;

20-0618 Thursday ” Daily Bugle “

20-0618 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share 
this subscription link
Thursday, 18 June 2020

  1. Commerce/BIS: “Release of Technology to Certain Entities on the Entity List in the Context of Standards Organizations”
  2. Treasury/OFAC: Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
  3. Treasury/OFAC: Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)
  3. State/DDTC: (No new postings)
  4. Australia DEC Updates Application Form DEC01 – Application to Export or Supply Controlled Goods and Technology
  5. EU Commission: “Trade Barriers Report – EU Continues to Open Up Markets Outside Europe in Midst of Rising Protectionism”
  6. EU Council Renews Crimea and Sevastopol Sanctions for 1 Year
  1. EU Sanctions: “US Companies Authorized to Work with Huawei to Set Tech Standards”
  2. NY Times: “EU Leaders to Support Extending Russia Economic Sanctions”
  1. MVA: “New Treasury Department Regulations Modify Mandatory Filing Requirements for Critical Technology Businesses”
  2. ST&R Trade Report: “Defense Export End-Use Checks Continue to Find Problems”
  3. Thompson Hine Updates its Country-by-Country Guide – Government Measures Taken in Response to COVID-19
  1. ECS Presents Webinar: 7-8 Jul; “ITAR/EAR Boot Camp — Achieving Compliance”
  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
, 18 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]

 
85 FR 36719: Rule
* AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
* ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
* SUMMARY: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (Huawei) and 114 of its foreign affiliates were added to the Entity List by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) in 2019, but continue to participate in many important international standards organizations in which U.S. companies also participate. As international standards serve as the building blocks for product development and help ensure functionality, interoperability, and safety of the products, it is important to U.S. technological leadership that U.S. companies be able to work in these bodies in order to ensure that U.S. standards proposals are fully considered. Since Huawei’s addition to the Entity List, organizations have consequently sought clarity about U.S. industry participation in standards development. BIS is amending the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to authorize the release of certain technology to Huawei and its affiliates on the Entity List without a license if such release is made for the purpose of contributing to the revision or development of a “standard” in a “standards organization.”  
For the purpose of this interim final rule, a “standard” is as defined in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119: Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities, and a “standards organization,” is the equivalent of a “voluntary consensus standards body” as defined in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119: Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities. This interim final rule does not change the assessment of whether “technology” is subject to the EAR. BIS is requesting comments on the impact of these revisions.
* DATES: This rule is effective June 18, 2020. Submit comments on or before August 17, 2020.
* ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number BIS 2020-0017 or RIN 0694-AI06, through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

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

(Source:
Federal Register
, 18 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]
 
85 FR 36934: Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
* AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
* ACTION: Notice.
* SUMMARY: The U.S. 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 action to impose sanctions on persons identified by the Secretary of State pursuant to the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act. 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: Associate Director for Global Targeting, 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, 202-622-2490; Assistant Director for Licensing, 202-622-2480.

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

(Source:
Federal Register
, 18 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]
 
85 FR 36933: Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions
* AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
* ACTION: Notice.
* SUMMARY: The U.S. 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, 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, 202-622-2490; Assistant Director for Licensing, 202-622-2480.

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

OGS OTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

(Source: Federal Register)

* State Department: NOTICES; List of Entities and Subentities: Cuba (Cuba Restricted List); Correction [Pub. Date: 19 Jun 2020] (PDF)

* Treasury/OFAC: NOTICES; Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties [Pub. Date: 19 Jun 2020] (PDF)

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

OGS_a25. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)

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

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

 
  Please note that Defence Export Controls has updated the ‘DEC01 – Application to Export or Supply Controlled Goods and Technology’ form on our website. This new version of this form cannot be uploaded until Monday, 22 June 2020, if your application is urgent please contact our office on 1800 661 066 or via email exportcontrols@defence.gov.au to be provided a copy of the previous version.
 
  From Monday, 22 June 2020 only the new version of this form will be accepted (version 3.9.1).

