The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls announced that due to recent events in Kyrgyzstan that the review of applications involving Kyrgyzstan “may be delayed.” (Do not think to yourself that the processing of all applications for all countries has always been delayed.) DDTC also advised applicants that “approvals should not be assumed.” (more…)
Archive for the ‘Denied & Restricted Parties’ Category
DDTC Puts Semi-Hold on Applications for Kyrgyzstan
Wednesday, June 9th, 2010 by John BlackFreight Forwarder Pays Small Fine for Export Involving Prohibited Party
Wednesday, June 9th, 2010 by John BlackG&W International Forwarders (G&W) agreed to settle a charge of aiding and abetting an export of an EAR99 Stack Sizer Screening Machine to Indian Rare Earths, Ltd., which is on the Proliferation Entity List in Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations. G&W agreed to pay $20,000 (in 5 installments) for the violation.
Two interesting points: First, the freight forwarder got nailed for arranging the export to a party on the Entity List. This shows that forwarders and other parties involved in facilitating exports can be penalized for participating in illegal exports. I have not heard that the actual exporter got penalized in this case. I do not know who the exporter is, but I got this website when I googled Stack Sizer Screening Machine: http://www.derrickcorp.com/webmodules/catCatalog/dtl_Product.aspx?ID=33 and that company is in Buffalo with G&W. I do not know why the exporter got penalized but if I had to make a wild guess, I would say maybe the actual exporter did a voluntary disclosure and maybe the exporter did not warn G&W it was doing a disclosure so that G&W could do its own disclosure.
The second interesting point is that $20,000 penalty is not much of a deterrent. I doubt you can use this case to convince your management that you should be doing a better job of screening against the denial lists. In fact, an unscrupulous person could argue that it is cheaper to pay a $20k fine than to implement comprehensive denial list screening procedures. Of course, penalties are based on an assessment of aggravating and mitigating factors.
http://efoia.bis.doc.gov/exportcontrolviolations/tocexportviolations.htm
Credit Suisse Gets $536 Million Fine
Friday, February 19th, 2010 by Danielle McClellanOFAC recently announced its largest sanctions policy ever…$536 million. Credit Suisse AG, a Switzerland-based bank agreed to the momentous fine after processing 5,000 electronic funds transfers (EFTs) on behalf of banks and individuals in Cuba, Iran, Sudan, and Burma among other countries. (more…)


