Thursday, March 17, 2011

ATTENTION: Free Webinar “Export Compliance: Best Practices in High Volume Screening” live Thursday, March 31st, 2 PM EST

American Shipper's Associate Editor Eric Kulisch moderates a one-hour Webinar broadcast exploring the latest trends and best practices in screening restricted parties.


When do you screen? Who do you screen? How often do you screen? How many lists are enough?When it comes to screening, what does the US Government require? Is manual screening still even possible or prudent? and much more…

The discussion will include a focus on the solutions Verizon Business employs to overcome the compliance challenges faced by a hi-volume exporter. This session is hosted by Management Dynamics, Inc. and features panelists: Kishore Gundamraj, Export Compliance Manager, Verizon Business; Nathan Pieri, SVP Marketing, Management Dynamics, John Priecko, President and Managing Partner, Trade Compliance Solutions

Register at http://www.americanshipper.com/NewWeb/hitechexport/index.asp

Saturday, March 12, 2011

New Coalition Seeks Best Practices for Export Control Compliance

The Coalition for Excellence in Export Compliance (CEEC) is an enthusiastic all volunteer group of experienced trade compliance professionals focused on long overdue harmonization, standardization and consistency in export compliance best practices.

Different than other organizations like the Defense Trade Advisory Group, the President’s Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration and the six Department of Commerce Technical Advisory Committees, the CEEC is not directly affiliated with any US Government (USG) organization. However, the CEEC advocates mutually beneficial ongoing relationships with virtually any individual or organization that has an honest interest and stake in the export control equation and wants to improve long overdue compliance consistency.

The CEEC is already working with the USG on various initiatives. It was invited and briefed the members of the Export Control Reform Task Force and Interagency Export Control Modernization Compliance Working Group. The CEEC was also invited to make a presentation to the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee to get them in the loop and further explore mutual benefits.

Other discussions are underway and more such sessions will follow with organizations like the US Commercial Service, various trade and professional associations, the National District Export Council and Export University.

This is truly a team effort seeking clarity, consistency and specificity in export compliance best practices and standards. The CEEC’s mission statement is to Identify and recommend export compliance best practices that provide practical guidance to better detect and prevent violations of law.

For more information about the CEEC, its various initiatives and how you might contribute, please contact John Priecko, 703-895-1110 or jpriecko@comcast.net. A CEEC Fact Sheet is also available on John’s LinkedIn home page in the “View Full Profile” Mode at http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnpriecko.

Monday, February 7, 2011

Do NOT miss the free Sunday evening reception at the Bureau of Industry & Security, Export Control Forum (ECF) in Irvine, California!

Please join Management Dynamics and ECF attendees, organizers and speakers for a Meet & Greet Reception at the 6ix Park Grill located in the Hyatt Regency, 17900 Jamboree Road, Irvine, CA 92614, on Sunday evening, Feb 27, 7-9 PM. Cocktails, hors d’oeuvres and networking opportunities will be served.

If you plan to attend the reception, please RSVP with an email to emilythornton@managementdynamics.com no later than February 22nd.

As a seasoned ECF attendee and trade compliance veteran, the reception is a great way to start the ECF and a proven way to connect or reconnect with counterparts.

Based on first-hand past experience the US Government (USG) organizers and high-level speakers from DC will also be there, readily available and always willing to discuss whatever is on your mind. Thus, I enthusiastically encourage you to attend both days of the ECF and do NOT miss the valuable networking reception to kick things off.

The ECF and Sunday night reception are great ways to connect and get up-to-speed on what’s going on in the world of export control. It’s also a timely opportunity to get the inside scoop on what’s happening in your region and what’s really going on with export control reform and other timely and hot topics.

Monday, January 17, 2011

If you are or aspire to be an Empowered Official (EO), responsible authority or senior trade compliance person, there is a new LinkedIn Group for you.

