Close X
Attorney Spotlight

Find out which two countries Cheryl Palmeri gets the most questions about related to International Trade in today's market? Find out more>


Close X


Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

In June 2016, AmSurg Corp. and Envision Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (Envision) announced they have signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which the companies will combine in an all-stock transaction. Upon completion of the merger, which is expected to be tax-free to the shareholders of both organizations, the combined company will be named Envision Healthcare Corporation and co-headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee and Greenwood Village, Colorado. The company's common stock is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol: EVHC. Bass, Berry & Sims served as lead counsel on the transaction, led by Jim Jenkins. Read more.

AmSurg logo

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Inside the FCA blogInside the FCA blog features ongoing updates related to the False Claims Act (FCA), including insight on the latest legal decisions, regulatory developments and FCA settlements. The blog provides timely updates for corporate boards, directors, compliance managers, general counsel and other parties interested in the organizational impact and legal developments stemming from issues potentially giving rise to FCA liability.

Read More >

GovCon Blog: ECR Marches On: State and Commerce Announce More Proposed Changes


June 11, 2015

As yet another step in the continuing Export Control Reform (ECR) effort, the U.S. government has recently issued a series of proposed rules that may help clarify key regulatory definitions and requirements that have confused exporters in the past. In particular, the proposed rules may ease licensing requirements for U.S. persons – and the employers of U.S. persons – working in the global defense industry.

First, on May 26, the U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) proposed changes to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to clarify the registration and licensing requirements that apply to U.S. persons in the United States or abroad who furnish defense services to, or on behalf of, their non-U.S. person employers. See 80 Fed. Reg. 30001 (May 26, 2015).

Then, on June 3, DDTC issued proposed revisions to help clarify the scope of activities and information covered by the ITAR. See 80 Fed. Reg. 31525 (June 3, 2015). The same day, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) issued a parallel proposed rule to amend key definitions of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations (EAR). See 80 Fed. Reg. 31505 (June 3, 2015). 

What follows is a brief summary of several of the key changes.

Technical Data. The U.S. government generally prohibits unauthorized exports, re-exports, or transfers of controlled articles or certain information related to those articles. Under both the ITAR and the EAR, information is controlled if it is "required" for certain activities involving controlled articles. In the past, the term "required" was defined in the EAR, but not the ITAR. This deficiency left many manufacturers of defense articles – and those who provide defense services – scratching their heads.

Under the proposed revisions, the ITAR would include a definition of "required" mirroring that of the EAR: information would be controlled only if it is "peculiarly responsible for achieving or exceeding the controlled performance levels, characteristics, or functions" of a defense article. It remains to be seen how useful this proposed definition will be, but at the least, general information about a defense article would seem to be excluded from the scope of "required" information.

Export. What qualifies as an "export" of controlled information has always been a sticky concept. In the context of cloud computing, it has been has been as sticky as super glue: information stored "on the cloud" can transit or be stored on servers in any number of countries.

Both DDTC and BIS are proposing to refine the definition of export and specifically exclude (among other information) certain cloud-based information. Under the proposed rules, as long as such information is (i) unclassified, (ii) secured using acceptable end-to-end encryption, and (iii) not stored in certain problematic countries, it will not be considered to have been exported.

ITAR Registration and Licensing Requirements. The ITAR currently require any person "in the United States" who engages in activities covered by the ITAR to register with DDTC. Under the May 26 rule, the ITAR would be amended to clarify that: (i) U.S. persons performing defense services abroad also must register; (ii) subsidiaries and affiliates controlled by a registrant may be included on the registrant's registration statement; and (iii) natural persons employed by a registrant, or by its affiliates or subsidiaries that are listed on its registration statement, are deemed to be registered.

In addition, the proposed revisions would authorize U.S. person regular employees of a non-U.S. subsidiary or affiliate listed on a U.S. person's registration to provide defense services without additional authorization under certain conditions.

Also importantly, the proposed revisions would, in certain cases, permit natural U.S. persons employed by a non-U.S. person to furnish defense services to and on behalf of the employer without a license. This revision would only apply when the non-U.S. employer is located within a NATO or EU country, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, or Switzerland, or if the defense services are provided in support of an active foreign military sale contract and are identified in an executed letter of offer and acceptance. Other limitations also apply.

Conclusion. The May 26 and June 3 rules contain a number of other proposed revisions to the ITAR and EAR that, if implemented, will impact companies in the United States and elsewhere. Overall, as with the ECR effort generally, the hoped-for outcome is that some restrictions – on persons and entities, on licensing and registration, and on exports of goods and information – will be liberalized.

Comments on the proposed rules are being accepted until July 27 (for the proposed rule issued on May 26) and August 3 (for the proposed rules issued on June 3). Many exporters could be dramatically affected by a number of the proposed changes – including those not specifically addressed here. We therefore encourage the exporting community to review the proposed rules and consider commenting. To truly accomplish ECR's goal of improving U.S. export control laws, DDTC and BIS need to hear from those affected.

Read more about government contracts on

Related Professionals

Related Services


Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.