a product exclusion process in June 2019, and interested persons have submitted requests for the exclusion of specific products. This notice announces the U.S. Trade Representative’s determination to grant certain exclusion requests, as specified in the Annex to this notice, and corrects technical errors in previously announced exclusions.
* DATES: The product exclusions announced in this notice will apply as of September 24, 2018, the effective date of the $200 billion action, and extend to August 7, 2020. The amendments announced in this notice are retroactive to the date that the original exclusions were published.

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

OGS OTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

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

OGS_a26. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)

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

OGS_a3
7. DHS/CBP Publishes Guidances on Section 301 China Extension of Certain Product Exclusions

(Source:
CSMS #42837261
and
CSMS #42839255
, 27 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* CSMS #42837261 – GUIDANCE: Section 301 Tranche 4A – $300B: Fourth Round of Product Exclusions from China (9903.88.47)
BACKGROUND
On May 13, 2020, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) published Federal Register (FR) Notice 85 FR 28693 announcing the decision to grant the fourth round of certain requested exclusions from the Section 301 duty related to goods covered under List 1 Annex A (Tranche 4A – $300B Action).
These product exclusions relate to the imposed additional duties announced in 84 FR 43304 and 84 FR 45821 on Chinese goods with an annual aggregate trade value of approximately $300 billion.  The product exclusions will retroactively apply as of the September 1, 2019 effective date of the $300 billion action (Tranche 4A), and will extend through September 1, 2020. 
The scope of each exclusion is governed by the scope of the HTSUS 10-digit classification and product descriptions in the Annex to 85 FR 28693, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion.  A link to the Federal Register Notice is embedded in this message.
The functionality for the acceptance of the fourth round of products of China excluded from Section 301, Tranche 4A – $300B Action duties will be available in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) by 7am, Eastern Daylight Time on May 21, 2020.
GUIDANCE
Instructions for the trade on submitting entries to CBP containing the Section 301 product exclusions announced in 85 FR 28693 are set out below:
  • In addition to reporting the regular Chapters 33, 39, 65, 84 and 85 classifications of the HTSUS for the imported merchandise, importers shall report the HTSUS classification 9903.88.47 (Articles, the product of China, as provided for in U.S. note 20(zz) 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 exclusion under HTS 9903.88.47 is claimed.

*
CSMS #42839255 – GUIDANCE: Section 301 China Extension of Certain Product Exclusions Covered under Tranche 1 – $34B -Action

BACKGROUND
On May 15, 2020, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) published Federal Register (FR) Notice 85 FR 29503 to extend by up to 12 months on certain product exclusions covered by the May 14, 2019 notice (see 85 FR 21389) for Section 301 duties on China ($34B Action – Tranche 1). 
These product exclusions relate to the imposed additional duties on Chinese goods with an annual trade value of approximately $34 billion, apply retroactive to the July 6, 2018 effective date of the $34 billion action, and will extend to December 31, 2020. 
The scope of each exclusion is governed by the scope of the HTSUS 10-digit classification and product descriptions in the Annex per FR notice 85 FR 29503; not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion.  A link to the Federal Register Notice is embedded in this message.
The functionality for the acceptance of the extended product exclusions will be available in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) as of 7 am eastern standard time, May 21, 2020.
GUIDANCE
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 29503 are set out below.
  • In addition to reporting the regular Chapters 84 and 90 classifications of the HTSUS for the imported merchandise, importers shall report the HTSUS classification 9903.88.08 (Articles, the product of China, as provided for in U.S. note 20(k) 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 9903.88.08 is submitted.

Back to top 

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

OGS_a4
8. State/DDTC:
“Outage Notice 29 May-1 Jun”
(Source:
State/DDTC, 28 May 2020)
 
The Defense Export Control and Compliance (DECCS) application will be unavailable to industry from 11:00 PM (EDT) Friday, May 29 through 8:00 AM (EDT) Monday, June 1, for scheduled system maintenance. Please ensure work in progress is saved prior to the scheduled downtime.

