<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: U.K. Legislative Committee Tackles Brokering Issues</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/219/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/219</link>
	<description>Latest News on DDTC, BIS, OFAC, and other export law matters</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike Deal</title>
		<link>http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/219#comment-3751</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Deal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/219#comment-3751</guid>
		<description>I agree that under the AECA and the ITAR is not discretionary, the fact is that State has been holding up on registrations, especially for small manufacturers that are subcontractors to defense contractors, for no good reason.  It has been a real problem for subs whose only requirement for an export license is to allow a foreign national engineer who already has a non-immigrant visa to work on a defense contract.  GAO and/or State's IG need to investigate what's really going on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that under the AECA and the ITAR is not discretionary, the fact is that State has been holding up on registrations, especially for small manufacturers that are subcontractors to defense contractors, for no good reason.  It has been a real problem for subs whose only requirement for an export license is to allow a foreign national engineer who already has a non-immigrant visa to work on a defense contract.  GAO and/or State&#8217;s IG need to investigate what&#8217;s really going on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