After discussion with and encouragement from counterparts, we started a new LinkedIn Group expressly for EOs and other senior trade compliance personnel. I do a great deal of work in this area and know there is a significant gap and need to address the unique concerns and interests of this growing community of professionals.

The idea behind EO Net is to provide an open, hands-on, practical application focused forum to discuss case studies, challenges, hot topics and issues of interest. We enthusiastically welcome factual, honest, courteous and productive communications on any related topic.

Membership is open to interested practitioners who are willing to share their experience, expertise, lessons learned and resources to better appreciate, understand and deal with the responsibilities, roles and real world exposure, liability and risk that come with the EO and senior trade compliance leadership positions.

Unfortunately some EOs are target of opportunity selections and may not be the best or right person for the job. Additionally, the regulations are inadequate in preparing EOs and others for what they are in store for or addressing the breadth and depth of the problems they will face. Adequate selection criteria do not exist in the Export Administration Regulations or International Traffic in Arms Regulations. All too often people in this career field learn the hard way on the job.

Further, EOs and other senior trade compliance team members are critical elements in any trade compliance program. They are crucial to success or failure and instrumental in executing and maintaining a culture of compliance (or non-compliance) from the top down, vertically, laterally and globally in an organization.

The goal behind EO Net is to help educate, train and inform so we can collectively better deal with problems, situations and as a result better comply with the letter and spirit of the law. We encourage and welcome you participation and contributions....

If you have any questions or suggestions on how to maximize the benefits from this unique group, feel free to contact me directly at 703-895-1110, jpriecko@comcast.net or via my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnpriecko/.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Nov. 8th Los Angeles & Nov. 10th San Diego Workshops Focus on Requirements, Responsibilities, Problems, Exposure, Liability and Risk...

Do NOT miss these two unique US Commercial Service and District Export Council sponsored low-cost and high-quality workshops in Southern California titled: “Challenges Facing Empowered Officials and Trade Compliance Professionals.”

These unique programs will much better prepare, educate and train you and your organization to be ready for a wide-range of real world situations, consequences and other adverse outcomes in the currently invigorated enforcement environment.

The agenda for these unique practical-application local/regionally-oriented half-day workshops includes: Legal / Export Administration Regulations and International Traffic in Arms Regulations Requirements and Other Concerns; What the Regulations Don’t Say and How to Prepare for What’s Ahead; Hands-on Interactive Case Studies and Lessons Learned; the President’s Export Control Reforms: Impact & Implications; and afternoon free one-hour sessions with the presenters to discuss your issues of interest

For more details and online registration including ICPA member discounts go to:
Los Angeles: http://www.buyusa.gov/pacificsouth/compliance.html
San Diego: http://www.regonline.com/trade_compliance_workshop

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Incoterms® 2010 Simplified

Incoterms® is a registered trademark of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), Paris, France.
The 11 new Incoterms® go into effect on January 01, 2011

RULES FOR ANY MODE OR MODES OF TRANSPORT
EXW
Ex Works (named place of delivery)
FCA
Free Carrier (named place of delivery)
CPT
Carriage Paid To (named place of destination)
CIP
Carriage And Insurance Paid To (named place of destination)
DAT
Delivered At Terminal (named terminal at port or place of destination)
DAP
Delivered At Place (named place of destination)
DDP
Delivered Duty Paid (named place of destination)


RULES FOR SEA AND INLAND WATERWAY TRANSPORT
FAS
Free Alongside Ship (named port of shipment)
FOB
Free On Board (named port of shipment)
CFR
Cost And Freight (named port of destination)
CIF
Cost, Insurance and Freight (named port of destination)

Incoterms® define the responsibilities of buyers and sellers for the domestic and international delivery of goods and determine how costs and risks are allocated.
The words, “importer” and exporter” have been used instead of “buyer” and “seller” that relate more closely with international (cross-border) trade.

