Treasury Secretary: Bureau of Industry and Security’s 50% Rule Suspended for One Year

Treasury Secretary: Bureau of Industry and Security’s 50% Rule Suspended for One Year

By John H. Kester and Oliver M. Krischik

Effective November 10, the U.S. will be suspending for one year the so-called “50% Rule” or “Affiliates Rule” that had extended applicability of Entity and Military End-User List restrictions, according to the White House. The move had been telegraphed by Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent in an interview on Fox Business last week.

The U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security announced in September an interim final rule (“IFR”) stating that any entity that is at least 50 percent owned by one or more entities on the Entity List or the Military End-User List (“MEU List”), directly or indirectly, individually or in aggregate, would itself automatically be subject to Entity List/MEU List restrictions. The rule had downstream effect, meaning that if, e.g., an Entity List listed entity owns 50 percent of Company B which in turn owns 50 percent of Company C, even Company C is subject to Entity List restrictions. See, FAQ Answer 52.

“We are going to be suspending that for a year…in return for the suspension…on the rare earth licensing regime,” Bessent said in the interview. The suspension is not effective until November 10th, according to the White House, and so transactions before then remain subject to the Affiliates Rule.

For its part, China agreed to suspend new export controls it had announced on October 9th, and will issue general licenses valid for exports of rare earths, gallium, germanium, antimony, and graphite, according to the Administration, which it characterized as a de facto removal of the controls imposed by China since 2023. The actions are part of a broader set of agreements between both parties that also include the U.S. lowering tariffs on Chinese goods for a one-year period, also effective November 10th, and China removing a number of its retaliatory tariffs and agreeing to purchase from the U.S. at least 12 million metric tons of soybeans from the U.S. this year and at least 25 million metric tons in each of 2026, 2027, and 2028, the White House stated.

Broadly, the Entity and MEU Lists impose supplemental export license requirements on parties whose activities BIS has deemed contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests, or who present an unacceptable risk that goods will be used in or diverted to a military end-use.

Exporters and transportation intermediaries should take note that the rule will remain effective until November 10, 2025, which means that the “Affiliates Rule” remains effective for shipments and transactions occurring between September 29 and November 10, 2025.  GKG Law on October 1 previously alerted exporters to prudent compliance steps in response to the Rule.  The Temporary General License (“TGL”) remains in effect at this time authorizing shipments subject to certain terms and conditions.

Notwithstanding the one-year suspension, it would be prudent for forwarders, logistics providers, exporters, and manufacturers to continue developing their compliance programming and systems to account for the “Affiliates Rule” for the following reasons:

  1. Potential Change in Policy. It is possible that the U.S. government will reimpose the “Affiliates Rule” early if there are problems with other terms of the agreements with China.
  2. Ownership Due Diligence Can Take Time. Due Diligence with respect to ownership can take time with certain partners and sometimes require follow up communications.  Further, under the “Affiliates Rule,” exporters have an affirmative obligation to determine ownership percentages of any identified Entity List or MEU List owners before proceeding with unlicensed transactions. To the extent any ownership due diligence has not yet been completed, parties would benefit from having ownership due diligence complete for important and/or ongoing suppliers, partners, customers, and service providers when the rule comes back into effect.
  3. Addressing Affected Partners. If companies have owners or partners that were affected by the “Affiliates Rule” identified during due diligence, the suspension period provides time for divestment of shares or for the parties to seek exemption from the “Affiliates Rule” by applying to the End-User Review Committee.
  4. Updating Contractual Language. Existing contracts and contracts entered into during the suspension period may have terms that extend through November 10, 2026.  It would be prudent for companies to ensure that contracts to have appropriate provisions to handle due diligence procedures, reporting of changes in ownership or suspected noncompliance, and noncompliance generally.
  5. Policies, Procedures, and Training. To the extent that compliance programs and training have not been updated to account for the “Affiliates Rule” or to incorporate new controls with respect to ownership screening, the suspension period provides additional time to: (1) effectively integrate those elements into companies’ policies and procedures; (2) and train staff on upcoming regulatory requirements and internal procedures.
  6. Partners’ Risk Management Policies. Partners may insist that companies conduct and certify ownership screening even during the suspension period.  While the “Affiliates Rule” will be suspended, U.S. economic sanctions programs continue to include restrictions based on ownership of listed entities.  Accordingly, contractual requirements or risk management policies regarding ownership screening in supply chains may continue to develop in industries during the suspension period.

