China Trade

Subscribe to China Trade

On June 10, 2021, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of China adopted the “Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law,” which represents the Chinese government’s most recent and direct response to U.S. and EU sanctions that have been imposed on China during the last year.  The law, which took immediate effect, authorizes the Chinese government to take certain actions when foreign countries are deemed to breach international laws or basic norms of international relations, seek to contain or suppress China’s interest under pretext or using their domestic laws, adopt restrictive measures against Chinese citizens or organizations on a discriminatory basis, or interfere with China’s domestic affairs.  Given how broadly a number of the provisions are worded, it remains to be seen how the Chinese government will implement and enforce the law.
Continue Reading China Passes “Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law”

President Biden recently issued a highly anticipated executive order that effectively replaces an existing ban on U.S. persons trading in securities of companies determined to be linked to the Chinese military.  Effective August 2, 2021, U.S. persons are prohibited from purchasing (and, as of June 3, 2022, selling) certain publicly traded securities of companies listed…

As noted in our previous blog post, Executive Order (EO) 13959 introduced novel sanctions prohibiting U.S. persons from purchasing publicly traded securities (debt or equity) issued by companies designated by the U.S. Government as “Communist Chinese military companies” (CMCs), as well as an ill-defined group of securities “designed to provide economic exposure” to the…

Yesterday, President Trump issued an Executive Order[1] that will, following an initial two-month grace period and a further ten-month wind-down period in which only dispositions are permitted, prohibit U.S. persons (including citizens and U.S. legal entities acting outside the United States and foreign citizens and legal entities acting inside the United States)[2] from engaging in any transactions in publicly traded securities (debt or equity) issued by companies that the U.S. government designates as tied to the Chinese military (Designated Entities), as well as in any securities linked (in an undefined manner) to the targeted Chinese securities.  The 31 current Designated Entities are listed at the end of this note.[3]
Continue Reading Trump Administration Bans Transactions in Securities of Military-Linked Chinese Companies: Potentially Far-Ranging Consequences Remain Unclear

Following the enactment of the Hong Kong Autonomy Act (HKAA), the issuance of Executive Order 13936, which implemented sanctions authorities under the HKAA and other statutes, and other recent U.S. sanctions designations and enforcement actions, many multinational entities based or operating in Hong Kong are concerned with how to navigate the new…

On July 14, President Trump issued an Executive Order pursuant to the Hong Kong Policy Act eliminating the separate status of Hong Kong and China under various provisions of U.S. law, including export controls, immigration, tax, and extradition, as well as providing for the implementation of recent Hong-Kong related sanctions authorities.

Please click here to…

On May 15, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issued an interim final rule (the Interim Rule) amending the direct product rule under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to further restrict Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (Huawei) and its affiliates designated on the Entity List from receiving semiconductor and other products produced outside the United States using U.S.-origin software and technology.  The changes, which are effective immediately (but subject to two savings clauses), could have a significant impact on the ability of non-U.S. foundries that manufacture semiconductor products for Huawei and its affiliates (e.g., HiSilicon) using U.S.-origin software or technology to continue to do so (and could have a corresponding significant impact on the competitiveness of U.S. semiconductor manufacturing equipment and software).  BIS also extended the temporary general license (TGL) that authorizes certain activities subject to the EAR involving Huawei and its affiliates through August 13, 2020.[1]
Continue Reading BIS Expands Export Restrictions on Huawei, Extends Temporary General License

Regulation 2017/2321,[1] which introduced a new methodology for calculation of normal value[2] in trade defence cases (“New Methodology”), entered into force on December 20, 2017 (see here). Two years on, a review of the Commission’s implementation practice provides useful insight into questions of evidentiary burden, practical application, and selection of representative third country.
Continue Reading Two Years On: Implementation of the New Methodology in Anti-Dumping Cases

Over the last few weeks, the U.S. House and Senate have separately passed a number of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (the “NDAA”) that, if enacted, would expand sanctions on persons and activities related to North Korea, China, Russia, Burma, and certain Central American states.
Continue Reading Sanctions Outlook: Congress to Consider Sanctions Provisions in FY2020 Defense Bill

China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) announced at a special press conference on May 31 that it will institute an “Unreliable Entity List” system based on China’s Foreign Trade Law, Anti-Monopoly Law, and National Security Law. The planned “Unreliable Entity List” will include foreign companies, organizations, and individuals that do not obey market rules, act contrary to the spirit of contract, engage in boycott or suspension of supply against Chinese enterprises without commercial justifications, or seriously harm the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises.  MOFCOM will announce the specific measures to be taken against those placed on the “Unreliable Entity List” in the near future.
Continue Reading China to Establish “Unreliable Entity List” in Response to “Unilateralism and Trade Protectionism”