|
Greetings!
We hope you all enjoyed a Happy Halloween! October's import/export news highlights include: OFAC's publication of recent enforcement actions; BIS issues corrections to EAR based on Wassenaar Plenary changes; BIS seeks comments from small and medium enterprises regarding understanding of EAR; the EU will require advance shipment information starting 1/1/11; court finds CBP may not deactivate a customs broker's filer code without due process; and the GAO issues a report on CBP's progress in implementing the 10+2 rule. Thank you for reading! Jennifer Kessinger, Tammie Krauskopf & Ruta Riley globaltradeexpertise info@globaltradeexpertise.com
|
|
OFAC Posts Information on Recent Civil Penalties
On October 29, 2010, Office of Foreign Assets Controls (OFAC) published recent civil penalties cases:
- Garlock Sealing Tech, LLC (Garlock), a subsidiary of Enpro Industries (Enpro) of Charlotte, NC, has remitted $16,875 to settle allegations of violations of Executive Order 13405, "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus" occurring on June 23, 2008. OFAC alleged that Garlock attempted to send, without authorization from OFAC, a funds transfer in the amount of $14,308 to the account of an entity blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13405. Garlock did not voluntarily disclose this matter to OFAC. The base penalty for the apparent violation was $25,000. The settlement amount reflects OFAC's consideration of the following General Factors: Garlock was a sophisticated entity with global operations; Garlock has not been subject to an OFAC enforcement action in the five years preceding the date of the apparent violation; and Garlock has taken remedial steps to prevent the recurrence of such a payment.
- OFAC issued a Finding of Violation Letter to Christ for all Nations (CfaN) of Orlando, FL, for violations of the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations. CfaN exported goods and services to Sudan in support of a non-commercial event in Sudan during 2006. CfaN has implemented steps to ensure that it does not perform any activities in violation of OFAC regulations and has not been subject to other OFAC enforcement action. The transactions in question appear to have been licensable had CfaN timely submitted a license application. A Finding of Violation was deemed appropriate given the clear violation of OFAC regulations on the one hand, and the licensable, non-commercial nature of the conduct and the non-profit nature of the violator on the other hand.
- Yokozuna Pearls & Gems, Inc. (Yokozuna) of Monrovia, CA, has been assessed a penalty of $25,000 for its violation of the Burmese Sanctions Regulations (BSR) that occurred in March 2006. Yokozuna initiated a $220,465 funds transfer to Myanmar Foreign Trade Bank, an entity blocked pursuant to the BSR, in furtherance of a contract to purchase and import pearls from Myanmar Pearl Enterprise, Yangoon, Burma. The funds transfer was blocked by a U.S. financial institution and the contract was not completed. The exportation of financial services (defined to include direct and indirect transfers of funds from the U.S. or by a U.S. person, wherever located, to Burma) is prohibited by the BSR. Yokozuna did not voluntarily disclose this matter to OFAC. The base penalty for the violation was $250,000. The final penalty amount reflects OFAC's consideration of the following General Factors: this was Yokozuna's first OFAC violation; Yokozuna received inaccurate legal guidance before engaging in the prohibited transaction; Yokozuna cooperated with OFAC and terminated its business transactions with Burma; and the documented financial condition of Yokozuna's owner.
- Hydra-Tech Pumps, Inc. (Hydra-Tech), Nesquehoning, PA, has been assessed a penalty of $1,961 for its violation of the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations that occurred in September 2007. Hydra-Tech exported a hydraulic hose to Khartoum State Water Corporation, Khartoum, Sudan. Hydra-Tech did not voluntarily disclose this matter to OFAC but has implemented enhanced export compliance procedures. This matter was resolved according to the prior enforcement guidelines published by OFAC at 68 Fed. Reg. 4422.
- Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC), a Japanese corporation, has agreed to pay $229,380 to settle allegations that SMBC's New York Branch Office (SMBCNY) violated the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations (the SSR). OFAC alleged that, from December 9, 2005, until about December 1, 2006, SMBCNY appears to have violated the SSR when it exported services to Sudan through its processing of the payments for SMBC's purchase of six export bills, in an aggregate amount of $1,037,988, relating to letters of credit (LC) issued by Sudanese banks and by its receipt of two USD payments, in the aggregate amount of $15,357,720, related to approximately forty LCs issued by a Sudanese bank. OFAC determined that SMBC voluntarily self disclosed the matter to OFAC and that the alleged violations constituted a non-egregious case. The base penalty amount for the apparent violations was $655,373. The settlement amount reflects OFAC's consideration of the following General Factors: SMBCNY was part of a commercially sophisticated international bank and had reason to know its conduct may have violated the SSR; SMBC had no violations of this nature on record with OFAC; SMBC substantially cooperated with OFAC's investigation of the alleged violations; and SMBC promptly responded to all requests for additional information and agreed to a statute of limitations tolling agreement when requested by OFAC.
|
BIS Issues Corrections to Wassenaar Arrangement 2009 Plenary Agreements Implementation Amendments are effective 10/13/10
On October 13, 2010, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published correcting amendments to the final rule issued in the Federal Register on September 7, 2010 that revised the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by amending entries for certain items that are controlled for national security reasons in Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Part I (telecommunications), 6, 7, and 9; adding new entries to the Commerce Control List (CCL); revising reporting requirements; and adding and amending EAR Definitions.
According to the correcting amendments, the final rule of September 7, 2010 contained errors that affect Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) 6A005, 6A006, and 9A001, as well as the definition of "energetic materials." In addition, the final rule's preamble erroneously identified ECCN 6E993 as one of the ECCNs that was revised in the rule's text.
The rule, as corrected, removes the note after 6A008.f. Also, the rule of September 8 listed an incorrect citation of "6.A.5.d.1.d" instead of "6A005.d.1.d" in 6A005.d.1.e, which is corrected by the amendment of October 13. The current rule also replaced two incomplete citations in the introductory text of ECCN 9A001.a; this rule replaces the citations ".a or .h" with "9E003.a or 9E003.h".
Amendments are effective October 13, 2010. |
BIS Seeks Comments Regarding Small and Medium Enterprises' Understanding of the EAR
Comments are due by December 6, 2010
On October 6, 2010, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a notice in the Federal Register seeking comments regarding small and medium enterprises' understanding of and compliance with export controls under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Specifically, BIS is seeking comments that identify issues and make recommendations regarding small and medium enterprises' awareness and understanding of the EAR, as well as their experiences complying with the EAR.
In addition, BIS invites the public to submit comments on the following:
(1) The principal challenges small and medium enterprises face in trying to comply with the EAR, including any challenges that small and medium enterprises uniquely face and approaches to overcoming these challenges; (2) The value of current BIS outreach, education and counseling to small and medium enterprises in understanding and complying with the EAR; (3) Ways to improve or expand small and medium enterprises' awareness, knowledge and understanding of the EAR and increase their capacity to comply with them; and (4) Data, including comparative international data, that support comments and recommendations related to items (1) through (3) above; and that provide examples of effective methods of administering and enforcing export controls with special attention to small and medium enterprises.
Comments are due by December 6, 2010.
|
EU To Require Advance Shipment Information as of January 1, 2011
Beginning January 1, 2011, the European Union will start enforcing the requirement to electronically provide advance information for goods being imported from non-EU countries into the EU. Carriers will be required to file an Entry Summary Declaration (ESD) using the EU's Import Control System (ICS) no later than 24 hours before vessel loading at the foreign port; however, importers will be responsible for providing accurate information in a timely manner to their carriers or face indefinite cargo delays by customs authorities. All non-EU shipments that are destined for or transshipped via the EU are subject to this requirement.
ICS is similar to the 10+2 requirement in the U.S. The goal of ICS is to enable customs authorities to assess any risks shipments may pose by evaluating shipment information in advance.
As of mid-October, Denmark, Greece, and Luxembourg did not yet have ICS in place. While the EU Commission is working closely to correct the situation, exporters with shipments into Denmark, Greece or Luxembourg may wish to verify with their carriers that procedures are in place to ensure smooth imports into those countries.
