Homework_ Export Control Issues and Consequences

.docx

School

Troy University, Troy *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

4468

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by AmbassadorRam2193

Report
Homework: Export Control Issues and Consequences CASE 1: Zheng Yan / Yang Yang / Ge Song Tao / Shanghai Breeze Technology Co. Ltd. 1. Who was involved and what were their roles? ● People and company that involved: ● Yang Yang: owner of BQ Tree Consulting in Jacksonville ● Ge Song Tao: President of the Chinese Company Shanghai Breeze ● Zheng Yan: Manager of the Chinese Company Shanghai Breeze ● Their roles: transporter 2. What did they do wrong? ● They and others conspired to illegally export military-grade combat rubber raiding craft (CCRC) classified under ECCN 8A992, used by the U.S. Special Operations community, to China. They provided a U.S. company with false end-use and end-user information for a front company in Hong Kong, which was used to complete the transaction valued over $266,000 and ultimately destined for China. 3. What rules did they break? Did they break the rule accidentally or intentionally? ● They broke the military-grade export rules and were dishonest in providing information. ● They broke the rule intentionally 4. Why is there a rule against that activity? ● In my opinion, these rules help the US government control the military products that export to other countries. 5. What were the consequences for the people/companies involved? ● Zheng Yan was sentenced a to 17 months in prison, one year of supervised release pending deportation, a prohibition on employment with any company that deals with the military, and a $100 special assessment ● Yang Yang was sentenced to 16 months in prison, two years of supervised release, mandatory mental health screening, and a $200 special assessment ● Ge Song Tao was sentenced to 42 months confinement, 3 years supervised probation upon release from confinement, a $50,000 criminal fine, and a $200 special assessment CASE 2: Kenneth Chait / Tubeman.com/Advantage Tube Services, Inc. 1. Who was involved and what were their roles? ● Kenneth Chait, owner/operator of Tubeman.com/Advantage Tube Services, Inc., ● His role: seller 2. What did they do wrong? ● He was willing to export to Pakistan two ceramic metal triggered spark gaps (also known as nuclear trigger spark gaps), without the required BIS export license. 3. What rules did they break? Did they break the rule accidentally or intentionally?
● He broke International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the EAR in connection with the attempted export of nuclear trigger spark gaps to Pakistan without a license. ● He broke the rules intentionally. 4. Why is there a rule against that activity? ● The rule against that activity was because the spark gaps were listed on the Commerce Control List, controlled for nuclear proliferation reasons. And if this product was exported without a license, it would cause many consequences to the safety of people and the country. 5. What were the consequences for the people/companies involved? ● Kenneth Chait was sentenced to 12 months and one day in prison, two years of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment, forfeit $7,465 to the U.S. Government.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help