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

OGS_a5
8. EU Commission: “Trade Barriers Report EU Continues to Open Up Markets Outside Europe in Midst of Rising Protectionism”

 
  Thanks to the European Union’s successful intervention, European companies generated €8 billion in additional exports in 2019. The high number of new restrictions that hinder EU exports shows however that protectionism has become deeply ingrained in global trade. These are some of the findings of the Commission’s annual Trade and Investment Barriers Report published today.
  Commissioner for Trade Phil Hogan said: “Ensuring respect of the existing international trade rules is one of my top priorities. Our action to enforce trade rights and eliminate trade barriers brings tangible benefits for EU companies, including small ones. In 2019, our joint efforts regained for them markets worth €8 billion. Yet, we have also been facing a worrying sea change in world trade. Barriers affect EU export sectors of particular importance and obstacles spread across regions. While we focus all our efforts on the post-COVID economic recovery, this calls for new impetus to enforcement. It is essential to keep global trade flows open.”
  Coordinated efforts by the Commission, Member States and EU business organisations in the framework of the Market Access Partnership allowed European companies to regain in 2019 important export markets. This benefited among others EU farmers and food producers, for instance:
  • Beef exporters from France, Ireland and The Netherlands regained access to China; producers from Ireland and Croatia recovered access to Japan; and Dutch pork producers can now export also to Mexico. 
  • Polish producers of baby milk powder can now export again to Egypt.
  • Belgian pear producers regained access to the Mexican market.
  However, EU companies face also a multiplication of new unlawful barriers in sectors of strategic importance for the EU, notably in information and communication technology, electronics, auto and other high-tech industries. The total number of existing trade barriers around the word amounts to 438, out of which 43 were introduced last year by 22 different countries. The highest number of trade restrictions concern access to the Chinese and Russian markets (respectively 38 and 31 measures). China also imposed the highest number of new restrictions in 2019, followed by South Mediterranean and Middle East countries.

Background

  The Commission’s Report on Trade and Investment Barriers has been published annually since the beginning of the 2008 economic crisis. It is part of the Commission enforcement efforts in the area of international trade rules. The report offers a detailed analysis of the types of barriers causing most problems to EU’s companies and the sectors where results have been achieved.
  The report is based on information reported by European companies. To increase awareness of the available export support, the Commission established the Market Access Days initiative, bringing together EU companies, national trade associations and trade experts from the Commission and Member States to discuss concrete market access problems on foreign markets. In 2019, sessions were held in the Netherlands, Lithuania, Portugal, France and Latvia in which hundreds of companies participated.
  Given the need to step up enforcement efforts in the area of trade, a Chief Trade Enforcement Officer will soon be nominated to coordinate and steer all EU enforcement actions. This will include the establishment of a single entry point for trade enforcement issues to respond faster and more effectively to trade restrictive practices by EU trading partners. Furthermore, on 16 June, the Commission launched of a public consultation [LINK] to review EU trade policy, seeking among others proposals on how to improve EU enforcement efforts to help small businesses facing unjustified export restrictions in countries outside the EU.

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

OGS_a6
9. EU Council Renews Crimea and Sevastopol Sanctions for 1 Year

 
  The Council today decided to renew the sanctions introduced in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation until 23 June 2021.
  The restrictive measures currently in place include prohibitions targeting the imports of products originating in Crimea or Sevastopol into the EU, and infrastructural or financial investments and tourism services in Crimea or Sevastopol. Furthermore, the exports of certain goods and technologies to Crimean companies or for use in Crimea in the transport, telecommunications and energy sectors or for the prospection, exploration and production of oil, gas and mineral resources are also subject to EU restrictions.
  As stated in the declaration by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on behalf of the EU on 16 March 2020, the EU still does not recognise the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and continues to condemn this violation of international law.
 
Background
  Sanctions were first introduced in June 2014 in response to the attempts to deliberately undermine Ukraine’s territorial integrity and destabilise the country. Other EU measures in place in response to the crisis in Ukraine include economic sanctions targeting specific sectors of the Russian economy and individual restrictive measures.

