you're reading...
Aircraft Parts, aviation, Commerce CCLs, ECCNs and BIS, Export, International Trade, ITARs

U.S. Government Almost Ready to Publish Export Reform

MARPA has reported on, and vocally supported, the Administration’s plans to revise the U.S. export rules in a way that makes it less complex to export aircraft parts.

The Hill Reports that the Administration is getting ready to publish the first of these export revisions.

Those of you who’ve seen me speak on export law in the past year know that I have been predicting that the Administration will take far less than the normal 18 months to publish the final rule in the export reform provisions.  While most people deride election cycle politics for its emphasis on form over substance, and a tendency for both parties to block partisan gains that might help the other earn votes, this is one situation where election year politics work in our favor.  The Administration would like to be able to take credit for making it easier for businesses to export products, in order to show that they are not anti-business.  The export reforms will do just that.

If the final rule looks like the proposal, then it will ease unnecessary burdens on the export of many dual-use aircraft parts.  With many dual-use aircraft parts (replacement parts that can be installed on both civilian and military aircraft), their precise placement into BIS or DDTC jurisdiction can be ambiguous, and can be based on facts that are not readily available to many exporters.  For example, the mechanism for obtaining a license to export a replacement part that is listed on both a military engine design and a civilian engine design (approved by the FAA) is very ambiguous, because it can be unclear whether the FAA exception applies [originally published in the 1979 Export Administion Act section 17(c), the exception has been turned into a rubik’s cube with contradictory guidance].

The proposed rule would move all of the dual use aircraft parts into BIS jurisdiction, leaving only parts with a clear defense mission in the jurisdiction of DDTC.

This is important to exporters because (1) many BIS exports do not need a license while nearly all DDTC exports require a license, and (2) even if a license is necessary, it is far quicker and easier to obtain a license from BIS than it is from DDTC.  It is also useful because there has been a lot of confusion about which agency’s rules must be followed for certain aircraft parts, and the reform would make the pathway to compliance much more clear.


About Jason Dickstein

Mr. Dickstein is the President of the Washington Aviation Group, a Washington, DC-based aviation law firm. He represents several aviation trade associations, including the Aviation Suppliers Association, the Aircraft Electronics Association, the Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association and the Modification and Replacement Parts Association.


No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Learn More About PMA

2018 MARPA Annual Conference - Featuring key airline and government speakersOctober 24th, 2018
7 months to go.
%d bloggers like this: