In this part, references to the EAR are references to 15 CFR chapter VII, subchapter C.
Examples of "United States Person"
The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining whether a person is a "United States person." They are illustrative, not comprehensive.
A is a United States person, because it is a corporation organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States.
A's U.S. office is a United States person, because it is a permanent establishment, in the United States, of a foreign concern.
A is a United States person. However, A is not a "domestic concern," because the term "domestic concern" does not include individuals.
A is a United States person, because he is resident in the United States.
A is not a United States person, because he is not a United States resident or national.
A is a United States person, because it is an association organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States.
A is not a United States person while under C's direction and control, because he will be resident outside the United States and assigned as an employee to a non-United States person. The arrangement designed to protect A's insurance, pension, and other benefits does not destroy his status as an employee of C so long as he is under the direction and control of C.
A is a United States person, because he is a U.S. national and because he is not a resident outside the United States who is employed by other than a United States person.
Examples of "Controlled in Fact"
The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining the circumstances in which a foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment of a domestic concern is "controlled in fact." They are illustrative, not comprehensive.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
As long as such contract is in effect, A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.
B is not presumed to control A, absent other facts giving rise to a presumption of control.
A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B, C, and D, because these companies are acting in concert to control A.
A is deemed to be controlled in fact by B, because A is a branch office of a domestic concern.
Both A and B are presumed to be controlled in fact by C. The presumption of C's control over B may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control over B does not, in fact, lie with C. The presumption of B's control over A (and thus C's control over A) may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control over A does not, in fact, lie with B.
A is not "controlled in fact" under this part, because it is not controlled by a "domestic concern."
Activities Involving United States Persons Located in the United States
Activities of Controlled in Fact Foreign Subsidiaries, Affiliates, and Other Permanent Foreign Establishments
Activities in United States Commerce
Activities Outside United States Commerce
General
Letters of Credit
Examples of Activities in the Interstate or Foreign Commerce of the United States
The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining the circumstances in which an activity is in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States. They are illustrative, not comprehensive.
United States Person Located in the United States
A's activity is in U.S. commerce even though B, a foreign-owned company located outside the United States, is not subject to this part, because A is exporting services from the United States.
A's activity is in U.S. commerce even though B is not subject to this part, because A is exporting financial services from the United States.
A's activity in directing the activities of its foreign subsidiary, B, is an activity in U.S. commerce.
Foreign Subsidiaries, Affiliates, and Other Permanent Foreign Establishments of Domestic Concerns
A's purchase of goods from the United States is in U.S. commerce, because A is importing goods from the United States. Whether A's subsequent disposition of these goods is in U.S. commerce is irrelevant. Similarly, the fact that A purchased goods from the United States does not, in and of itself, make any subsequent disposition of those goods an activity in U.S. commerce.
A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because the materials are purchased from the United States for the purpose of filling the order from Y.
A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because the materials are purchased from the United States for the purpose of filling the order from Y. It makes no difference whether the materials are ordered from B or C.
A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because its U.S.-origin goods are resold without substantial alteration.
A's sale to Y of unaltered goods from its general inventory is presumed to be in U.S. commerce unless A can show that at the time of the sale the foreign-origin inventory on hand was sufficient to cover the shipment to Y.
A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because some of the components are acquired from the United States for purposes of filling an order from Y.
A's transaction with Y is not an activity in U.S. commerce, because it involves no export of goods from the United States. It makes no difference whether the technology A uses to manufacture computers was originally acquired from its U.S. parent.
A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce, because the U.S.-origin components are not acquired for the purpose of meeting the anticipated needs of specified customers in Y. It is irrelevant that A's operations may be based on U.S.-origin technology.
A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because the U.S.-origin goods were acquired for the purpose of filling an anticipated order from Y.
A's sales of typewriters to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the U.S. components are not acquired for the purpose of filling an order from Y. A general expectancy of future sales is not an "order" within the meaning of this section.
While provision of this legal advice is itself an activity in U.S. commerce, it does not, in and of itself, bring B's activities into U.S. commerce.
A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's services are used for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y. B's services are not ancillary services, because the engineering services in connection with construction of the power plant are part of the services ultimately provided to Y by A.
A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce. The legal services provided to A are ancillary services, because they are not part of the services provided to Y by A in fulfillment of its contract with Y.
A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's guaranty of A's performance involves the acquisition of services from the United States for purposes of fulfilling the transaction with Y, and those services are part of the services ultimately provided to Y.
A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce, because the services acquired from the United States are not acquired for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y.
A's contract with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's services are sought for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y and are part of the services ultimately provided to Y.
A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because in carrying A's goods, C is providing an ancillary service to A and not a service to Y.
A's sales to Y are in U.S. commerce, because in carrying Y's goods, C is providing a service to A which is ultimately provided to Y.
A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the insurance provided by C is an ancillary service provided to A which is not ultimately provided to Y.
A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the rights conveyed by the license are not acquired for the specific purpose of engaging in transactions with Y.
Examples of "Intent"
The following examples are intended to illustrate the factors which will be considered in determining whether the required intent exists. They are illustrative, not comprehensive.
A's choice of B rather than C is not action with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because C's blacklist status is not a reason for A's action.
Since C's blacklist status is a reason for A's choice, A's action is taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott.
A's action in bidding was not taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because the boycott was not a reason for A's action.
Although Y's boycott may not be a specific reason for A's action in implementing the letter of credit with a prohibited condition, all available evidence shows that A's action was taken with intent to comply with the boycott, because A knows or should know that its procedures result in compliance with the boycott.
All available evidence shows that A's action in implementing the letter of credit was not taken with intent to comply with the boycott, because A has no affirmative obligation to go beyond applicable standard banking practices in implementing letters of credit.
A's decision not to proceed with the plant in X is not action with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because Y's boycott of X is not a reason for A's decision.
A's decision not to proceed with the plant in X is action taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because Y's boycott is a reason for A's decision.
A's responding to Y's questionnaire is deemed to be action with intent to comply with Y's boycott because A knows that the questionnaire is boycott-related. It is irrelevant that A does not also wish to support Y's boycott.
A may not answer the questionnaire, because, despite A's intentions with regard to its business operations in X, Y's request for completion of the questionnaire is for boycott purposes and by responding, A's action would be taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott.
15 C.F.R. §760.1