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

COM NEWS

(Source:
EU Sanctions, 18 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]

 
  The US Commerce Dept has issued a 
rule to clarify that US companies can work alongside Huawei to develop international standards in the telecommunications sector. When Huawei and its affiliates were added to the Entity List in May 2019, US companies were not permitted to help set standards on next generation technology with industry bodies when Huawei was participating. The rule will authorise the sharing of technology usually subject to the Export Administration Regulations without a licence to develop standards with industry bodies of which Huawei is a participant. The changes will become effective today, 18 June 2020, upon publication in the Federal Register.


(Source:
New York Times, 18 Jun 2020) [Excerpts]

 
   European Union leaders are expected on Friday to back extending the bloc’s main economic sanctions against Russia over the turmoil in Ukraine until the end of January 2021, diplomatic sources and officials said.
   The EU hit Russia’s energy, financial and arms sectors after Moscow annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and went on to back rebels fighting Kyiv government troops in the east of the ex-Soviet republic.
It has rolled them over ever since as Moscow has vowed to never give back the Black Sea peninsula.
   The curbs are now in place until the end of July, and the 27 national EU leaders holding a virtual meeting on Friday are expected to pave the way for another six-month extension, which would be formalised later this month, the sources said.
   Separately on Thursday, the EU prolonged its ban on doing business with the annexed Crimea until mid-2021. A third batch of EU sanctions blacklists people and firms the bloc sees as instrumental in spreading havoc in the former Russian satellite.
   While some countries including Italy and Hungary would want to see a revival of economic ties with Russia, the bloc’s dovish wing has not had the upper hand recently as the EU was unnerved by what it has seen as Moscow’s disinformation over coronavirus. …

COM COMMENTARY

 
* Principal Author:
Elena F. Mitchell, Esq., 1-704-331-3671,
Moore & Van Allen PLLC 
 
  The U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) recently published a 
proposed rule that would modify the mandatory filing requirements in place throughout the pilot program for certain foreign investment transactions subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) pursuant to the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (”
FIRRMA“). The proposed rule modifies the mandatory filing requirement for “critical technologies” transactions involving a U.S. business that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops one or more critical technologies, as well as clarifies when a foreign interest has a “substantial interest” in a company.
  Importantly, the proposed rule does not modify the definition of “critical technologies,” but rather modifies the manner in which transactions qualify as requiring a mandatory filing based on the need for U.S. government authorization as opposed to using the North American Industry Classification System (“NAICS”) code criteria. Under the proposed rule, the trigger for the mandatory filing requirement would depend on whether or not U.S. export licenses are required for shipments of a U.S. target’s products or technology to a foreign investor’s country of origin. This would replace the current system in which the determination of whether a filing is required is determined by whether the U.S. company engages in certain activities related to a critical technology in one of 27 industries identified in CFIUS regulations based on their classification under the NAICS. Although the proposed rule may provide greater clarity regarding which transactions involving critical technology businesses will be subject to mandatory filings, it likely will disproportionately increase mandatory filings for investors from countries subject to more rigorous U.S. export controls (e.g., China).
  The proposed rule also makes clarifying edits to the definition of “substantial interest”-which is relevant for determining whether transactions involving foreign government interests are subject to mandatory filing requirements. Under the proposed rule, the focus of the analysis of a “substantial interest” moves away from a strict voting percentage analysis, and adds in another qualifying layer that the general partner, managing member, or equivalent also primarily directs, controls, or coordinates the activities of the entity. This revision offers significant relief for majority interest holders that do not primarily manage the activities of the company.
The Treasury is accepting comments on the proposed rule through June 22, 2020.
 
