• Company committed multiple apparent violations of U.S. sanctions on North Korea
  • Penalty imposed in part because of company’s “non-existent” sanctions compliance program
  • Settlement underscores need to address supply chain risks

On January 31, 2019, U.S. Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)announced a $996,080 settlement agreement with e.l.f. Cosmetics, Inc. (ELF) to settle ELF’s potential civil liability for 156 violations of the North Korea Sanctions Regulations.  According to OFAC, fake eyelash kits that ELF believed to be from China were in fact supplied from North Korea.

Presumably very few Americans awake in the middle of the night worrying that North Korean fake eyelashes pose a threat to U.S. national security.  Yet in pursuing this action vigorously, OFAC made clear that it is willing to seek penalties against any U.S. business that directly or indirectly benefits the North Korean economy.  In announcing the settlement, OFAC highlighted the importance of conducting “full-spectrum supply chain due diligence when sourcing products from overseas, particularly in a region in which the DPRK, as well as other comprehensively sanctioned countries or regions, is known to export goods.”

Continue Reading OFAC Settles with Cosmetics Company, Reiterates Importance of Supply Chain Compliance

December of 2018 brought many potential changes to the U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA) regulations that impact small businesses. First, on December 4, 2018, the SBA issued a lengthy proposed rule implementing several provisions of the National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) of 2016 and 2017, and the Recovery Improvements for Small Entities After Disaster Act of 2015 (RISE Act), as well as other clarifying amendments.  Then, on December 17, 2018, President Trump signed Public Law No. 115-324, the Small Business Runway Extension Act, which modifies the method for determining the size standards for small businesses.

SBA’s Proposed Rule

 The SBA’s proposed rule offers clarification on numerous topics, including but not limited to, recertification requirements, material breach of subcontracting plans for failure to comply in good faith, the inclusion of indirect costs in commercial subcontracting plans, setting aside an order under a set-aside multiple award contract (MAC), the status of independent contractors as employees in certain situations, and limitations on subcontracting compliance.  Comments on the proposed rule are due on February 4, 2019.  Some of the most significant proposed rules are summarized below.

Continue Reading SBA’s Busy Year End Yields Lots of Potential Changes for Small Businesses in 2019

On December 21, 2018, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report analyzing contract and grant awards of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding to small businesses owned by multiple venture capital (VC) companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms between 2015 and 2018.  In 2011, agencies were given the authority to award SBIR funds to small businesses owned by multiple venture capital companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms (investment companies and funds), however these awards were not to exceed either 25% or 15% of the agencies’ SBIR budgets depending on which agency was making the award.  The GAO found that of the 11 federal agencies participating in the SBIR program, only three agencies (the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), and the Department of Education’s Institute for Education Sciences) awarded contracts or grants to small businesses majority-owned by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity firms.  These three agencies made a total of 62 awards and obligated $43.6 million to such businesses from 2015 to 2018, only amounting to 0.1% to 2.7% of the three agencies’ total SBIR awards. Continue Reading Agencies Continue to Shy Away from Awarding SBIR Funds to VC/Private Equity-Backed Small Businesses

  • Russian corporations de-listed through significant specific steps agreed to with OFAC
  • Exporter settles for $7.7 million and agrees to comprehensive compliance measures
  • OFAC outlines sanctions compliance best practices, expands oversight

As 2018 came to a close, the U.S. Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced two actions that should be studied by any party subject to U.S. economic sanctions. OFAC is the U.S. government agency with principal responsibility for administering U.S. sanctions regulations.

First, on December 19, OFAC published a letter to members of the U.S. Congress announcing the agency’s intention to remove a group of Russian corporations from the List of Specially Designated and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) that OFAC maintains. As a general matter, U.S. individuals and entities are prohibited from engaging in any transaction with an SDN.

Then, on December 20, OFAC released its settlement agreement with Zoltek Companies, Inc. (Zoltek) for violations of the Belarus Sanctions Regulations. According to OFAC, the violations consisted of at least 26 transactions with an SDN.

These actions are quite different. But as described below, each includes very useful guidance about OFAC’s current view of sanctions compliance best practices. Continue Reading OFAC Actions Provide Guidance on Sanctions Compliance Best Practices

On November 5, 2018, the Federal Circuit held in a precedential decision that bonding requirements in FAR 52.228-15, “Performance and Payment Bonds—Construction,” were read into all construction contracts by operation of law at the time of award, pursuant to the Christian doctrine.  FAR 52.228-15 requires an offeror in any construction contract valued over $150,000 to furnish performance and payment bonds:

Performance and Payment Bonds—Construction (OCT 2010)

(b) Amount of required bonds. Unless the resulting contract price is $150,000 or less, the successful offeror shall furnish performance and payment bonds to the Contracting Officer as follows:

(1) Performance bonds (Standard Form 25). The penal amount of performance bonds at the time of contract award shall be 100 percent of the original contract price.
(2) Payment Bonds (Standard Form 25-A). The penal amount of payment bonds at the time of contract award shall be 100 percent of the original contract price.

Continue Reading The <i>Christian</i> Doctrine Strikes Again … To Require Performance and Payment Bonds in all Construction Contracts

On September 24, 2018, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued a final rule that alters its regulations governing the Veteran-Owned Small Business Verification Program.  The final rule, “VA Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) Verification Guidelines,” will go into effect on October 1, 2018.  This new rule brings much awaited clarity and uniformity to the regulations governing the VA’s ownership and control requirements for VOSBs and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs).

Details of the VA VOSB Verification Guidelines

The rule places exclusive authority to implement VOSB verification regulations in the Small Business Administration (SBA), and goes so far as to seek the removal of all references to “ownership” or “control” from VA regulations.  Additionally, the rule provides clarification on certain portions of the VA verification process, and outlines the circumstances that will allow a company to qualify as a VOSB or SDVOSB under a surviving spouse or active employee stock ownership plan (ESOP).

Continue Reading VA Concedes Sole Responsibility for Verifying Veteran Contractor Ownership and Control to the SBA