LONDON -- The U.K. government is pouring more resources into enforcement of its sanctions and export controls, with a particular focus on closing loopholes that may be allowing Russia to receive restricted business services or continuing to buy critical items for its military, a senior U.K. trade official said this week.
Ian Cohen
Ian Cohen, Deputy Managing Editor, is a reporter with Export Compliance Daily and its sister publications International Trade Today and Trade Law Daily, where he covers export controls, sanctions and international trade issues. He previously worked as a local government reporter in South Florida. Ian graduated with a journalism degree from the University of Florida in 2017 and lives in Washington, D.C. He joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2019.
The Bureau of Industry and Security has removed multiple companies from a list of flagged foreign suppliers accused of illegal sales to Russia, including one after the company told BIS it was added by mistake, Export Compliance Daily has learned.
U.S. companies and trade groups applauded a recent Bureau of Industry and Security rule that expanded the agency’s export control exemption for certain standards-setting activities, saying the change will help remove licensing barriers faced by American officials at international bodies working on emerging technology standards. But at least one group asked BIS to continue expanding the exemption to cover a wider set of technologies discussed in standards bodies involving the electronics, telecommunications and aviation industries.
Companies should continue to expect an “aggressive” U.S. sanctions enforcement landscape heading into next year, and should consider increasing the amount of due diligence they undertake if they haven’t already, panelists said during an event last week about sanctions compliance.
The top lawmaker on the House Select Committee on China called on the U.S. to continue imposing strict export controls and investment restrictions against China, adding that those tools must be coupled with bolder investments in innovative American companies if the U.S. wants to “win” its technology competition with China.
Export enforcement officials from the U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the U.K. met in Washington this week, where they warned businesses about complying with export controls against Russia and committed to expanding joint investigations to penalize violators.
The EU could soon see a sharp uptick in its use of defensive trade policy tools, especially if Donald Trump is elected the next U.S. president and follows through with his promise of a new global tariff (see 2409110015), at least one panelist said during a roundtable discussion on EU competitiveness.
After initially facing scrutiny for helping to facilitate Russia-related transactions, Cypriot banks have made significant progress in improving their compliance programs in recent months and are now adhering to all U.S. sanctions rules, the country’s top banking industry officials said this week. They also said they face hurdles implementing some of the sanctions, including potential legal challenges from customers.
The U.K. will officially launch a new agency Oct. 10 to oversee civil enforcement of certain sanctions and trade restrictions for controlled goods and services moving or being provided outside the U.K. The new Office of Trade Sanctions Implementation, first unveiled last year (see 2312110016), will investigate and impose fines on U.K. sanctions violators and introduce new reporting requirements for businesses, potentially to include information about their due diligence practices.
A new final rule issued by the Bureau of Industry and Security this week will codify a host of updates the agency made to its administrative enforcement policies over the past three years, including measures to help BIS more quickly resolve minor voluntary disclosures and increase penalties on exporters who choose not to report serious violations. Other changes will give BIS broader discretion to impose higher fines, including by eliminating language that had capped maximum base civil penalties for “non-egregious” violations.