Background
  CFIUS is an interagency committee chaired by the Treasury and tasked with evaluating certain foreign investments and transactions for national security-related concerns. In connection with these reviews, and as advised by CFIUS, the President may suspend or prohibit a transaction when there is credible evidence that the transaction may threaten national security. Thus, failing to receive CFIUS’s approval of a transaction can subject that transaction to substantial risk if national security concerns are determined to be involved. On the other hand, once CFIUS approves a transaction, that transaction generally will not be subject to further review unless false, incomplete, or misleading information was provided to CFIUS during the review and approval process.
  Originally, CFIUS’s authority to review transactions was limited to transactions pursuant to which a foreign person would obtain control over a U.S. business. FIRRMA maintains CFIUS’s jurisdiction over such transactions and broadens CFIUS’s authority to review other investments and transactions for national security concerns. In October 2018, the Treasury issued 
regulations as the first part of a phased implementation of FIRRMA. Those regulations launched a pilot program implementing CFIUS’s expanded jurisdiction over certain non-controlling foreign investments in U.S. businesses involved with critical technology that did not take effect upon FIRRMA’s enactment. They also established mandatory filing requirements in connection with such transactions. As discussed, the Treasury issued additional regulations earlier this year implementing significant changes to CFIUS’s jurisdiction and review process as follows:
  1. Provisions Pertaining to Certain Investments in the United States by Foreign Persons: These regulations implement changes to CFIUS’s jurisdiction and process with respect to transactions that could result in foreign control of any U.S. business, as well as certain non-controlling other investments that give a foreign person certain access, rights, or involvement in certain types of U.S. businesses involving critical technology, critical infrastructure, and sensitive personal data.
  2. Provisions Pertaining to Certain Transactions by Foreign Persons Involving Real Estate in the United States: These regulations implement CFIUS’s authority to review the purchase or lease by, or concession to, a foreign person of certain real estate in the U.S.
 
New Scope of Mandatory Filing Requirements
  Under the proposed rule, parties would have the option to make the required filing either by a short-form declaration or a full notice, for any foreign investment transaction involving a U.S. business that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops one or more critical technologies for which “U.S. regulatory authorization” would be required for the export, re-export, transfer (in-country), or retransfer of such critical technology to a foreign person that is a party to the transaction.
  “U.S. regulatory authorization” is defined to mean any authorization that is required under the following U.S. export control regimes:
  • license or other approval issued by the Department of State under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”);
  • A license from the Department of Commerce under the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”);
  • A specific or general authorization from the Department of Energy under certain regulations governing assistance to foreign atomic energy activities; and
  • A specific license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under certain regulations governing the export or import of nuclear equipment and material.
  Generally, qualifying for a license exemption under the ITAR or the EAR is not sufficient to avoid the mandatory filing requirement. However, the proposed rule specifies a few exceptions. In particular, a U.S. regulatory authorization is not required if satisfied by eligibility for any of three license exceptions in the EAR:
  • The license exception at 15 C.F.R. 740.13 (related to the transfer of broadly available technology (“License Exception TSU”));
  • The license exception at 15 C.F.R. 740.17(b) (related to encryption items (“License Exception ENC”)); or
  • The license exception at 15 C.F.R. 740.20(c)(1) (higher controlled items and technology authorized to be transferred to close allies without a specific U.S. government approval (“License Exception STA”)).
  In determining whether a U.S. regulatory authorization would be required, CFIUS will consider:
  • For an entity-the foreign entity’s principal place of business, meaning the primary location where an entity’s management directs, controls, or coordinates the entity’s activities, or, in the case of an investment fund, where the fund’s activities and investments are primarily directed, controlled, or coordinated by, or on behalf of, the general partner, managing member, or equivalent.
  • For an individual-such foreign person’s nationality or nationalities under the relevant U.S. regulatory authorization.
  The proposed rule provides that if a U.S. regulatory authorization would be required with respect to a foreign person, a filing with CFIUS would be required if that foreign person:
  • Could directly control the U.S. business as a result of the transaction;
  • Is directly acquiring an interest that constitutes a “covered investment”-meaning that the foreign person is acquiring any equity interest along with certain rights, such as a board seat, board observer, or access to material nonpublic technical information-in the U.S. business;
  • Already holds an equity interest and is acquiring certain new rights with respect to the U.S. business;
  • Is involved in a transaction, transfer, agreement, or arrangement, designed or intended to evade or circumvent CFIUS jurisdiction; or
  • Individually holds, or is part of a group of foreign persons that, in the aggregate, holds, a “voting interest” in any entity that meets the foregoing criteria. “Voting interest” is defined for these purposes as a voting interest, direct or indirect, of 25 percent or more. For entities that are controlled by a general partner, managing member, or equivalent, such as most investment funds, only interests in the general partner, managing member, or equivalent will be considered to be a “voting interest”; limited partner or similar interests will be disregarded. Further, for purposes of calculating whether the 25 percent voting interest threshold is met, any interest by a “parent”-meaning any entity holding a greater than 50 percent interest-will be deemed to be a 100 percent interest in the entity of which it is a parent.
 
