Japanese Ministry of Justice (MOJ) launched new web site which is database of English translation for Japanese Law. This is official translation and very helpful. Good initiative by MOJ and I really appreciate their hard work on this!
The site url is http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/
However for customs and trade professional, we still have challenges mainly in following points.
1) Export control - Only FEFTL (Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Law), Export Trade Control Order, and Foreign Exchange Order are available. There are no English translation for Ministry Ordinance and Notices, which include critical information when resolving operational inquiry from industry.
2) The translation is not for the latest one. For example, the translation of Export Trade Control Order doesn't reflect recent change in Nov. 2008, which should reflect catch-all control for Conventional Weapon.
3) Customs Law - No translation at all! These are under Ministry of Finance, but there is no customs related Law or Order.
MOJ states they continue to add, improve, or update the English translation.
Stay tuned and continue to monitor this web site.
2009年5月13日水曜日
2009年5月9日土曜日
Cuba Embargo may be lifted by end of 2010
According to Inside U.S. Trade - 5/8/2009, one of the congress man stated this week, Congress will “most likely” move to end the U.S. trade embargo of Cuba before the end of 2010.
However, we need to understand this move is not top priority, the committee would not consider legislation to end the embargo until after other priorities, particularly health care reform, were considered. It would be better to recognize this as just general direction.
As for recent update, State Department officials are in the early planning stages of a dialogue aimed at further engagement with Cuba. On April 13, the Obama administration announced it would allow U.S. telecommunications companies to do business in Cuba and lift all restrictions on family travel to Cuba, remittances to family members in Cuba and gift parcels sent to Cuba.
According to this announcement on April 13, the Obama administration will now allow more gift parcels, including clothing, personal hygiene items and fishing equipment, and personal communications devices, including cell phones, to be sent from the U.S. to Cuba.
To implement this policy, BIS is making changes to the EAR. The items in question are classified as EAR99. The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control is expected to publish rules on the licenses for telecommunications work in Cuba.
However, we need to understand this move is not top priority, the committee would not consider legislation to end the embargo until after other priorities, particularly health care reform, were considered. It would be better to recognize this as just general direction.
As for recent update, State Department officials are in the early planning stages of a dialogue aimed at further engagement with Cuba. On April 13, the Obama administration announced it would allow U.S. telecommunications companies to do business in Cuba and lift all restrictions on family travel to Cuba, remittances to family members in Cuba and gift parcels sent to Cuba.
According to this announcement on April 13, the Obama administration will now allow more gift parcels, including clothing, personal hygiene items and fishing equipment, and personal communications devices, including cell phones, to be sent from the U.S. to Cuba.
To implement this policy, BIS is making changes to the EAR. The items in question are classified as EAR99. The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control is expected to publish rules on the licenses for telecommunications work in Cuba.
2009年5月2日土曜日
Unauthorized CO between Japan-Malaysia
METI made alert to public on their web site on May 1 regarding CO (Certificate of Origin) authorization issue between Japan and Malaysia EPA.
Between Japan and Malaysia, there are two EPAs in force, which are Japan-Malaysia bilateral EPA and Japan Asean regional EPA. Both EPAs have CO authorization signature provision and strictly impose the authorized CO operation in claiming preferential tariff in importing into Japan.
The problem reported is that in Malaysia side, "not authorized" signature has made in CO and consequently the CO is not effective and rejected by Japanese customs in importing into Japan.
Japanese METI made alert to traders when receiving CO in Malaysia, make sure to confirm whether the signature was made by officially authorized person.
(The report by METI don't disclose the organization name and the person's status who provided the unauthorized signature.)
If the unauthorized signature CO is presented to Japanese customs, the CO is not valid and the importer have to pay duty in MFN rate. The refund later on by submitting correct CO is NOT admitted.
Take care and be sure to check CO signature just in case!
(Source: http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/trade_policy/090501AJCEP%20JMEPA.pdf )
Between Japan and Malaysia, there are two EPAs in force, which are Japan-Malaysia bilateral EPA and Japan Asean regional EPA. Both EPAs have CO authorization signature provision and strictly impose the authorized CO operation in claiming preferential tariff in importing into Japan.
The problem reported is that in Malaysia side, "not authorized" signature has made in CO and consequently the CO is not effective and rejected by Japanese customs in importing into Japan.
Japanese METI made alert to traders when receiving CO in Malaysia, make sure to confirm whether the signature was made by officially authorized person.
(The report by METI don't disclose the organization name and the person's status who provided the unauthorized signature.)
