U.S. Antiboycott Regulations: What Exporters Must Report and Avoid

One of the most basic components of export compliance is often one of the most overlooked: antiboycott regulations. U.S. antiboycott regulations prohibit or discourage U.S. persons from taking certain actions with the intent to comply with, further or support an unsanctioned foreign boycott. They also require U.S. persons to report their receipt of certain boycott-related requests to the Office of Antiboycott Compliance (OAC)—even when they do not intend to comply.

The Arab League boycott of Israel remains the principal unsanctioned foreign boycott covered by these rules, but Part 760 of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) applies to all unsanctioned foreign boycotts within its jurisdiction.

The practical takeaway: Do not assume a boycott-related request is harmless because your company plans to reject it. The request itself may trigger a reporting obligation.

The History of Antiboycott Regulations

In the mid-1970s, the United States adopted two laws intended to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nations' economic boycotts or embargoes. These antiboycott laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA).

Antiboycott compliance refers to the provisions found in Part 760, Restrictive Trade Practices or Boycotts, of the EAR. These laws discourage, and in some cases, “prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain other countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott.”

Where does boycott language appear?

Boycott language may appear in almost any document connected to an international transaction, including:

• Purchase orders
• Requests for quotation
• Tenders and bid invitations
• Sales contracts
• Letters of credit
• Commercial invoices
• Certificates of origin
• Packing lists
• Shipping instructions
• Vendor questionnaires
• Trademark applications
• Customs documents
• Instructions supplied by customers, banks or logistics providers

A request does not have to be written. Part 760 also covers oral requests, solicitations, directives, legends and instructions that ask a U.S. person to provide information, take an action or refrain from taking an action.

Companies should also avoid limiting document reviews to one or two countries. Boycott-related language may originate in a variety of markets or be passed along by banks, distributors, freight forwarders and other intermediaries.

The practical danger is often not an employee deliberately supporting a boycott. It is someone accepting a purchase order without reading the fine print, copying customer instructions onto a commercial invoice or assuming that a freight forwarder will identify and resolve the issue.

What does boycott language look like?

Potential red flags include language that asks a company to:

• Certify that goods are not of Israeli origin.
• State that goods do not contain Israeli components or materials.
• Confirm that a company, supplier, manufacturer, bank, vessel or insurer is not blacklisted.
• Disclose whether the company does business in or with Israel.
• Refuse to use certain suppliers, carriers, banks or insurers.
• Comply with a foreign country’s boycott laws or regulations.
• Exclude individuals or businesses based on nationality, religion, race or national origin.
• Confirm that a vessel has not called—or will not call—at an Israeli port.

Examples published by BIS include phrases such as “Goods of Israeli origin not acceptable” and requirements that suppliers comply with Israel boycott conditions. BIS emphasizes that its examples are illustrative and not exhaustive. You’ll find more examples of the language foreign entities have used in the past to solicit antiboycott cooperation from U.S. companies on the OAC website.

What conduct do the antiboycott regulations prohibit?

Antiboycott provisions under the TRA and/or found in the EAR prohibit a variety of activities:

• Agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
• Agreements to discriminate or actual discrimination against other persons based on race, religion, sex, national origin or nationality.
• Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
• Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex or national origin of another person.
• Implementing letters of credit containing prohibited boycott terms or conditions.

The TRA does not prohibit any conduct, but it penalizes companies that participate in these agreements by denying them certain tax benefits. Needless to say, they are significant enough to make noncompliance expensive.

According to the OAC, these laws apply to “U.S. persons in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States.” This includes all individuals, corporations and unincorporated associations resident in the U.S. including the permanent domestic affiliates of foreign concerns.

U.S. persons also include U.S. citizens abroad (except when they reside abroad and are employed by non-U.S. persons) and the controlled in fact affiliates of domestic concerns. The test for "controlled in fact" is the ability to establish general policies or to control the day-to-day operations of the foreign affiliate.

When must a boycott request be reported?

U.S. persons located in the United States generally must submit their reports by the last day of the month following the calendar quarter in which the request was received.

U.S. persons located outside the United States generally have until the last day of the second month following that calendar quarter.

For example, a U.S.-located exporter that receives a reportable request on February 15 generally must file its report by April 30. A covered U.S. person located outside the United States generally would have until May 31.

BIS provides two reporting forms:

• Form BIS-621P for a single transaction.
• Form BIS-6051P for multiple transactions involving requests received during the same calendar quarter.

Reports may be submitted electronically or by mail. The regulations can also require different boycott requests associated with the same transaction to be reported separately. A report may be filed by someone acting on behalf of the recipient, but the filer must identify the person on whose behalf the report is being submitted.

Records relating to a reportable boycott request—including copies of documents containing the request—generally must be retained for five years after the request is received.

What is the BIS Boycott Requester List?

To make it easier for exporters, freight forwarders and others to comply, the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) launched its public Boycott Requester List in March 2024 after modifying its reporting form in 2023 to collect the identity of parties making boycott-related requests. Each listed party has been identified in a report submitted to BIS as having made a boycott-related request.

The Requester List is an awareness and due-diligence tool—not a restricted-party list. Inclusion does not prohibit U.S. persons from dealing with the listed party. It means transaction documents involving that party deserve additional review. The list is not exhaustive, and BIS currently says it will be updated periodically, so companies must review documents from all customers, banks, distributors, freight forwarders and other transaction parties.

As of this article’s publication date, the maximum civil monetary penalty is $374,474 per violation or twice the value of the underlying transaction, whichever is greater. Because the monetary maximum is subject to inflation adjustment, exporters should verify the current amount on the OAC website rather than relying on an older statutory figure.

Can failing to report create liability even when the company does not comply?

Yes. Recent enforcement cases demonstrate that a failure to report can result in liability even when BIS does not allege that the company carried out the requested boycott-related action.

In 2024, Quantum Corporation agreed to pay $151,875 to resolve 45 alleged failures to report requests that goods supplied to a UAE distributor not be of Israeli origin. Its voluntary disclosure and remedial actions substantially reduced the penalty.

The case provides two important lessons:

• Rejecting or not acting on a request does not necessarily remove the duty to report it.
• A voluntary self-disclosure, cooperation and corrective action may significantly affect the enforcement outcome.

How can exporters reduce their antiboycott risk?

An effective process should include more than an annual compliance reminder. Companies should:

• Train sales, finance, logistics, customer service and contract personnel to recognize boycott language.
• Include foreign subsidiaries and distributors in the training program.
• Review customer-supplied language before transferring it to an invoice, packing list or certificate.
• Establish a central process for escalating and tracking questionable requests.
• Monitor the BIS Boycott Requester List without treating it as the only source of risk.
• Include antiboycott checks in contract, letter-of-credit and order-review procedures.
• Periodically audit documents involving markets where boycott language is more likely to appear.

The practical danger is often not an employee intentionally supporting a boycott. It is someone copying customer instructions into a commercial invoice, accepting a purchase order without reading the fine print or assuming that a freight forwarder will identify the problem.

For More Information

For more information about the antiboycott regulations, check out these additional resources:

• Contact the OAC Advice Line at (202) 482-2381.
• Visit the Office of Antiboycott Compliance website.

Like what you read? Subscribe today to the International Trade Blog to get the latest news and tips for exporters and importers delivered to your inbox.

This article was first published in February 2016 and has been updated to include current information, links and formatting.