Clarifications to the Definition of “Substantial Interest”
  FIRRMA requires filings with CFIUS for certain transactions involving foreign government ownership and “TID U.S. businesses”, or U.S. businesses involved with critical technology, critical infrastructure, and sensitive personal data.   Specifically, a filing is required for any transaction through which a “foreign person in which a foreign government holds a substantial interest” acquires a “substantial interest” in a TID U.S. business. Under current regulations, “substantial interest” is defined as a 49 percent or greater interest, directly or indirectly, between the foreign government and the foreign person, and a 25 percent or greater interest, directly or indirectly, between the foreign person and the TID U.S. business.
  The proposed rule makes two clarifying edits to the substantial interest definition:
  (1) First, current regulations provide in the case of an entity “with a general partner, managing member, or equivalent, the national or subnational governments of a single foreign state will be considered to have a substantial interest in such an entity only if they hold 49 percent or more of the interest in the general partner, managing member, or equivalent of the entity.” The proposed rule revises the definition as follows: “In the case of an entity whose activities are primarily directed, controlled, or coordinated by or on behalf of a general partner, managing member, or equivalent, the national or subnational governments of a single foreign state will be considered to have a substantial interest in such entity only if they hold 49 percent or more of the interest in the general partner, managing member, or equivalent of the entity.” (emphasis added).
  (2) Second, the proposed rule clarifies that regardless of the type of entity at issue, a parent will be deemed to have 100 percent of the applicable interest in any entity of which it is a parent.
 
Exemptions
  Significantly, certain foreign investment transactions remain exempt from the mandatory filing obligations, including transactions involving “excepted investors”, certain encryption technologies, and certain investment funds managed and controlled by U.S. nationals.
 
Conclusion

   As stated previously, the proposed rule provides greater clarity regarding which transactions involving critical technology businesses will be subject to mandatory filings. The prior industry analysis test was widely viewed as ambiguous and difficult to administer. The proposed rule may also increase the number of mandatory filings required because the trigger for transactions involving critical technology businesses is no longer tied to a U.S. business’s connection to certain industries. Investors from countries subject to more rigorous U.S. export controls (e.g., China) will find more of their investments to be subject to mandatory filings. Conversely, investors from countries subject to lighter U.S. export controls (i.e.
, countries that are close allies of the U.S.) may see some relief. We will continue to track CFIUS-related developments.

COM_a213. ST&R
Trade Report: “Defense Export End-Use Checks Continue to Find Problems”

