Even if the exporter said, falsely, that the shipment was domestic, it still wouldn’t make the export illegal but would just subject the exporter to penalties for those statements. I don’t think 554 was meant to capture any federal law violation that occurred in the course of the export as, for example, using employees that weren’t paid minimum wage.

While not mentioned, the statute that comes to mine is perjury for the misdeclarations on the AES transmissions, assuming the value of an individual shipment exceeded $2,500.

As Stu mentioned, 1592(f) was probably the violation, and I think I would have to agree with that. The main issue is whether this violation is covered under 554.

I do not read 18 USC 554 as requiring only the exportation be contrary to law. 554 also applies to facilitation of the sale of the merchandise contrary to law. Falsifying NAFTA certs would seem to fall under the definition of “facilitation.”

Your blog suggests that no US law was in fact violated because 1592 only applies to imports.

However, 19 U.S.C 1592(f)entitled “False certifications regarding exports to NAFTA countries” clearly applies.
1592 (f) makes it unlawful for any person to “certify falsely, by fraud, gross negligence or negligence, in a NAfta Certificate of Origin…that a good to be exported to a NAFTA country…qualifies under the rules of origin…”

The text of 554 applies to any law or regulation. In addition to 1592(f), 19 CFR 181.81 applies to exporters.