International Trade Law News /title <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <meta name="verify-v1" content="6kFGcaEvnPNJ6heBYemQKQasNtyHRZrl1qGh38P0b6M=" /> <head> <title>International Trade Law News

« Home | Midway Arms Inc. Settles Charges of Illegal Exports » | Commerce Department Revokes Antidumping Duty Order... » | BIS Issues Frequently Asked Questions on Changes t... » | ITC Makes Negative Injury Determination in Antidum... » | Robert Werner Named as Director of OFAC » | Meetings During BIS and Customs Law Updates » | BIS Requests Comments on Foreign-Policy Based Expo... » | BIS Requests Comments on Effectiveness of TSRA Lic... » | DOC Issues Preliminary Results of Antidumping Inve... » | USA*Engage and National Foreign Trade Council Issu... » 

October 01, 2004 

BIS Announces Antiboycott Settlements

On September 30, 2004, the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Indutry and Security (BIS) announced the settlement of two cases involving violations of the antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR).

In the first case, St. Jude Medical Export GmbH, an Austrian subsidiary of a Minnesota-based U.S. exporter of medical equipment, agreed to pay a $30,000 civil penalty to settle charges that it violated the antiboycott provisions of the EAR by failing to report in a timely manner its receipt of three requests from an Iraqi government agency to adhere to the rules of the Israeli boycott during the 2000-2001 reporting period. BIS also charged that, on four occasions, St. Jude violated the antiboycott provisions by agreeing to refuse to do business with blacklisted persons.

In the second case, Arab Bank Plc., of New York, agreed to pay a $9,000 civil penalty to settle charges that it violated the antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by furnishing prohibited information about another company’s business relationships in connection with a transaction involving the sale of goods to Oman. BIS also charged that Arab Bank failed to maintain records relating to a reportable boycott request.

The antiboycott provisions of the EAR prohibit U.S. persons from complying with certain requirements of unsanctioned foreign boycotts, including providing information about business relationships with another person who is known or believed to be restricted from having a business relationship with or in a boycotting country. In addition, the EAR requires that U.S. persons report their receipt of certain boycott requests to the Department of Commerce. Under the antiboycott provisions of the EAR, a controlled-in-fact foreign subsidiary of a domestic U.S. company is considered a U.S. person.

Labels:


Editor

Subscribe

Subscribe to our confidential mailing list

Mobile Version

Search Trade Law News

International Trade and Compliance Jobs

Jobs from Indeed

Archives

Categories

Disclaimer

  • This Site is presented for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed when you use this Site. Do not consider the Site to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney. The information on this Site may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While we try to revise this Site on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed on this Site are the opinions of the individual author.
  • The content on this Site may be reproduced and/or distributed in whole or in part, provided that its source is indicated as "International Trade Law News, www.tradelawnews.com".
  • ©2003-2015. All rights reserved.

Translate This Site


Powered by Blogger