CommissionIssues

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Monday, August 24, 2009

BIS Imposes $70,000 Civil Penalty on NY Freight Forwarder for Entity List Violation

Posted on 8:49 PM by Unknown
Yet another company has been fined by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) for an export-related violation involving a party on the Entity List.

Today BIS posted the settlement documents involving Eastways Shipping Corporation, a New York City-based freight forwarder. Eastways agreed to pay a $70,000 civil penalty ($23,333 per violation) for allegedly arranging for the export of scrap metal worth $95,335 to Allied Trading Company, a company in Karachi, Pakistan that is included on the Entity List. The scrap metal involved in these transactions was classified as EAR99.

As a result of its actions, BIS charged Eastways with three counts of aiding and abetting an act prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) since the scrap metal was apparently exported to Pakistan without the required export licenses.

The Entity List, established in 1997 and modified periodically, is found in Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 (pdf) of the EAR. The Entity List includes non-U.S. businesses, research institutions, government and private organizations, individuals, and other types of entities whose activities are contrary to U.S. national security and/or foreign policy interests.

The inclusion of a party on the Entity List notifies exporters that certain exports and reexports to parties identified on the Entity List require an export license from BIS and that the availability of License Exceptions in such transactions is limited. The Entity List also includes the license review policy for each part listed. In some cases, there is a presumption that an export license will not be granted.

In this case, the Entity List states that for Allied Trading Company the license review policy is "case-by-case for all items listed on the CCL" and that there is a "presumption of approval for EAR99 items." Because the scrap metal was classified as EAR99, it appears likely that BIS would have approved the export license application submitted by the exporter in this case. BIS has yet to post the civil penalty against the exporter that attempted to sell the scrap metal to Pakistan.

This case once again demonstrates the need for all parties in U.S. export transactions to screen all of the customers and end-users against the Entity List and the other restricted party lists maintained by the U.S. Government.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in BIS; EAR, Export Controls | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • OFAC Announces Rare "Finding of Violation" for Failing to File Blocked Property Reports
    OFAC's Office of Enforcement last week issued a rare " Finding of Violation " to Visa International Service Association for fa...
  • DDTC Issues Announcement Regarding Use of USML Category XXI
    The State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) issued an announcement (doc) today that could impact many exporter...
  • Photos From BIS 2010 Export Control Forum
    Below are some photos from the Bureau of Industry and Security's 2010 Export Control Forum that was held earlier this week in Irvine, Ca...
  • BIS Imposes Denial Orders and Civil Penalties in Cases Involving Unlicensed Exports From U.S. to Taiwan
    In a series of four related cases involving the unlicensed exports of chemicals, metals and electronic components from the U.S. to Taiwan, t...
  • BIS Publishes Final Rule Regarding In-Country Transfers to Parties on Entity List
    The Bureau of Industry (BIS) published a final rule (PDF) in today's Federal Register amending several sections of Part 744 of the Exp...
  • BIS Publishes Rule Making Editorial Changes to Commerce Control List
    The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a final rule in today's Federal Register modifying the Co...
  • Addressing Today’s Most Common Corporate Compliance Gaps
    Guest Post Addressing Today’s Most Common Corporate Compliance Gaps By Steve Kuzma and Paul Harris, Ernst & Young LLP* Increased corpora...
  • Seasons Greetings and Happy New Year From International Trade Law News and Letter to Santa Regarding Possible Compliance Violations
    Season's Greetings and Happy New Year to all of our loyal readers and clients around the world. See you in 201 3 .  In the spirit of th...
  • DDTC Requesting Comments on New Commodity Jurisdiction Form
    The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) published a Federal Register notice announcing that the 30 day comment period has begun fo...
  • Finding a Willing Buyer Is Only the First Step of the Export Process
    U.S. Exporters Looking to Boost Business Overseas Need to Understand the Rules and Regulations That Apply to International Trade Transaction...

Categories

  • 10+2 (1)
  • 2B350 (1)
  • AES (12)
  • Antidumping (17)
  • ATPA (1)
  • Belarus (2)
  • best practices (1)
  • BIS (56)
  • BIS Update Conference (14)
  • BIS; EAR (22)
  • BIS; EAR; (7)
  • Boycotts (2)
  • Burma/Myanmar (1)
  • C-TPAT (3)
  • Canada (2)
  • CBP (20)
  • CBP; Marking (1)
  • CEEC (1)
  • Census (11)
  • CFIUS (2)
  • China (8)
  • China; (11)
  • Commerce Department (2)
  • Congress (10)
  • Countervailing Duties (8)
  • CPSC (1)
  • Cuba (18)
  • Customs (12)
  • Customs Brokers (1)
  • DDTC (21)
  • EAA (1)
  • Export Controls (144)
  • Exports (17)
  • FAST (1)
  • FCPA (34)
  • Free Trade Agreements (4)
  • GSP (8)
  • HTS (2)
  • Incoterms (8)
  • India (6)
  • ITAR (46)
  • ITC (2)
  • Japan (2)
  • Libya (5)
  • Miscellaneous (27)
  • NASA (3)
  • North Korea (8)
  • OFAC (36)
  • Sanctions (10)
  • Sanctions; Iran (58)
  • Sanctions; Sanctions; Syria (1)
  • Sanctions; Sudan (6)
  • Sanctions; Syria (6)
  • State Department (4)
  • Trade Policy (1)
  • TSRA (1)
  • Twitter (1)
  • UAE (5)
  • United Kingdom (1)
  • United Nations (3)
  • USTR (3)
  • Vietnam (2)
  • WTO (2)
  • Zimbabwe (1)

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (17)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2012 (32)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2011 (63)
    • ►  December (7)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (6)
    • ►  September (7)
    • ►  August (6)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (10)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (12)
  • ►  2010 (114)
    • ►  December (12)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (16)
    • ►  July (16)
    • ►  June (9)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (11)
    • ►  February (19)
    • ►  January (12)
  • ▼  2009 (237)
    • ►  December (35)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (29)
    • ▼  August (10)
      • DDTC Publishes Statutory Debarment List
      • BIS Imposes $70,000 Civil Penalty on NY Freight Fo...
      • OFAC Imposes $5.75 Million Penalty on Bank for Vio...
      • Cracking Down on Iran's Illicit Trade
      • Despite Reports U.S. Export Control Policy on Syri...
      • Latest Posts on Recent BIS Export Enforcement Case...
      • BIS Imposes Civil Penalties on U.S. Exporter and E...
      • BIS Imposes $610,000 Penalty on Houston Company fo...
      • President Obama Orders Export Control Review Initi...
      • Professor Roth Released on Bond Pending Appeal; Ro...
    • ►  July (22)
    • ►  June (13)
    • ►  May (11)
    • ►  April (20)
    • ►  March (24)
    • ►  February (29)
    • ►  January (30)
  • ►  2008 (37)
    • ►  December (37)
Powered by Blogger.