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

(Source:
Treasury/OFAC, 28 May 2020)
 
Today, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is issuing a new Frequently Asked Questions related to the Secretary of State’s announcement that he will be ending certain Iran nuclear-related waivers.
In addition, OFAC has added names to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List …  For more information,
 
please visit this page.

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

(Source:
Australia DEC, 28 May 2020)
 
Defence Export Controls will be closed Monday 1 June 2020 & Monday 8 June 2020 for Public Holidays in the ACT. Please note that our office will be closed on these days. Applications and enquiries will be processed as soon as possible once the office reopens following each of these holidays: Tuesday 2 June 2020 & Tuesday 9 June 2020 respectively.

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

In addition to the usual housekeeping time for TradeNet on Sundays from 4am to 8am, we wish to inform you that Singapore Customs will be performing system maintenance work which will affect TradeNet for the following date and time.

Date  Time  Duration 
14 Jun 2020  4am to 12pm  8 hours 

   During this period, all applications can still be submitted through TradeNet. Only applications involving amendment, cancellation, refund and stock related permit applications will not be processed, and processing of such applications will resume after the indicated timing above.

  Please bring the contents of this Notice to the attention of your staff. Kindly plan in advance and submit applications before the downtime, to minimise disruptions to your business operations. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.

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

COM NEWS

NWS_a112. Washington Post: “Canadian Court Rules Extradition Case Against Huawei Executive Meng Can Proceed”

(Source:
 
Washington Post, 27 May 20) [Excerpts]
 
A Canadian court ruled Wednesday that the charges the United States has filed against Huawei’s chief financial officer are also crimes in Canada, a decision that keeps her under house arrest in an extradition case that has ensnared Ottawa in a dispute between Beijing and Washington.  Heather Holmes, associate chief justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, wrote that Meng Wanzhou’s case could meet the threshold of “double criminality” – a prerequisite for extradition under Canadian law.
  The U.S. Justice Department alleges that Meng made “numerous misrepresentations” to banks, including HSBC, about the telecom giant’s relationship with Skycom, an Iranian-based subsidiary, effectively tricking them into clearing hundreds of millions of dollars in transactions in violation of U.S. sanctions on Iran and exposing them to reputational and economic risk.
Meng, the 48-year-old daughter of billionaire Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested by Canadian authorities in Vancouver in December 2018 at the behest of the United States. She denies any wrongdoing. … After Meng’s arrest, China detained two Canadians, former diplomat Michael Kovrig and businessman Michael Spavor, and charged them with violating state secrets laws in a move widely seen as retaliation. China also blocked some agricultural imports from Canada.
  China has cast Meng’s arrest as a U.S. plot to cripple the country’s economic rise. Chinese officials have also cast the prosecution as political; they point to statements by President Trump that he might intercede in her case in exchange for concessions on trade.   
  After the ruling Wednesday, the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa declared “the whole case” a “grave political incident.”  “The purpose of the United States is to bring down Huawei and other Chinese high-tech companies, and Canada has been acting in the process as an accomplice,” the embassy said in a statement. “We once again urge Canada to take China’s solemn position and concerns seriously, immediately release Ms. Meng Wanzhou to allow her to return safely to China, and not to go further down the wrong path.” …
  Canada arrested Huawei’s Meng on behalf of the United States.  … U.S. Justice Department spokeswoman Natalie Navas Oxman said the United States “thanks the Government of Canada for its continued assistance pursuant to the U.S./Canada Extradition Treaty in this ongoing matter.” … Meng’s lawyers argued in January that the case is a U.S. sanctions violations complaint framed as a fraud case. Since Canada lifted its sanctions against Iran in 2016, they argued, the transactions wouldn’t have violated any Canadian law.  Canadian prosecutors, arguing the United States’ case, dismissed that argument. They said the essence of the alleged offense – allegedly lying to a bank to obtain financial services – is fraud. …
  The U.S. Commerce Department intensified its pressure on the Shenzhen-based firm by implementing a rule that will require overseas manufacturers of semiconductors using American equipment to get a license from the United States before selling them to Huawei.