If the unauthorized signature CO is presented to Japanese customs, the CO is not valid and the importer have to pay duty in MFN rate. The refund later on by submitting correct CO is NOT admitted.
Take care and be sure to check CO signature just in case!
(Source: http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/trade_policy/090501AJCEP%20JMEPA.pdf )
2009年5月1日金曜日
The End User List updated
Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry ("METI") announced on May 1, 2009 that they updated "The End User List" (or Foreign User List), which is WMD activity concerned entities list. As general practice, this list is updated annually around May or June every year.
In the updated list, the number of entities increased by 21, most of them are in Iran and in North Korea, and making it total number of entities 244. There are no deletion of entities.
The list is available in following METI web site in pdf and MS-Excel format.
http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/anpo/kanri/user-list/list.htm
(Overview of The End User List)
The End User List is a list of foreign entity who are considered to have relations with development, production, manufacturing or storage of WMD. Exporters are required to file export license applications when they wish to export goods subject to the WMD Catch-all control to entities on the End User List, unless it is apparent that those will not be used for WMD purpose.
Please be noted this list is not an embargo list. It is allowed to export when the goods/technologies are apparently not related to WMD purpose.
In the updated list, the number of entities increased by 21, most of them are in Iran and in North Korea, and making it total number of entities 244. There are no deletion of entities.
The list is available in following METI web site in pdf and MS-Excel format.
http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/anpo/kanri/user-list/list.htm
(Overview of The End User List)
The End User List is a list of foreign entity who are considered to have relations with development, production, manufacturing or storage of WMD. Exporters are required to file export license applications when they wish to export goods subject to the WMD Catch-all control to entities on the End User List, unless it is apparent that those will not be used for WMD purpose.
Please be noted this list is not an embargo list. It is allowed to export when the goods/technologies are apparently not related to WMD purpose.
2009年4月28日火曜日
Amend HS code in 2012
HS code was changed in January 2007, and I had hard time to cope with this change, e.g. updating corporate classification system. Now, the next big wave is expected on 1 January 2012.
WCO headquarter adopted the amendments to the international HS goods nomenclature.
These amendments will be submitted to the WCO Council for approval in June 2009.
Main points to be amended are as follows:
WCO headquarter adopted the amendments to the international HS goods nomenclature.
These amendments will be submitted to the WCO Council for approval in June 2009.
Main points to be amended are as follows:
- The use of HS as the standard for classifying and coding goods of specific importance to food security and early warning data falling within the ambit of the Food Security Information for Action Programme of the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).
- Create additional subheadings for the identification of chemicals and pesticides controlled under the Rotterdam Convention and ozone depleting substances controlled under the Montreal Protocol.
- Simplified by the deletion of more than 40 headings or subheadings due to low volume of trade. Certain products will be separately identified in either existing or new headings. Advances in technology are also reflected in the amendments.
Once approved by the WCO Council, all amendments, except those for which an objection has been timely notified to the WCO Secretariat, will enter into force for all Contracting Parties to the HS convention on 1st January 2012.
It looks far too away future, but good preparation always makes you smart guy.
2009年4月25日土曜日
Refund of CVD
As reported in this blog, Counter Vailing Duty ("CVD") of Hynix DRAM made in Korea was abolished as of April 23. No more CVD in importing into Japan.
One important topic for this CVD is the paid CVD can be refunded to importers in Japan.
As CVD is a counter-measure to the subsidy to Hynix by Korean governmental financial institute, in order to make the industry competitiveness equal status, Japanese decided to impose CVD to Hynix Korea DRAM. However, based on the protest by Hynix, Japanese government have re-investigated whether the duty rate of CVD was appropriate or not.
The result is that there is no more ground of CVD in current situation, and the effect of the subsidy was disappeared in some years ago, CVD was abolished.
The refund of the CVD is the amount of difference between actually paid CVD and "should-be CVD amount", which is, e.g. JPY3.98 per 256MB per item. (Please be noted the actual calculation should be more complicated based on the procedure sheet by Customs.)
As the implementation of CVD was first time in history in Japan, not many of traders know this refund system. Although the check of paid CVD result and the calculation of the refund would be complicated and troublesome, it would be worth while doing so for traders who paid CVD a lot.
Good luck!
(Source: Cabinet Order to abolish CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/seirei.htm#H21s122
Report of investigation of CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/kokuji/H21kokuji/H21kokuji0140.pdf
Procedure of refund of CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/tsutatsu/H21tsutatsu/H21tsutatsu0476.pdf )
One important topic for this CVD is the paid CVD can be refunded to importers in Japan.
