Jun

6

U.S. Company Announces Retrieval Service for Cuban Documents


Posted by at 10:01 pm on June 6, 2011
Category: Cuba SanctionsOFAC

Cuban CertificatesJust how far does the information exception to our economic sanctions programs go? Of course, the traditional response from the Office of Foreign Asset Controls (“OFAC”), the agency that administers the U.S. economic sanctions regimes, is usually “Not very far.” The issue, here, is whether a particular activity is an export of information or an export of services (or some combination of the two.) Sometimes OFAC has tried to draw the distinction by saying that the exception does not apply to information not already in existence, although it makes a somewhat unaccountable (although welcome) exception for magazine subscriptions.

So where does this new Cuban document retrieval service fall? The service advertises that it uses “proprietary” means to retrieve Cuban birth certificates and other official certificates for people in the United States. Retrieving these documents from Cuban archives seems to pose few problems. But the service doesn’t stop there:

All documents retrieved from Cuba for any official use (Cuban passport, driver’s license and marriage applications etc) need to be “legalized” in Cuba in order to be recognized as an official document.

The certificates we provide are legalized with stamps and seals from the Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores also known as MINREX.

Adding the legalization stamps, seals and other government doohickeys may be what steps over the line, because the retrieval company is not just exporting information already in existence but is taking existing information and providing services to alter it.

Section 515.545 of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations also seems to suggest that the legalization process may be one step too far:

This section does not authorize the remittance of royalties or other payments relating to works not yet in being, or for marketing and business consulting services, or artistic or other substantive
alteration or enhancements to informational materials

The company has said that this plan has been blessed by its lawyers and that they are not obtaining licenses for these transactions. I suppose that in the end the issue is whether the legalization of the document is or is not a “substantive alteration or enhancements.” I would be disinclined to opine to a client on that matter without at least some informal discussions with OFAC. So, I’m assuming that someone in OFAC likely provided at leat an informal reaction to the retrieval plan.

[Posting has been light lately due to demands at work This week my normal posting schedule ought to resume.]

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2011 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


4 Comments:


Clif: The legislative history of the Free Trade in Ideas Act, which amended and expanded the Berman information exclusion in both IEEPA and TWEA in a direct response to what Congress found was an overly restrictive interpretation of the original statute by OFAC, states that costs incidental to the export or import of information are included within the exclusion. Given that authentication or “legalization” of documents is intended simply to verify the truth of the information contained therein is often required in order to make such documents acceptable for official purposes, it would be hard to characterize that as an alteration or enhancement of the information. Simply because, as Congress found, OFAC habitually violates the statute and intentionally thwarts Congressional intent does not make the company’s counsel wrong.

Comment by Mike Deal on June 7th, 2011 @ 6:19 am

@Mike.I agree completely that OFAC’s narrow view of the Berman Amendment is inconsistent with its legislative history. But it is what it is from a compliance viewpoint until a Court forces OFAC to believe otherwise. I also didn’t say that the company’s counsel was wrong. I think there’s a good argument that legalization isn’t a substantive alteration. And, I’m speculating that maybe someone in OFAC informally agreed given that there is risk in reaching that conclusion without at least something from the agency.

Comment by Clif Burns on June 7th, 2011 @ 7:09 am

Did you notice that this company is also selling Cuban cigars and Cuban coffee? I suppose the service does have international clients who are not subject to U.S. import laws. Americans aren’t even supposed to purchase or smoke Cuban cigars while traveling outside the U.S., though it’s hard to imagine how that part of the law would be enforced. I checked the order form and terms of use, and it appears the company is willing to ship to any address worldwide, but it puts all the blame on the purchaser for knowingly thwarting his own country’s import restrictions. I have to wonder how many living in the U.S. will risk it.

Comment by DGHarrison on June 7th, 2011 @ 8:25 am

@DG. The retrieval company is only running ads for another company that sells Cuban cigars. The company that sells the cigars appears to be located in Switzerland. You’d be surprised how many U.S. citizens order Cuban cigars over the Internet. You’d be even more surprised at all the taxpayer dollars wasted in catching and fining these folks

Comment by Clif Burns on June 7th, 2011 @ 9:04 am