EU Customs Information Portal provides answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) as well as time limits for filing of ENS, which vary depending on the mode of shipping:
- Containerized maritime cargo (except short sea containerized shipping) - At least 24 hours before commencement of loading in each foreign load port
- Bulk/ break bulk maritime cargo (except short sea bulk/ break bulk shipping) - At least 4 hours before arrival at the first port in the Community
- Short sea shipping - At least 2 hours before arrival at the first port in the Community
- Short haul flights (less than 4 hours duration) - At least by the time of the actual take off of the aircraft
- Long haul flights (more than 4 hours duration) - At least 4 hours before arrival at the first airport in the Community
- Rail and inland waterways - At least 2 hours before arrival at the customs office of entry in the Community
- Road traffic - At least 1 hour before arrival at the customs office of entry in the Community
|
|
Court Finds CBP May Not Deactivate Customs Broker's Filer Code without Due Process
On October 4, 2010, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued an opinion in Lizarraga Customs Broker v. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, holding that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) may not deactivate customs broker's filer code without due process.
U.S. customs entries can be filed either manually or electronically through the Automated Broker Interface (ABI) system. According to CBP, currently 96% of all entries are filed electronically. In order to use ABI, the broker must have an active entry filer code and be approved for participation in the ABI system.
On October 21, 2008, the Director of Field Operations at the Otay Mesa Port Entry in San Diego wrote to the Assistant Commissioner of the Office of International Trade and requested that Guillermo Lizarraga's entry filer code be deactivated for misuse. On November 3, 2008, the Assistant Commissioner made a final determination to indefinitely and immediately suspend Lizarraga's entry filer code for misuse.
Customs did not provide Lizarraga with notice of its internal administrative review or an opportunity for a hearing, or solicit a written submission from him prior to its final determination, but on November 10, 2008, Customs notified Lizzaraga that, effective November 14, 2008, it would "immediately and indefinitely" suspend his entry filer code. The notice stated that the action was "necessary to prevent the misuse of the filer code in the conducting of customs business," and that the suspension was to prevent Mr. Lizarraga from using his individual filer code to "facilitate smuggling narcotics" and to ensure that plaintiff's "license, permit, name, and filer code are not used by persons who are not employed by Lizarraga and authorized to act for Lizarraga."
Lizarraga argued that "suspending a broker's entry filer code effectively puts that broker out of business because it is impossible to compete with other licensed brokers with active filer codes."
Following CIT's grant of Lizarraga's motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin Customs from suspending or deactivating plaintiff's broker entry file code in the port of San Diego, CA, CBP filed the Confession of Judgment in plaintiff's favor on April 23, 2010. The confession of judgment stated that CBP agreed not to suspend or deactivate Lizarraga's entry filer code for any past fact or event. Customs stated in its oral argument that it would not seek to summarily suspend a broker's entry filer code saying that "brokers are entitled to the [Administrative Procedure Act] (APA) if their entry filer code is deactivated, the procedural protections of the APA. So with respect to what occurred to Mr. Lizarraga in this instance, the Customs treatment of Mr. Lizarraga, it's certain that that is not going to occur again."
With respect to APA, CIT noted that Customs was referring to 5 U.S.C. §558(c), which states, in relevant part:
"Except in cases of willfulness or those in which public health, interest, or safety requires otherwise, the withdrawal, suspension, revocation, or annulment of a license is lawful only if, before the institution of agency proceedings therefor, the licensee has been given notice by the agency in writing of the facts or conduct which may warrant the action; and opportunity to demonstrate or achieve compliance with all lawful requirements."
CIT stressed, however, that it was not finding that the due process afforded by 5 U.S.C. §588 would be legally sufficient in similar future cases. |
GAO Issues Report on CBP Progress in Implementing the 10+2 Importer Security Filing Rule
On September 10, 2010, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on the progress Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has made in implementing Importer Security Filing (ISF) and Additional Carrier Requirements, collectively known as the "10+2 rule."
Specifically, GAO assessed: (1) the extent to which CBP conducted the 10+2 regulatory assessment in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance, (2) how CBP used information it collected and assessed to inform its efforts to implement the 10+2 rule since January 2009, and (3) the extent to which CBP has used the additional 10+2 data to identify high-risk cargo.
GAO found that CBP's 10+2 regulatory assessment generally adheres to OMB guidance however, CBP's assessment could be improved by greater transparency regarding the selection of alternatives analyzed and a more complete analysis. GAO found that the assessment lacked transparency in that it did not explain how the four alternatives considered for the rule-variations in what and how many data elements are to be collected-were selected or how the preferred alternative was chosen. Accordingly, if, as CBP officials stated, an update to the regulatory assessment might be published in the future, greater transparency could help justify the scope of alternatives analyzed in the regulatory assessment and provide insight into CBP's decision making.
Regarding ISF collection, report states:
CBP data indicate that in July 2010, approximately 80% of shipments were ISF compliant, and CBP officials said that most carriers had submitted stow plans. CBP publishes answers to frequently asked questions on its Web site and has conducted outreach sessions with the trade industry to discuss errors in ISF submissions and help improve compliance.
GAO noted that, while 10+2 rule data elements are available for identifying high-risk cargo, CBP has not yet finalized its national security targeting criteria to include these additional data elements to support high-risk targeting.
CBP has assessed the submitted 10+2 data elements for risk factors, and according to CBP officials, access to information on stow plans has enabled CBP to identify more than 1,000 unmanifested containers-containers that are inherently high risk because their contents are not listed on a ship's manifest. In addition, while GAO found that CBP has conducted a preliminary analysis indicating that the collection of the additional 10+2 data elements could help determine risk earlier in the supply chain, CBP has not yet finalized its national security targeting criteria for identifying high-risk cargo containers or established project time frames and milestones-best practices in project management-for doing so. According to the report, such efforts could help provide CBP with goals for finishing this project, thus better positioning it to improve its targeting of high-risk cargo.
|
Calendar of Events Upcoming Trade Events & Seminars
Our website has a comprehensive listing of import and export conferences held throughout the country, as well as Customs training, EAR training, ITAR training, and other training. Below is a small sampling of what's available in the coming months:
Essentials and How to Develop an Export Management and Compliance Program - Bureau of Industry and Security November 3 - 4, 2010 - Pittsburgh, PA
Complying with U.S. Export Controls - Bureau of Industry and Security November 30 - December 1, 2010 - Austin, TX
Advanced ITAR Workshop - Federal Publications Seminar December 9 - 10, 2010 - Washington, DC - $995
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - United States Council for International Business (USCIB) November 4, 2010 - Washington, DC - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB November 8, 2010 - Houston, TX - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB November 9, 2010 - Dallas, TX - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB November 10, 2010 - Atlanta, GA - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB November 17, 2010 - Charleston, SC - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB November 30, 2010 - Cincinnati, OH $350/$380
Navigating US, UK and EU Export Regulations - Federal Publications Seminar November 10, 2010 - London, UK - $595
Navigating US and EU Export Controls - Federal Publications Seminar November 17, 2010 - Frankfurt, Germany - $595
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB December 2, 2010 - Troy, MI - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB December 9, 2010 - Omaha, NE - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB December 14, 2010 - Miami, FL - $350/$380
Incoterms® 2010 Seminar - USCIB December 16, 2010 - Charlotte, NC - $350/$380
Navigating US Export Controls and Sanctions, including Foreign Military Sales (FMS) - Federal Publications Seminar December 1 - 2, 2010 - Dubai, UAE - $995
|
|
Who's Hiring? A Summary of Current Trade Job Opportunities
As a service to the international trade community, Global Trade Expertise compiles links to trade job opportunities from many different sources. New trade job listings are posted frequently on our website.
To sort the job opportunities by region, fields, or levels, click on the appropriate category or tag in the right column on our Trade Jobs webpage. |
|
|
|
Thanks again for your interest in our newsletter!
Sincerely,
|
Jennifer Kessinger, Tammie Krauskopf & Ruta Riley
Attorneys & Consultants
jk@globaltradeexpertise.com
Tel. 925.876.1381 (Jennifer Kessinger)
tk@globaltradeexpertise.com Tel. 708.707.4087 (Tammie Krauskopf)
rr@globaltradexpertise.com Tel. (630) 862-8123
www.globaltradeexpertise.com
| |
|
|