Richard Battaglia

Subscribe to Richard Battaglia's Posts
Contact: Read more about Richard Battaglia

On May 18, 2021, the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued an updated general license under Executive Order (EO) 13959 authorizing US persons to transact in publicly traded securities of entities whose names “closely match” the name of any company previously identified as a Communist Chinese military company (CCMC). The general license (now called General License No. 1B), which was due to expire on May 27, 2021, now expires on June 11, 2021.

For the time being, the restrictions under EO 13959 apply only to entities whose names appear on OFAC’s Non-SDN CCMC List as well as seven entities who are yet to be formally added to OFAC’s Non-SDN CCMC List but were identified by the Department of Defense on January 14, 2021.…

Continue Reading OFAC Extends General License for “Close Name Matches” under Executive Order 13959 as Biden Administration Reviews Communist Chinese Military Company Sanctions

Just three days before restrictions under Executive Order (EO) 13959 arising from Xiaomi Corporation’s designation by the US Department of Defense (DoD) as a Communist Chinese military company (CCMC) were to go into effect, on March 15, 2021, the US District Court for the District of Columbia granted Xiaomi’s request for a preliminary injunction order (the Court Order) against enforcement of the restrictions.

Following the Court Order, on March 14, 2021, the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) published a new Frequently Asked Question (“FAQ”) confirming that, for now, US persons are not prohibited from transacting in publicly traded securities of Xiaomi under EO 13959. OFAC also published a new FAQ concerning the application of EO 13959 to Luokung Technology Corp., which is also designated as a CCMC.…

Continue Reading OFAC FAQs Confirm the Suspension of the Restrictions on Xiaomi’s Securities Following District Court Injunction

Two important anti-corruption due diligence tools published their 2020 results in November 2020 and January 2021. While the results are largely consistent, there are some important differences and some key improvements and declines in the Transparency International 2020 Corruption Perceptions Index and the TRACE 2020 Bribery Risk Matrix.

To comprehensively understand the risks and take…

In the latest shoe to drop in the escalation of tensions between the United States and China, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issued a final rule on December 23, 2020, removing Hong Kong as a separate destination under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Rather than adding Hong Kong alongside the People’s Republic of China to Country Group D in the Commerce Country Chart, BIS eliminated references to it in all but a few sections of the EAR.

The removal of Hong Kong as a separate destination is a further step toward implementation of Executive Order (EO) 13936, signed July 14, 2020. (85 FR 43413, 7/17/2020). Steptoe’s prior analysis of EO 13936 is available here. EO 13936 directed relevant agencies to amend their regulations to remove differential and preferential treatment for exports, reexports, or transfers (in-country) to or within Hong Kong of all items subject to the EAR when compared to the treatment for such transactions to or within China. The final rule codifies the BIS rule issued July 31, 2020, which required that Hong Kong be treated the same as China in almost all circumstances; that is, Hong Kong would be subject to the same license requirements, license exceptions, and other applicable provisions as China under the EAR (85 FR 45998).

Specifically, in this new rule, BIS removes the entry for Hong Kong from the Commerce Country Chart at Supplement No. 1 to Part 738, since Hong Kong is now to be governed by the entry for China. Most references to Hong Kong in Part 740 of the EAR governing license exceptions were previously removed, consistent with the July 31 final rule. The Hong Kong entities listed separately on the Unverified List, Supplement No. 6 to Part 744, are now merged, alphabetically under the entries for China.…

Continue Reading Hong Kong Removed as a Separate Destination from China Under the EAR

On August 28, China’s Ministry of Commerce and Ministry of Science and Technology jointly released a newly revised Catalogue of Technologies Prohibited and Restricted from Export (“Catalogue”), which is the second revision since the creation of the Catalogue in 2001. While China has separate control lists for items (including technology) controlled for non-proliferation reasons (i.e. nuclear, biological, chemical and missile-related control lists), this Catalogue sets forth technologies that otherwise warrant control, including on grounds of national security, public interests, environmental protection, etc.[1]

The Catalogue is structured in accordance with the industry classification issued by China’s National Bureau of Statistics, with the controlled technologies listed by category under each industry with a code assigned to the category. Before the revision, the Catalogue contained 150 categories/codes of technologies related to 34 industries, including 33 prohibited categories and 117 restricted categories. The controlled technologies include techniques related to China’s indigenous cultural and natural resources (e.g. manufacturing techniques of certain tea, alcohol, food and Chinese medicine, certain panda nurturing techniques) as well as technologies that are important to safeguarding China’s economic interests and national security.

The revision this time removed 4 categories of “prohibited” technologies and 5 categories of “restricted” technologies, while adding 23 new categories of “restricted” technologies. Moreover, changes were made to 21 existing categories with respect to the nature and parameters of the specific technology covered. Those newly added include technologies related to encryption, cyber defense, metal 3D printing, aero remote sensors, UAVs, lasers, major power and petrochemical facilities, etc.…

Continue Reading China Updates its Catalogue of Technologies Prohibited and Restricted from Export

With the world economy significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, many companies are struggling to survive and facing an acute need to retain existing business and obtain new business. This puts pressure on their business and marketing teams. As a result, proper management of the anti-corruption risks associated with business hospitality is even more important to avoid possible breach of applicable anti-bribery laws such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

Business hospitality, including gifts, meals, entertainment, transportation, lodging and per diems, that legitimately promotes cordial business relations or demonstrates a company’s products or services is a normal part of business relationships across the globe. However, business hospitality that improperly influences the behavior of the recipient to obtain or retain business advantages may result in actual or perceived anti-corruption violations, causing economic as well as reputational damage to the company. So, what are the things to look at when reviewing business hospitality expenses? This blogpost provides some practical advice to in-house legal and compliance professionals on the review and approval of business hospitality expenses.…

Continue Reading Risk Management for Business Hospitality–The Basics

As the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic continues globally, multinational companies and individuals are joining the fight against the virus, donating money and medical supplies, and providing necessary services. However, when making these charitable donations, either domestically or globally, companies should consider appropriate anti-corruption compliance procedures under applicable anti-bribery laws such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act to ensure the donation is used for the intended charitable purpose.  Any donation should be carried out in an open and transparent fashion, be based on fair and objective criteria, be accurately and completely documented, and be consistent in all respects with the principles of the company’s code of conduct and anti-corruption policies.

Some practical compliance safeguards include:

  • Donations should be made only to recipients that can be relied upon to use the donation in the legitimate manner intended by your company;
  • Donations should be described accurately and in reasonable detail in the books and records of your company; and
  • Donations that improperly or disproportionately benefit a public official or other recipient who has regulatory oversight over or who can improperly influence your company’s business should not be made.

…
Continue Reading Anti-Corruption Compliance for Charitable Donations—The Basics

Click here to read the full Client Advisory by Steptoe.

On January 23, 2020, Transparency International published its 2019 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI),  which measures perceptions of public sector corruption in 180 countries. Viewed together with the 2019 TRACE Bribery Risk Matrix,  which also includes private sector corruption, the Asia Pacific (APAC)…

Click here to read the full Client Advisory by Steptoe.

Of the record-breaking USD 2.9 billion in fines imposed by US authorities in 2019 for violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), almost 95% involved Asia Pacific, primarily China and India, but also Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, and South Korea.

This year, the US…

Click here to read the full Client Advisory by Steptoe.

On December 28, 2019, China’s Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) published a new draft Export Control Law (the draft law) for public comment. As China’s first export control statute, this law is intended to unify and significantly enhance China’s existing export control…