As CVD is a counter-measure to the subsidy to Hynix by Korean governmental financial institute, in order to make the industry competitiveness equal status, Japanese decided to impose CVD to Hynix Korea DRAM. However, based on the protest by Hynix, Japanese government have re-investigated whether the duty rate of CVD was appropriate or not.
The result is that there is no more ground of CVD in current situation, and the effect of the subsidy was disappeared in some years ago, CVD was abolished.
The refund of the CVD is the amount of difference between actually paid CVD and "should-be CVD amount", which is, e.g. JPY3.98 per 256MB per item. (Please be noted the actual calculation should be more complicated based on the procedure sheet by Customs.)
As the implementation of CVD was first time in history in Japan, not many of traders know this refund system. Although the check of paid CVD result and the calculation of the refund would be complicated and troublesome, it would be worth while doing so for traders who paid CVD a lot.
Good luck!
(Source: Cabinet Order to abolish CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/seirei.htm#H21s122
Report of investigation of CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/kokuji/H21kokuji/H21kokuji0140.pdf
Procedure of refund of CVD: http://www.customs.go.jp/kaisei/tsutatsu/H21tsutatsu/H21tsutatsu0476.pdf )
2009年4月23日木曜日
Concern - FEFTL amendment (2)
Following the yesterday's article, I have another concern for implementation of amended FEFTL in export control of technology transfer, and actually this is much more important for operation of real business world.
(2) When is the point in time of export in technology?
Question: If Japanese company export group of various software to foreign country through Internet and the software can be used only after the exporter give "virtual key" to foreign company, when is the point in time of export in technology? The assumption is that the software works only after activating with key, and foreign company cannot use the other software without the key. The security by key is never broken. The point of time of export is whether:
a) the time when foreign company receive the software? or
b) the time when they activate the software by key?
The answer is, it is b). The time when the software is activated by key.
This is based on the "Ekimu Tsutatsu" (Notification), it prescribe that the point of export of technology in such case is "the time when the technology is transferred to non-resident".
Trust me, this answer was verified by METI, and even in US EAR's case, the answer is same.
Actually, many of software company have similar business model. Give series of software to customers initially, and then provide activation key depending on customer needs and bill to customer based on the activation key accordingly.
Now, my concern is the amended new FEFTL have new provision that the permission is required if document, drawing, or electric media which have sensitive technology is exported.
In addition, this is applicable to transmission of technology. The amended FEFTL impose more "cross boarder" check of technology transfer. This is understandable to cope with actual business world and make the export control more reliable and practical.
Then, concern coming to my mind, the activation key business model as above may be affected by amended law? The software company may need to get license for not only key activated software, but also for non-activated software provided to overseas company even if it is never be used?
It is too early to give definite answer before Cabinet Order, Ministerial Order, and related notification are announced. We need to check and read carefully after they are disclosed.
As usual, the devil is in the details. Stay tuned.
(2) When is the point in time of export in technology?
Question: If Japanese company export group of various software to foreign country through Internet and the software can be used only after the exporter give "virtual key" to foreign company, when is the point in time of export in technology? The assumption is that the software works only after activating with key, and foreign company cannot use the other software without the key. The security by key is never broken. The point of time of export is whether:
a) the time when foreign company receive the software? or
b) the time when they activate the software by key?
The answer is, it is b). The time when the software is activated by key.
This is based on the "Ekimu Tsutatsu" (Notification), it prescribe that the point of export of technology in such case is "the time when the technology is transferred to non-resident".
Trust me, this answer was verified by METI, and even in US EAR's case, the answer is same.
Actually, many of software company have similar business model. Give series of software to customers initially, and then provide activation key depending on customer needs and bill to customer based on the activation key accordingly.
Now, my concern is the amended new FEFTL have new provision that the permission is required if document, drawing, or electric media which have sensitive technology is exported.
In addition, this is applicable to transmission of technology. The amended FEFTL impose more "cross boarder" check of technology transfer. This is understandable to cope with actual business world and make the export control more reliable and practical.
Then, concern coming to my mind, the activation key business model as above may be affected by amended law? The software company may need to get license for not only key activated software, but also for non-activated software provided to overseas company even if it is never be used?
It is too early to give definite answer before Cabinet Order, Ministerial Order, and related notification are announced. We need to check and read carefully after they are disclosed.
As usual, the devil is in the details. Stay tuned.
登録:
投稿 (Atom)
