International Trade Bulletin - Volume 1, Issue 2
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.03.06
Inside this issue:
- CALIFORNIA IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- Wine Industry: The United States and the European Union have signed a bilateral wine trade agreement that will facilitate trade but also increase competition in the two wine markets
- Bilateral Trade: On March 8, the Bush Administration announced its latest plan to help U.S. exporters and importers do business in the Asia-Pacific market – a proposed U.S. – Malaysia Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
- EUROPE IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- Chemicals: New EU rules on the Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) will greatly affect the business reality for a large number of chemical companies as well as downstream users doing business in Europe and elsewhere
- Market Access: The EU and the U.S. are each other’s main trading partners, accounting for the largest bilateral trade relationship in the world
- EU TRADE REMEDIES: European Union Introduces “Flexible” Features into Its Anti-Dumping Measures
- WTO: The US and the EU have come together to request WTO consultations with China on its tariffs on automotive parts signaling an important change in the relationship among the three trading partners
- INVESTMENT: Investors clearly have begun to realize the significance of the rights guaranteed to them under NAFTA and other investment treaties, as well as their ability to enforce them
- US TRADE REMEDIES : Two initiatives currently underway in the U.S. government may make the prospects of bringing antidumping actions less attractive to U.S. petitioners
- SANCTIONS: The U.S. extraterritorial sanctions continue to wreak havoc with sourcing for companies worldwide
- CHINA EXPORT ISSUES: China "catch all" export control delayed but not dead; major review of China export policy underway
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