1.
EXW
Ex Works (named place of delivery)

Exporter places goods at their premises at importer’s disposal, i.e. works, factory or warehouse. For example: EXW Street Address, City, Country or EXW City, Country if the named address has been specified in the contract of sale.
Exporter has limited obligations to provide export information and is not obliged to load the goods on any conveyance. Moreover, importer has to organize export clearance from the country of shipment.
It should not be assumed that export formalities such as licenses, authorizations and security-related information are the responsibility of the importer. The exporter must provide, at importer’s request, risk and expense, assistance in these export formalities.

2.
FCA
Free Carrier (named place of delivery)

Exporter delivers the goods to the carrier or another person nominated by importer at the exporter’s premises or another named place. For example: FCA Street Address of Forwarder/Consolidator, City, Country.
Exporter is required to clear the goods for export.
Delivery is said to have taken place when the exporter places the goods at the named place. It is then up to the importer to arrange for further means of transport.
Transfer of risk for loss or damage from exporter to importer takes place when said delivery has taken place in said manner.

3.
CPT
Carriage Paid To (named place of destination)

Exporter delivers the goods to the carrier or another person nominated by them at an agreed place and pays the costs to ship the goods to the named place of destination. For example: CPT Destination City.
Exporter is required to clear the goods for export.
The agreed place of delivery is where the risk passes to the importer. The costs of transportation to the destination place (named city) are borne by the exporter but the risk for damage or loss to the goods passes when delivery is made at the agreed place. The agreed place may be the carrier’s or the nominated person’s premises, the airport or port terminal warehouse or any other place, as agreed to in the contract of sale.
Several carriers may be used to transport the goods to its destination.
Example:
- Goods transported from factory address by a trucking company (first carrier)
- Then from the trucking company’s address to a rail yard by a another trucking company (second carrier)
- Then from the rail yard to the port rail yard by rail (third carrier)
- Then from the port rail yard to a dock by another trucking company (fourth carrier)
- Finally by vessel to the final destination (fifth carrier)

4.
CIP
Carriage And Insurance Paid To (named place of destination)

Exporter delivers the goods to the carrier or another person nominated by them at an agreed place and also contracts for insurance cover against risk of loss or damage to the goods during the carriage in addition to paying the costs to ship the goods to the destination.  For example: CIP Destination City.
CIP can be considered similar to CPT with insurance cover added.
Exporter is required to clear the goods for export.

5.
DAT
Delivered At Terminal (named terminal at port or place of destination)

Exporter delivers the goods after unloading from the arriving vessel or other means of transport and places them at the disposal of the importer at a named terminal at a named port. For example: Port name, Terminal number.
Terminal could also mean a port warehouse, container yard, rail station or air cargo terminal.
Exporter bears all risks and costs involved up to unloading the goods at the named terminal.
For LCL (Loose Container Load) cargo, it would be the obligation of the exporter to have the LCL cargo unloaded from the container and placed in their NVOCC (Non-Vessel Operation Common Carrier) or freight forwarders warehouse at the disposal of the importer. The exporter bears all the costs up to this point. It is then the obligation of the importer to arrange for pick-up.

6.
DAP
Delivered At Place (named place of destination)

Delivery takes place at a named destination and when the goods have been placed at the disposal of the importer but have not yet been unloaded from the arriving vehicle. For example DAP City name.
In this case, the street address of the importer could also be included or indicated separately in the contract of sale as the named place of destination or any agreed to point.
Risks and costs up to the named address and prior to the time the goods are unloaded are the exporter’s responsibility.

7.
DDP
Delivered Duty Paid (named place of destination)

Exporter places the goods at the disposal of the importer with all import duties and taxes paid. The exporter is also responsible for all costs associated with importing the goods and assumes risk for damage to or loss of the goods up to the named place of destination. For example: DDP City name. Street address of the importer could also be included or indicated separately in the contract of sale as the named place of destination.

