Limits on the Extraterritoriality of United States Export Control and Sanctions Legislation

The sovereignty of states is reflected in the notion of jurisdiction, empowering them to enact and enforce laws and regulations, and to adjudicate disputes in court. The jurisdiction of states and the exercise thereof is primarily territorial, limiting the exercise of state authority to their respective national territories except in specific situations. However, in an increasingly globalized and interconnected world, it would be hard to maintain that a state should be denied the right to exercise its sovereign powers beyond national borders when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. Consequently, the exercise of extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction has become more accepted, although it is limited to particular situations and circumstances. These have to do with the exercise of jurisdiction over nationals, vessels and aircraft registered in or pertaining to the legislating state, as well as certain activities aimed at undermining the state’s security or solvency or which constitute crimes under international law. However, in principle it is not allowed to regulate activities of foreign nationals or entities operating wholly outside the legislating state’s territory. One area where this has become increasingly prevalent is through the exercise of export controls over foreign nationals and legal persons. The United States (US) has long been engaged in the exercise of this type of extraterritorial jurisdiction and is, without doubt, the state that is most proactive in doing so. This chapter considers US extraterritorial claims with respect to its export control and sanctions legislation and explores the limits of this practice under public international law.

Exporting Forest Loss? A Cross-National Analysis of the United States Export–Import Bank Financing in Low- and Middle-Income Nations

Dependency theory argues that due to unequal economic relationships, including exports, multinational corporations, and loans from multilateral lending institutions, high-income nations exploit the labor and resources of low- and middle-income nations. We extend this line of reasoning to the United States Export–Import Bank, as it has recently come under scrutiny for its lending in the forestry sector of low- and middle-income nations. Although this concern has been raised, we are not aware of any cross-national research that empirically evaluates if their investments adversely impact forests. Therefore, we examine the impact of the United States Export–Import Bank lending in the forestry sector on forest loss. Using a two-stage instrumental variable regression model to account for possible donor selection bias as well as ordinary least squares regression to analyze data for 78 low- and middle-income nations, we find that export credit agency financing is related to increased forest loss from 2001 to 2014. Our findings are consistent with dependency theory ideas that economic linkages with high-income nations increase forest loss in low- and middle-income nations.

Synchronizing U.S. States' Strategic Plans to Increase Exports to Emerging Markets

The United States seeks to increase and expand exports to emerging markets. The majority of U.S. firms (98 percent) are small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) with only 1 percent engaging in exporting. The Federal and State Governments encourage SMEs to expand exporting through the National Export Initiative (NEI) and NEI/NEXT initiatives. This paper examines NEI’s progress and strategies by leading U.S. exporting states, export activity to BRICSA, states’ alignment with NEI and the extent to which NEI has facilitated federal and state collaboration. Further, it reviews NEI/NEXT objectives and strategies to internationalize U.S. business practices.

US Export-Import Bank may be reauthorised

Headline UNITED STATES: Export-Import Bank may be reauthorised

US Export-Import Bank will be renewed

Headline UNITED STATES: Export-Import Bank will be renewed