(a) Introduction—(1) Scope. This Supplement describes how the Office of Antiboycott Compliance (OAC) responds to violations of part 760 of the EAR “Restrictive Trade Practices or Boycotts” and to violations of part 762 “Recordkeeping” when the recordkeeping requirement pertains to part 760 (together referred to in this supplement as the “antiboycott provisions”). It also describes how BIS makes penalty determinations in the settlement of administrative enforcement cases brought under parts 764 and 766 of the EAR involving violations of the antiboycott provisions.

Introduction This supplement describes how the Office of Export Enforcement (OEE) at the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) responds to apparent violations of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and, specifically, how OEE makes penalty determinations in the settlement of civil administrative enforcement cases under part 764 of the EAR. This guidance does not apply to enforcement cases for violations under part 760 of the EAR—Restrictive Trade Practices or Boycotts. Supplement no.

(a) General. (1) Orders denying export privileges may be “standard” or “non-standard.” This Supplement specifies terms of the standard order denying export privilege with respect to denial orders issued after March 25, 1996. Denial orders issued prior to March 25, 1996 are to be construed, insofar as possible, as having the same scope and effect as the standard denial order. All denial orders are published in the Federal Register. The failure by any person to comply with any denial order is a violation of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (see § 764.2(k) of this part).

Pursuant to the agreement between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel establishing diplomatic and commercial relations (the “Abraham Accords”), on August 16, 2020, the UAE issued Federal Decree-Law No. 4 of 2020, abolishing Federal Law No.

Pursuant to Articles 5, 7, and 26 of the Treaty of Peace between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and implementing legislation enacted by Jordan, Jordan's participation in the Arab economic boycott of Israel was formally terminated on August 16, 1995. On the basis of this action, it is the Department's position that certain requests for information, action or agreement from Jordan which were considered boycott-related by implication now cannot be presumed boycott-related and thus would not be prohibited or reportable under the regulations.

Section 760.2 (c), (d), and (e) of this part prohibits United States persons from furnishing certain types of information with intent to comply with, further, or support an unsanctioned foreign boycott against a country friendly to the United States. The Department has been asked whether prohibited information may be transmitted—that is, passed to others by a United States person who has not directly or indirectly authored the information—without such transmission constituting a furnishing of information in violation of § 760.2 (c), (d), and (e) of this part.

(a) Contractual clause concerning import, customs and boycott laws of a boycotting country.

Summary This interpretation considers boycott-based contractual language dealing with the selection of suppliers and subcontractors. While this language borrows terms from the “unilateral and specific selection” exception contained in § 760.3(d), it fails to meet the requirements of that exception. Compliance with the requirements of the language constitutes a violation of the regulatory prohibition of boycott-based refusals to do business. Regulatory Background Section 760.2(a) of this part prohibits U.S.

The Department has taken the position that a U.S. person as defined by § 760.1(b) of this part may not make use of an agent to furnish information that the U.S. person is prohibited from furnishing pursuant to § 760.2(d) of this part. Example (v) under § 760.4 of this part (Evasion) provides: “A, a U.S. company, is negotiating a long-term contract with boycotting country Y to meet all of Y's medical supply needs. Y informs A that before such a contract can be concluded, A must complete Y's boycott questionnaire.

Definition of Unsolicited Invitation To Bid § 760.5(a)(4) of this part states in part: “In addition, a United States person who receives an unsolicited invitation to bid, or similar proposal, containing a boycott request has not received a reportable request for purposes of this section where he does not respond to the invitation to bid or other proposal.” The Regulations do not define “unsolicited” in this context.