Sailing + Trade in One Post!

When I go sailing, the only border I cross is between Illinois and Wisconsin.  Sailors in Florida have far more options that require worrying about customs and trade issue.  

Yesterday, I was quoted in the Sarasota Herald Tribune about the prospects for U.S. sailors who want to sail to Cuba to participate in a regatta.  As I told the reporter, its entirely possible to do.  But, and its an important point, anyone who wants to do that needs to go through the right process and seek a specific license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control.  What's involved is an application under 31 CFR 515.567 involving public performances, athletic, and other competitions.  

I know some are probably thinking that rich yachtsmen and women in ascots and Henri Lloyd foulies don't qualify as "athletes."  Two things: First the definition is not all that strict.  Second, watch this:



Comments

Mike Turner said…
Larry -

You should also note that Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has also previously issued administrative penalties to participants in sailing regattas and fishing tournaments, for failure to obtain BIS export licenses for export of their boats to Cuba. This is separate and apart from any OFAC requirements regarding licensing for travel/ financial transactions for Cuba.

By way of full disclosure, I'm (a) the former director of BIS's Office of Export Enforcement and (b) a recreational sailor; and (c) the aforesaid penalties were issued after I had retired from the Government. I don't completely agree with the rationale BIS used to issue these penalties, but they're the arbiter...

Mike Turner
MK Technology
Apr 2, 2009, 3:04:00 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CAFC Decision in Double Invoicing Case

The Federal Circuit has issued a decision on the merits in United States v. Inn Foods, Inc.  There had been a previous decision on jurisdiction, which was followed by a trial at the Court of International Trade and then this appeal on the substance. The initial issue is whether Inn Foods' invoicing practice amounts to fraud.  Inn Foods had been receiving an invoice from growers in Mexico that had a relatively low sales prices on it.  Subsequent to entry, Inn Foods created a second invoice at something more similar to market value, retaining the original invoice number, and paid at that higher amount.   Superficially, this looks like a standard-issue double-invoicing scheme.  But, in the age of reconciliation, is it really more like a provisional pricing mechanism?  It might have been possible to make that argument had Inn Foods adjusted its entries accordingly.  It didn't and the loss of revenue was approximately $624,000.  Based on testimony and evidence indicating both knowl
Read more

Target on Finality

Image
In the last post , about the Federal Circuit’s very important decision on due process and allegations of evasion of antidumping duties, I made a snarky, offhand comment that the government believes “liquidation is magic.” That was in the context of the government arguing that Customs’ liquidation of entries mooted an appeal, thereby taking away the importer’s right to further judicial review. I said that knowing full well that I still needed to write this post summarizing Target Corp. v. United States in which Target made what I want to be a valid and righteous argument that Customs’ improper liquidation of entries at a favorable rate of antidumping duty prevents the Court of International Trade from ordering Customs to collect the legally applicable duties. But it turns out that while liquidation is an important legal step, in at least one unusual circumstance it is not sufficiently powerful to overcome the full force of an Article III court. Understanding this case requires a lot
Read more

CAFC: EAPA Process Really Does Violate Due Process

Image
Hot on the heels of my complaining about how the EAPA law and process is stacked against importers, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued an important decision that will have a major impact on how those cases work. If you are unfamiliar with evasion cases under the Enforce and Protect Act and how Customs and Border Protection handles them, go back and look at these two posts: Part 1 , Part 2. Royal Brush Manufacturing, Inc. v. United States , is the decision in an evasion case against Royal Brush involving pencils allegedly transshipped from China through the Philippines. Customs determined that there was evasion of an antidumping duty order based in part on evidence that was not disclosed to Royal. Specifically, Customs sent a representative to the facility in the Philippines to photograph the interior and provide a report. Customs refused to disclose all the photographs to Royal. Moreover, CBP's report concluded that the facility did not have sufficient capacit
Read more