China-based smartphone apps, TikTok and WeChat, have each received a reprieve from the respective bans, which were originally ordered by President Trump on August 6, 2020 against both parties and were scheduled to take effect on September 21, 2020.  Please see our previous post covering the Executive Orders.  Pursuant to the Executive Orders banning the

The United States is formally demanding that the United Nations (U.N.) reimpose sanctions on Iran for its failure to meet commitments to limit its nuclear program set forth under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).  U.N. sanctions on Iran were lifted in 2015 as part of the terms of the JCPOA, which included the United States, European Union, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia, and China as signatories.  The U.S. formally withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and reinstated sanctions on Iran.
Continue Reading U.S. Seeks Snapback of U.N. Sanctions on Iran Despite Departure from Nuclear Deal

On August 6, 2020, the White House issued two (2) Executive Orders (“EO”) banning the popular China-based social media app TikTok and the messaging and electronic payments app WeChat.  Both orders are scheduled to take effect in 45 days (approximately September 21, 2020). While a U.S. ban on TikTok, owned by Beijing-based ByteDance Ltd., had been anticipated, especially after India banned the app earlier this year, the EO on Tencent Holding Ltd.’s (“Tencent”) WeChat was not anticipated and has significant potential business ramifications.
Continue Reading U.S. Moves to Ban TikTok and WeChat Apps Amid U.S.-China Tensions

On July 14, 2020, President Trump signed into law an Executive Order that ends Hong Kong’s differential treatment compared to the People’s Republic of China (“PRC” or “China”). The President’s action follows the Chinese government’s decision in late May to impose new national security legislation on Hong Kong that outlaws any act of “secession,” “terrorism,”

On July 14, 2020, the United Kingdom announced that it will ban Huawei Technologies, Co. Ltd. (“Huawei”) equipment from its 5G network. Effective December 31, 2020, Telecoms operators in the UK can no longer purchase Huawei equipment and have until 2027 to remove Huawei technology from their networks, with broadband companies receiving an additional two

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA) will displace NAFTA and become effective July 1, 2020. Though similar to NAFTA in many ways, key changes in the USMCA include provisions for digital trade, implementation of new local labor standards in the automotive sector, and the adjustment of the rules of origin for a wide variety of

In Husch Blackwell’s May 2020 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:

  • Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announces opportunities to submit comments in the Section 232 investigations on imports of mobile cranes and steel for electrical transformers
  • White House issues Executive Order providing federal

White HouseThe Trump Administration issued its Executive Order on Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery (the “EO”) on May 19, 2020 (Executive Order). The EO seeks to remedy the economic impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic by removing certain administrative barriers and providing flexibility in the implementation and enforcement of other administrative provisions and

[APRIL 3 UPDATE] U.S. lawmakers of both parties in the House and the Senate, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), have urged the Trump Administration to suspend tariff collections for at least 90 days to assist businesses that are hurting from the economic crisis caused

White HouseWhy importers of steel and aluminum derivative products should consider challenging the administration’s imposition of additional Section 232 duties:

  • The processes followed by the administration in implementing additional Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum products not originally included in the Section 232 duties are procedurally flawed.
  • The institution of additional duties on products not