8.
FAS
Free Alongside Ship (named port of shipment)

Exporter places the goods alongside the vessel nominated by the importer at a named port of shipment. For example: FAS Port name.
For exporters who ship goods in containers, placing a container alongside a vessel is most likely not possible because containers are usually first sent to a terminal or loaded at a NVOCC’s warehouse before being loaded onto the vessel. It is therefore advisable to use FCA in these cases. FAS is usually used for bulk cargo.
Risk of loss of and damage to the goods up to the port is the exporter’s responsibility and the importer then assumes risk and bears all costs thereafter.

9.
FOB
Free On Board (named port of shipment)

Exporter is required to deliver the goods on board a vessel. For example: FOB Port name.
This is sometimes not possible for exporters who ship goods in containers because containers are usually first sent to a terminal or loaded at a NVOCC’s warehouse before being loaded onto the vessel.
Risk of loss of and damage to the goods is the exporter’s responsibility up to when the goods are on board the vessel.
FOB is good to use for bulk cargo.
The point of delivery here is the named port.
Usually the exporter hands over a loaded, ready-to-ship container to the carrier at a warehouse or terminal (named place) before being loaded onto the vessel. This then cannot be an appropriate FOB transaction which states Free On Board. In the case of container shipments, it is advisable to use FCA.

10.
CFR
Cost And Freight (named port of destination)

Exporter delivers the goods on board a vessel and pays the costs and freight necessary to bring the goods to the named port of destination. For example: CFR Port name.
The point of delivery here is when the goods are on board the vessel at the shipment port.
Therefore, the exporter’s obligation for loss or damage to the goods is to this point of delivery. It is not up to the port of destination.
Here, the risk passes at the port of shipment even though the freight costs have been paid up to the port of destination. Point to bear in mind is that with CFR terms the destination port is known but not necessarily the origin port. It is entirely likely that the exporter may opt to ship from different ports each time. In all cases, risk passes to the importer at the port of shipment.
Similarly as with FOB, CFR cannot be an appropriate term to use for container shipments because containers are handed over to the carrier at a warehouse or terminal (named place) before being loaded onto the vessel. In this case, it is advisable to use CPT.

11.
CIF
Cost, Insurance and Freight (named port of destination)

Exporter delivers the goods on board a vessel and pays the costs and freight necessary to bring the goods to the named port of destination as well as covers insurance for risk of loss of or damage to the goods during carriage. For example: CIF Port name.
The point of delivery here is when the goods are on board the vessel at the shipment port.
The exporter’s obligation for loss or damage to the goods is to this point and not up to the port of destination.
The two critical points of when the risk passes from the exporter and the incurred costs are the same as in CFR.
Similarly, too, because of container shipments which are handed over to the carrier before being loaded onto the vessel, CIF is not an appropriate term to use. In this case, it is advisable to use CIP.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Meeting to Discuss Harmonizing Trade Compliance Best Practices, Standards, Benchmarking and Related Education & Training…

On Wednesday, October 27th, seasoned trade compliance professionals are getting together in Washington DC for an “Exploratory Discussion on Trade Compliance Standards.” The session is hosted by the law firm of Baker & McKenzie LLP in cooperation with The Export Practitioner, University of Georgia and National Foreign Trade Council, Inc.

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss consistency and harmonization of best practices, benchmarking and trade compliance standards including related education, training and certification issues. Initial focus is on exports, but international trade is the overarching subject.

The August article in The Export Practitioner “Certificate vs. Certification: Buyer Beware!” energized and educated the constituency, generated a great deal of lively as well as informative discussion and received significant attention from a wide-range of practitioners and vendors alike. That and ongoing inconsistencies in best practices and a lack of consistent standards prompted this meeting.

Already invited representatives from industry, academia, the research & development community, consulting and law firms along with ICPA and District Export Council members and others from the public and private sectors will consider past history, present concerns, address specific actions and the way ahead.

Participants see this as a timely and unique opportunity to make a significant difference and move trade compliance best practices, harmonization, benchmarking and universal standards forward with greater clarity, depth and fidelity than ever before. Hopefully, fundamental export control reform will be a catalyst for significant progress in this arena. Unfortunately much of what needs to be done is long overdue.