COM COMMENTARY

COM_a113. BakerMcKenzie: “United States: A New Approach to OFAC’s Rejected-Transactions Reporting” (Part II of II)   

(Source: 
International Trade Compliance Update, 26 May 2020) [Excerpts]
(Part I of this article was posted in yesterday’s Daily Bugle.) 
 

* Author: 
Alexandre Lamy
, Esq., 1-202-835-1862, BakerMckenzie
 
  As a jurisdictional matter, OFAC’s substantive regulations also apply to non-U.S. entities owned or controlled by U.S. persons under U.S. sanctions targeting Cuba and Iran.
  Nonetheless, Section 501.604 appears only to apply to owned/controlled non-U.S. entities for Cuba purposes, because the term “persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction” appears in the Cuban As
sets Control Regulations,[FN/9] but not the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations.[FN/10]

  Owned/controlled non-U.S. entities are not subject to U.S. sanctions jurisdiction under other OFAC regulations if they are operating with no U.S. nexus – e.g., no U.S. persons, no U.S.- dollar payments, no U.S. items.
  Based on its plain language, there is no indication that Section 501.604 requires a non-U.S. entity outside of U.S. jurisdiction to report to OFAC about a transaction that it rejected under U.S. sanctions because a director, officer or employee of the non-U.S. entity involved in the transaction is themselves a U.S. person (e.g., a U.S. citizen or permanent resident alien) or the non-U.S. entity rejected a transaction because it otherwise involved a U.S. nexus (e.g., a U.S.-dollar payment).
 
Which types of rejected transactions should be reported to OFAC going forward?
  While the jurisdictional scope of Section 501.604 appears clear, OFAC has not provided similar guidance to nonfinancial institutions about which types of transactions should be reported when they are rejected. As noted above, revised Section 501.604 provides that covered transactions may be “related to wire transfers, trade finance, securities, checks, foreign exchanges, and goods or services.”
  In addition, in terms of documentation that OFAC expects about rejected transactions, Section 501.604(b)(7) was amended to require a “copy of any related payment or transfer instructions, accompanying bill of lading, invoice, or any other relevant documentation received in connection with the transaction.”
  These points do not explain to nonfinancial institutions which of their commercial activities may trigger Section 501.604 as a practical matter.
Every day, companies engage in a wide variety of commercial activities – e.g., provide pricing information, conduct due diligence, respond to information requests – that would not normally be considered transactions, even if some of these activities may lead to a bona fide transaction.
  OFAC’s approach to the revamped Section 501.604 and the absence of guidance have created uncertainty about which such commercial activities are subject to the rejected- transactions reporting requirements.
  Reviewing dictionary definitions of terms like “transaction” and “rejection” provide a potential compliance road map. Definitions of transaction in Black’s Law Dictionary include an “act or an instance of conducting business or other dealings; esp., the formation, performance, or discharge of a contract” and a “business deal or arrangement that alters legal rights.”[FN/11]
The main definition of rejection from the same source is a “refusal to accept a contractual offer .”[FN/12]
  From these common-sense definitions, we can narrow the scope of a company’s commercial activities that should reasonably be subject to reporting under Section 501.604.
  What appears to be clearly covered by Section 501.604 are the formal steps of contract creation and performance because a transaction is primarily meant to include the formation, performance or discharge of a contract. In addition, a company deciding not to pursue a transaction once such formal steps have been taken would be engaging in a rejection – i.e., a refusal to accept a contractual offer.
  At a high level, this would cover preliminary steps related to a transaction prohibited under U.S. sanctions (in OFAC programs that do not require blocking), such as the receipt of a purchase order, an order confirmation and the issuance of an invoice.
  And it would cover the formal execution of a contract and all the remaining steps to the performance thereof – e.g., delivery or acceptance of goods or services, payments, etc.
  This approach is consistent with the types of documents that OFAC says it expects as part of reports pursuant to Section 501.604 – i.e., “accompanying bill of lading, invoice, or any other relevant documentation received in connection with the transaction.”
  Thus, the Section 501.604 reporting requirements would be triggered if a Section 501.604 party takes a step at any of those stages to advance a transaction that is prohibited (but not blocked) under U.S. sanctions and must be stopped to comply with U.S. sanctions.
  By contrast, the types of commercial activities that do not appear to be covered by Section 501.604 in and of themselves are other steps that may predate or accompany a transaction that is prohibited (but not blocked) under U.S. sanctions. Such noncovered commercial activities should include:
  • Responding to information requests about a product or to more general inquiries;
  • Providing pricing information;
  • Entering into a nonbinding letter of intent;
  • Conducting due diligence about a potential counterparty;
  • Implementing sanctions compliance measures such as internet domain blocking (e.g., blocking access by IP addresses from comprehensively sanctioned territories) or restricted-party screening; and
  • Completing a sanctions compliance analysis about whether a potential transaction is permissible under applicable sanctions and advising personnel within a company about the results of the analysis.
  These activities do not typically involve the formation, performance or discharge of a contract, or a “business deal or arrangement that alters legal rights,” and they should not be subject to Section 501.604, even if they could ultimately lead or are related to a later transaction.
  Furthermore, the fact that some of these steps may result in a compliance team recommending that a company not pursue a proposed or potential transaction in order to comply with U.S. sanctions should not constitute a rejection, because there would be no contractual offer to refuse at that stage.
In the context of tenders or requests for proposals, or RFPs, this proposed compliance framework would mean that the receipt alone of such requests should not trigger Section 501.604.
  That said, a Section 501.604 party that responds to a tender or RFP where a customer’s acceptance would create a binding contract would have a Section 501.604 reporting obligation if it turns out the transaction is prohibited (but not blocked) under applicable U.S. sanctions.
  Although it should help most companies differentiate which types of typical commercial activities should and should not be reported under Section 501.604, this proposed compliance framework is not necessarily complete, in that it does not help adjudicate how some activities involving third parties should be treated.
  One example is the status of online accounts. For instance, it would generally be prohibited for a nonsanctioned individual in North Korea to maintain an online account offered by a U.S. person company, under the North Korea sanctions regulations.[FN/13]
  It is not clear that all online accounts involve transactions, as defined above, or that terminating such accounts involves a rejection. Some accounts may be of a general registration/information-collection nature, while others may enable a user to purchase goods or services.
  Absent further guidance from OFAC, this compliance framework does not necessarily provide a bright-line test for such online activities. There may be other commercial activities, not considered by this article, that may not fit neatly within this proposed compliance framework and would need further consideration.


