1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |BIS Issues Final Rule on China Exports

BIS Issues Final Rule on China Exports

Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.18.07

In publishing its long-awaited rule imposing controls on exports to the PRC, BIS has imposed controls where the exporter "knows" of a military end use for 31 categories (down from 47) of items on the Commerce Control List, and created a new authorization for some exports to China that would require a license unless destined to Validated End Users ("VEUs"). In response to extensive public comments, BIS has modified the standard for evaluating "military end use," raised the dollar value of transactions requiring a PRC "End User Statement" (from $5,000 to $50,000), and set out the specific requirements for VEU status, including the specific information required to support an application and the creation of a new inter-agency "End User Review Committee" (including State, Defense, Energy, and others) which must unanimously approve all applications for VEU status. BIS has heralded the VEU, or "trusted customer," approach as a model for the future of export controls in an increasingly list-based compliance environment; this future will depend on the degree of practical usefulness of the VEU model as an alternative to traditional export licenses. The text of the Final Rule is available at http://www.bis.doc.gov/News/2007/Rule%20text.pdf.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights