The Commerce Department recently introduced a new policy as part of its export promotion work that will formally require the International Trade Administration to determine whether any potential export assistance would contribute to human rights concerns, including assistance for shipments that could cause surveillance technology to be exported to human rights abusers. The agency outlined the new policy in an October letter to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who asked Commerce in May to review its export assistance to companies that may sell “dangerous surveillance technology” in certain foreign markets (see 2305300025).
A recent ruling by a U.K. appellate court “sent the sanctions legal community into a bit of a tailspin” after it appeared to pave the way for the government to treat every Russian public and private entity as a sanctioned party, said Daniel Martin, a sanctions lawyer with HFW. Although the U.K. has since clarified that its sanctions aren’t necessarily meant to apply to every Russian company, Martin said questions remain, including whether banks now will be even less willing to handle Russia-related transactions, whether U.K. lawyers will continue to be able to participate in Russian-related proceedings, and whether similar logic could apply to U.K. sanctions against other countries.
The U.S. this week unsealed two indictments charging multiple people in schemes to deliver export-controlled dual-use goods to Russia. In both cases, DOJ charged Russian nationals and others with using Brooklyn-based companies to buy goods on behalf of sanctioned end-users or others connected to Russia's military.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching for the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Forwarders should think carefully before they file an export license application on behalf of a customer, a service that could make the forwarder liable in case of an export violation, said Tirrell McKnight, an official with the Bureau of Industry and Security's western regional office. McKnight suggested export application services should only be offered by forwarders who are confident in their export compliance, know their customers well and “want to take on that liability.”
CBP recently completed a review of export-related penalties and found they were “all legitimate” despite some shippers claiming they were unfairly imposed, said Peter Russell, a program manager with CBP’s outbound enforcement policy branch. Russell said CBP began the review after exporters, forwarders and others complained they were receiving years-old penalties for filing violations or unfair redelivery notices for used vehicle shipments.
A Commerce Department decision last week to suspend new export licenses for certain firearms, parts and ammunition caught the industry by surprise and has caused confusion about what types of shipments will be impacted. The announcement came after an uptick in license processing times in recent months, an industry lawyer said, and could lead to a surge in purchases of U.S. firearms by foreign customers that fear the suspension could be a harbinger of permanent change.
The Bureau of Industry and Security on Oct. 27 announced an immediate 90-day suspension of new export licenses for certain firearms, components and ammunition while it reviews its firearms policies to determine whether any permanent changes are “warranted.” During the next 90 days, the agency said it will not issue any new licenses for those exports to non-government end users worldwide, apart from Ukraine, Israel or a nation listed in Country Group A:1.
After years of asking for U.S. defense export control reform, Australia is hopeful that change is finally imminent, said Arthur Sinodinos, Australia’s former ambassador to the U.S. before leaving the role earlier this year. Sinodinos, who said he helped oversee the creation of the Australia-U.K.-U.S. (AUKUS) partnership, said he believes Congress will soon pass pending legislation to reduce technology sharing restrictions, and Australia is pushing for “as big an exemption as possible.”
The State and Commerce departments are frequently seeing illegal exports of controlled items, including technical data, by companies that aren’t classifying their products correctly and may not realize they need a license.