 
What practical steps can companies take to comply with the expanded scope of Section 501.604?
  With this framework in mind, compliance teams can focus their efforts on the types of company activities that are most likely to be subject to Section 501.604 in order to comply with OFAC’s expanded requirements.
  Specifically, corporate compliance teams should ensure that their transactional review processes include a new step at the end for a transaction that must be stopped and rejected for U.S. sanctions compliance reasons.
  This additional step should primarily consist of compliance teams considering (1) whether a Section 501.604 party is involved and (2) whether the activities in question constitute reportable transactions discussed above.
  For purposes of step one, a compliance team would want to confirm whether the corporate entity that was supposed to engage in the rejected transaction is itself a U.S. entity or, in a Cuba-related transaction, an owned/controlled non-U.S. entity.
  That is an important jurisdictional limitation for Section 501.604 and should mean that it will not generally be relevant to the non-U.S. subsidiaries of U.S.-based companies.
  As noted above, there is no indication that Section 501.604 requires a non-U.S. entity outside of U.S. jurisdiction to report to OFAC about a transaction that would have been prohibited under U.S. sanctions because a director, officer or employee of the non-U.S. entity involved in the transaction is themselves a U.S. person, or the non-U.S. entity rejecting a transaction because it otherwise involved a U.S. nexus (e.g., a U.S. dollar payment).
Step two should be focused on determining whether the steps taken by a Section 501.604 party involve a reportable rejection or, rather, other commercial activities that are not covered. If the compliance team determines that Section 501.604’s jurisdiction applies and a covered transaction is involved, then the company has 10 business days from the date a decision is made to reject the transaction to report it to OFAC.
  Finally, prior to the OFAC regulatory changes discussed here, Section 501.604 parties could determine that a transaction was prohibited under U.S. sanctions and terminate it where no blocked property was involved, ideally before it was fully performed.
  Such companies could then consider whether they should disclose the transaction to OFAC, but that was otherwise the end of the compliance review process for a problematic transaction – e.g., make sure it was stopped and implement measures as needed to avoid a similar incident.
  Now, companies may sometimes find themselves in a position of a forced voluntary disclosure to OFAC, when they are reporting rejected transactions.
While Section 501.604 reports to OFAC should be a sign of a well-functioning compliance program, it is possible that such reports could prompt questions or an investigation from OFAC, particularly if a transaction is very far along when it is rejected or a company submits many reports.
  When submitting Section 501.604 reports, compliance teams should try to mitigate such risks by providing appropriate context about rejections that are reported.
______________________________________________________  
[
FN/
9] Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. pt. 515 (2020).
[

