4 ms·

At the time I'm writing this, this hasn't been mentioned. How this interacts with state laws, I have no idea. When it comes to businesses, the US government re

At the time I'm writing this, this hasn't been mentioned. How this interacts with state laws, I have no idea. When it comes to businesses, the US government reserves the right to institute international boycotts. Companies may not, generally speaking, boycott a country (or people from that country, etc) unless that country (or person) is being boycotted by the US. There are mandatory reporting requirements that surround this. If you work in finance and you have not received training on this topic... For more info: The Office of Antiboycott Compliance -- https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/enforcement/oac https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/enforcement/oac. From their intro: "The Office of Antiboycott Compliance (OAC) within BIS is charged with administering and enforcing the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018, Part II of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (ECRA), and the antiboycott provisions set forth in Part 760 of the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730-774 (EAR). These authorities discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from taking certain actions in furtherance or support of a boycott maintained by a foreign country against a country friendly to the United States (unsanctioned foreign boycott). U.S. companies must report to OAC their receipt of certain boycott-related requests for information designed to verify compliance with an unsanctioned foreign boycott. Prohibited activities include, inter alia, agreements by U.S. companies to refuse to do business with a boycotted country or with blacklisted persons for boycott-related reasons, furnishing information about any person’s business relationships with a boycotted country or with blacklisted persons, and implementation (by U.S. banking entities) of letters of credit that include prohibited boycott-related terms or conditions."

lr4444lr 5y ago
Some states implement their own versions of this, but even if not, if the state agencies in question are funded federally, they may obligated to carry out the same federal contractor compliances.
justin66 5y ago
> prohibit U.S. companies from taking certain actions in furtherance or support of a boycott maintained by a foreign country against a country friendly to the United States (unsanctioned foreign boycott) This would seem to be referring to boycotts instituted by nation states against other nation states that are friendly to the United States. It doesn’t seem applicable to a discussion about BDS.
bjourne 5y ago
> When it comes to businesses, the US government reserves the right to institute international boycotts. Companies may not, generally speaking, boycott a country (or people from that country, etc) unless that country (or person) is being boycotted by the US. That is far from clear and has not been settled by the SC. There is a federal amendment from 1977 to the Export Administration Act (EEA) that forbade American companies from participating in the boycott against Israel that the Arab League organized. However, since then the SC decided in favor of African American organizations that in the 1960's had organized boycotts against racist white shopkeepers. The SC ruled that political boycotts was protected free speech and participating in them a constitutional right. Another counter-argument is that the boycott against Israel is not maintained by a "foreign country" but by the BDS movement and other grassroots organizations around the world. Furthermore, the boycott targets non-Israel companies doing business in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories just as much as it targets Israeli companies. Thus, the EEA may not be applicable at all. In either case, the EEA doesn't entail an obligation of contractors to promise not to boycott certain countries to be awarded government contracts, which is what this (and other similar state laws) is all about.
VictorPath 5y ago
You're talking as if there is some law from time immemorial regarding this, to deal with all corporate boycotts. The 2018 law mentioned was completely driven by the Israel lobby, and all proceeding laws in this respect were due to the Israel lobby. The grand statement "When it comes to businesses, the US government reserves the right to institute international boycotts" is deceptive and farcical- this was instigated due to the Israel lobby and for all practical purposes has only applied to Israel.
- silicon2401 5y ago
  One of the many legitimate reasons for boycotting Israel
- q1w2 5y ago
  ...at the same time - the ability for the US to act as ONE body to impose strong political will is an important tool. ...so this law makes sense. You cannot negotiate with 100,000 small US businesses - but now the US can use this lever of control to help force Israel or other governments to change. This also applies to China, Myanmar, South Africa, etc...

lr4444lr 5y ago

Some states implement their own versions of this, but even if not, if the state agencies in question are funded federally, they may obligated to carry out the same federal contractor compliances.

justin66 5y ago

> prohibit U.S. companies from taking certain actions in furtherance or support of a boycott maintained by a foreign country against a country friendly to the United States (unsanctioned foreign boycott) This would seem to be referring to boycotts instituted by nation states against other nation states that are friendly to the United States. It doesn’t seem applicable to a discussion about BDS.

bjourne 5y ago

> When it comes to businesses, the US government reserves the right to institute international boycotts. Companies may not, generally speaking, boycott a country (or people from that country, etc) unless that country (or person) is being boycotted by the US. That is far from clear and has not been settled by the SC. There is a federal amendment from 1977 to the Export Administration Act (EEA) that forbade American companies from participating in the boycott against Israel that the Arab League organized. However, since then the SC decided in favor of African American organizations that in the 1960's had organized boycotts against racist white shopkeepers. The SC ruled that political boycotts was protected free speech and participating in them a constitutional right. Another counter-argument is that the boycott against Israel is not maintained by a "foreign country" but by the BDS movement and other grassroots organizations around the world. Furthermore, the boycott targets non-Israel companies doing business in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories just as much as it targets Israeli companies. Thus, the EEA may not be applicable at all. In either case, the EEA doesn't entail an obligation of contractors to promise not to boycott certain countries to be awarded government contracts, which is what this (and other similar state laws) is all about.

VictorPath 5y ago

You're talking as if there is some law from time immemorial regarding this, to deal with all corporate boycotts. The 2018 law mentioned was completely driven by the Israel lobby, and all proceeding laws in this respect were due to the Israel lobby. The grand statement "When it comes to businesses, the US government reserves the right to institute international boycotts" is deceptive and farcical- this was instigated due to the Israel lobby and for all practical purposes has only applied to Israel.

silicon2401 5y ago
One of the many legitimate reasons for boycotting Israel
q1w2 5y ago
...at the same time - the ability for the US to act as ONE body to impose strong political will is an important tool. ...so this law makes sense. You cannot negotiate with 100,000 small US businesses - but now the US can use this lever of control to help force Israel or other governments to change. This also applies to China, Myanmar, South Africa, etc...