We hope this is helpful, and please let us know if you have any questions.

John H. Kester jkester@gkglaw.com

Oliver M. Krischik okrischik@gkglaw.com

Drug Enforcement Agency Focused on Fentanyl Precursor Imports

Drug Enforcement Agency Focused on Fentanyl Precursor Imports

By John H. Kester

Importers working to ensure compliance with swiftly changing tariffs enforced by Customs and Border Protection would be prudent also to keep another arm of government in mind: the Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”). Just as the Trump Administration has pointed to fentanyl as justification for tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico, the DEA has focused on identifying those importing fentanyl precursor products in the U.S.

In March, IMC Pro International Inc. (“IMC”), a North Carolina logistics firm, agreed to pay $400,000 to resolve allegations that it violated the Controlled Substances Act by transshipping fentanyl precursor chemicals. According to Reuters, the matter represented the first time in U.S. history that any U.S. shipping company has paid to settle allegations of violating that Act based on transshipment through the United States of fentanyl precursor chemicals – the DEA alleged the precursors were destined for lab(s) in Mexico. After seizing five packages identifying IMC as shipper, the DEA discovered an alleged business arrangement under which IMC allowed Chinese companies access to its accounts with common carriers in order to generate domestic shipping labels to be used for the goods those companies manufactured. The packages seized by DEA included:

  • 1-BOC-4 Piperidone, now a List I Regulated Chemical;
    • List I chemicals are those designated by DEA that have legitimate uses and are used in manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of the CSA and are important to the manufacture of a controlled substance. Under 21 U.S.C. § 822(a), “Every person who manufactures or distributes any controlled substance or list I chemical,” or who proposes to do so, must register with DEA. The CSA additionally imposes requirements regarding recordkeeping, volumes, reporting suspicious transactions, etc. Knowing violations of the CSA may be prosecuted as criminal
  • 2-Bromethyl Benzene, a chemical on the DEA’s Special Surveillance List (“SSL);
    • The SSL includes chemicals, products, materials and equipment most frequently used in the clandestine production of controlled substances or listed chemicals. Its stated purposes are:
      • to inform individuals and firms of the potential use of the items on the list in the manufacture of controlled substances and listed chemicals; and,
      • to remind individuals and firms that civil penalties may be imposed on them if they distribute a laboratory supply to a person who uses, or attempts to use, that laboratory supply to manufacture a controlled substance or listed chemical, in violation of the CSA, with reckless disregard for the illegal uses to which such a laboratory will be put.

In light of the foregoing, shipping companies would be prudent to:

  • Ensure they have not created business arrangements allowing others to identify the shipping company as a shipper without oversight;
  • Evaluate whether they are shipping any items regulated by, g., the DEA’s Regulated Chemicals lists or its Special Surveillance List;
  • If they are importing such chemicals, ensure they are doing so in compliance with DEA regulations and all applicable laws; and,
  • Conduct due diligence to ensure that they do not facilitate suspicious shipments, g., as in the example above, precursor chemicals from China transshipped to Mexico.

“I encourage shipping and logistics companies that may have engaged in similar business arrangements to uphold their own responsibilities and assist in the efforts to stop the flow of fentanyl,” Acting U.S. Attorney Margaret Leachman for the Western District of Texas was quoted as saying in a DEA release. Special Agent in Charge Daniel Comeaux for the DEA Houston Division stated, “DEA will continue to hold companies accountable who make it easy for drug trafficking organizations to get their hands on precursor chemicals to produce deadly synthetic drugs like fentanyl.”

We hope this is helpful, and please let us know if you have any questions.

John H. Kester jkester@gkglaw.com

 

Copyright © 2026. All Rights Reserved.