FN/
10] Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, 31 C.F.R. pt. 560 (2020).
[
FN/
11] Transaction, Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
[
FN/
12] Rejection, Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
[

FN/
13] North Korea Sanctions Regulations, 31 C.F.R. pt. 510 (2020).

(Source:
International Compliance Blog, 26 May 2020) [Excerpts]
 
* Principal Author: Meredith Rathbone, Esq., 44-0-7367-8021, Steptoe and Johnson LLP
 
On May 19, the US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
 
published a new interim final rule, retroactively effective on May 15, amending the Foreign-Produced Direct Product Rule (FPDP) under the US Export Administration Regulations (EAR). The new rule expands the jurisdictional scope of the EAR and restricts the non-US supply of semiconductor chips to Huawei Technologies and its affiliates on the Commerce Department Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to 15 C.F.R. Part 744).
Some aspects of the rule are subject to a “savings clause” or delay in application of the new restrictions. BIS will be accepting comments regarding the interim final rule until July 14.
For more on this issue, read here.

TE EX/IM MOVERS & SHAKERS

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

TE EX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

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

 
* What: UK/EU Export Controls and Sanctions 101
* When: 30 Jun; 1:00 p.m. (EDT)
* Where: Webinar
* Sponsor: Export Compliance Training Institute (ECTI)
* ECTI Speaker: Richard Tauwhare
* Register: 
here 
or 
contact 
Ashleigh Foor
, 1-540-433-3977

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

EN EDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a120. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)
  

*
William Pitt (William Pitt the Younger; 28 May 1759 – 23 January 1806; was a prominent British Tory statesman of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.  He became the youngest Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1783 at the age of 24, and the first Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.)
  – “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it; and this I know, my lords: that where law ends, tyranny begins.”
 

Ian Fleming (Ian Lancaster Fleming (28 May 1908 – 12 August 1964) was an English author, journalist and naval intelligence officer who is best known for his James Bond series of spy novels.)
  – “Never say ‘no’ to adventures. Always say ‘yes’, otherwise you’ll lead a very dull life.”
  – “I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them.”

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

 

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.
 
Agency 
Regulations 
Latest Update 
DHS CUSTOMS REGULATIONS
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.
 
 
 
5 Apr 2019:84 FR 13499: Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation.

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

19 May 2020: 85 FR 29849: Amendments to General Prohibition Three (Foreign-Produced Direct Product Rule) and the Entity List.   
 
 
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. 
DOD NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM): DoD 5220.22-M. Implemented by Dep’t of Defense.

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. 

23 Feb 2015: 80 FR 9359, comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. 
DOE EXPORT AND IMPORT OF NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL; 10 CFR Part 110.

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. 
6 May 2020: 85 FR 26847, Notice (not an amendment) temporarily reducing the registration fee schedule in ITAR 122.3 until April 30, 2021. 

 

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

10 Apr 2020:
85 FR 20158:

North Korea Sanctions Regulations. 

 
 
 
 
USITC HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA), Revision 8.

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