 
* Contact: 
messages@strtrade.com, 1-305-894-1035
 
   More than 40 percent of the defense export end-use cases closed in fiscal year 2019 found inconsistencies with or could not verify the information on license applications, according to a report from State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls. This report on the annual performance of DDTC’s “Blue Lantern” end-use monitoring program highlights the importance for defense exporters to maintain effective compliance procedures.
   The Blue Lantern program monitors the end-use of defense articles, technical data, services, and brokering activities exported through commercial channels and subject to licensing or other approvals under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Blue Lantern end-use monitoring includes pre-license, post-license, and post-shipment checks to verify the bona fides of foreign consignees and end-users, confirm the legitimacy of proposed transactions, and provide reasonable assurance that (1) the recipient is complying with U.S. government requirements with respect to use, transfers, and security of defense articles and defense services and (2) such articles and services are being used for the purposes for which they are provided.
   DDTC notes that in FY 2019 it initiated the first-ever series of joint end-use monitoring checks with the Department of Defense and completed the first tranche of Blue Lantern visits tailored to assess the risk of diversion of U.S. defense articles due to the acquisition of foreign companies by entities that pose a potential enhanced risk of diversion.
   According to the report, in FY 2019 the Blue Lantern program initiated 187 checks in more than 40 countries, down from 466 in more than 70 countries the year before. Europe accounted for the largest share of these initiations at 32 percent (up from 14 percent), followed by East Asia and the Pacific at 20.2 percent (down from 43 percent), the Western Hemisphere at 16.2 percent (up from 7 percent), the Near East at 9.2 percent (up from 2 percent), South/Central Asia at 3 percent (unchanged), and Africa at 1.8 percent (down from 20 percent).
   Of the 181 Blue Lantern cases closed in FY 2019 (down from 585), 101 (55.8 percent, up from 29 percent) were determined to be unfavorable. Africa had the highest rate of unfavorable checks at 93.3 percent (up from 41 percent), followed by East Asia and the Pacific at 58.8 percent (up from 5 percent), the Near East at 47.1 percent (up from 46 percent), South/Central Asia at 25 percent (down from 81 percent), Europe at 16.7 percent (down from 32 percent), and the Western Hemisphere at 8.3 percent (down from 32 percent).
   The report states that the leading cause of an unfavorable finding in FY 2019 (40 cases, down from 52) was derogatory information/foreign party deemed unreliable recipient. Other reasons include unlicensed party (22, up from 12), inability to confirm an order or receipt of goods (13, down from 54), unauthorized reexports/retransfers (5, up from 3), foreign party uncooperative or failing to respond to an end-use check (4, down from 68), inability to confirm existence of foreign party (1, down from 3), and lack of secure storage facilities (1, down from 7). No instances of indications of potential or actual diversion were documented.
   Finally, the report notes that unfavorable cases resulted in DDTC recommending denial, removal of an entity, or return without action on more than 130 license applications, up from 57. Eight were referred to Defense Trade Controls Compliance (down from nine).


(Source:
Trump and Trade, 18 Jun 2020)
 
  Today’s update includes new information as of the second week of June, 2020 for Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Panama, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States and Vietnam. The updates are bolded in the chart for ease of reference.
  In the Americas and Europe, recent changes involve the easing of stricter health and safety measures including of curfews, stay-at-home orders, and domestic travel restrictions.  In Asia, governments have lifted most lock-down measures relating to domestic travel and have begun to allow international travel.  Most governments have used a phased approach to re-opening  businesses previously closed in response to the pandemic.  Finally, most governments continue to maintain new export controls and import facilitation measures involving COVID-19-related health and medical goods.
 


TE EX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

 
*When: 7-8 Jul
*Where: 
Your Computer
*Sponsor: Export Compliance Solutions & Consulting

*Presenter: Suzanne Palmer, Mal Zerden
*Register 

here
 or by calling 1-866-238-4018 or email 
liz@exportcompliancesolutions.com

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

EN EDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a116. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)
  

Auberon Herbert (Auberon Edward William Molyneux Herbert; 18 Jun 1838 – 5 Nov 1906; was a British writer, theorist, philosopher, and 19th century individualist. He promoted a classical liberal philosophy and took the ideas of Herbert Spencer a stage further by advocating voluntary-funded government that uses force only in defence of individual liberty and private property. He is known as the originator of voluntaryism.)
  – “The career of a politician mainly consists in making one part of the nation do what it does not want to do, in order to please and satisfy the other part of the nation.”


  – “If government half a century ago had provided us with all our dinners and breakfasts, it would be the practice of our orators today to assume the impossibility of our providing for ourselves.”

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

 

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. 
DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30.    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

5 Jun 2020:
85 FR 84510:

Syria 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