Oct

1

New De Minimis Rules Are Still De Maximis Headaches


Posted by at 6:49 pm on October 1, 2008
Category: BIS

BIS LogoThe Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) released today a revision of the de minimis rules which BIS touted as a major simplification of the rules. I think most people when reviewing the new rules will find them as complicated as ever.

The de minimis rules are an effort by BIS to define when the U.S.-origin content of a commodity is sufficiently small that the commodity will not be deemed to be subject to the export control restrictions set forth in the Export Administration Regulations. When U.S. content doesn’t satisfy the requirements of the de minimis rule, then the incorporation of that content, even if that content is not itself subject to U.S. export controls, into a commodity may subject that commodity to U.S. export controls.

Leaving aside whether the new rules are ultimately a simplification or not, there is one significant area in which the new rule may permit a de minimis finding where the old rules would not — namely, hardware commodities that bundle U.S. origin software. Under the prior rule, the de minimis calculation had to be made separately for hardware, software and technology. Under the new rule, the value of “bundled” U.S.-origin software will be compared with the value of the hardware. If it constitutes less than 25% of the commodities value (or 10% in the case of exports to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan or Syria), then the de minimis rule applies and the commodity is not subject to U.S. export controls.

The new rules define bundled in a broad way that would go beyond pre-installed software but which would also include un-installed software distributed on a separate disk with the hardware. Think printer drivers, for example. To qualify as bundled software, the software must be exported or re-exported with the hardware and must be configured for the hardware. Additionally, if the software is listed on the Commerce Control List it must only be controlled for anti-terrorism reasons. Software that is controlled for export for other reasons can slip out of the country under the de minimis rule no matter what percentage its value bears to the value of the hardware with which its bundled.

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2008 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


2 Comments:


The new de minimis rules still fail to address the special unique problem of open source software that is shared by an entire community of users situated the world over through an open license (such as “Gnu” license which governs use of LINUX) in which the original authors grant a free license to use the sourcecode provided that the users posts his derivative software sourcecode and grants back an open license to other users/developers. The open source community has actually found open source software to be profitable and viable alternative to proprietary software systems such as Microsoft(R) that require users to pay for software licenses, and courts have held the Gnu and other open source software licenses to be fully enforceable.

Because open-source operating systems contain an encryption module, BIS regards them as “subject to the EAR”, often under 5D002, even though they would otherwise be considered to be publicly available. While they might be eligible for license exception TSU, this makes them ineligible for export to embargoed countries.

Given that anyone can copy and develop open source software as long as they follow the cross-license conditions, determining the US content of open source products can be nightmarishly difficult and pretty much pointless, given the availability of the Internet. There are over 100 registered Linux developers in Tehran.

Comment by Mike Deal on October 2nd, 2008 @ 12:40 pm

After studying the exact wording of the new regulation, I’m surprising of the new “incorporated” definition, which introduces the concept of “essential to the functioning of the foreign equipment”. What is the meaning of that? Is a US component non essential to the functioning of an aircraft (2d inertial aircraft equipment for example) excluded of scope of the de minimis? Is the foreign integrator compelled to apply for an individual licence? What is the De minimis interest for the industry?

Comment by Marion R. on November 19th, 2008 @ 6:10 am