Screen against the Entity List, OFAC, and more in seconds
One search, 10 jurisdictions, always current.
The Three Pillars of US Export Control
US export control is not a single statute — it is three overlapping regimes, each with its own agency, scope, and enforcement posture:
- The Export Administration Regulations (EAR), administered by BIS, cover "dual-use" items with both civilian and military applications. This is the broadest regime and the one most relevant to semiconductor, electronics, and software companies.
- The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), administered by the State Department's DDTC, cover defense articles, services, and technical data on the US Munitions List. ITAR is stricter than the EAR — there are no de minimis thresholds, and manufacturers must register regardless of whether they currently export.
- OFAC sanctions programs, administered by Treasury, restrict transactions with designated countries, entities, and individuals. Sanctions operate independently of the EAR and ITAR — a transaction can be EAR-compliant but still prohibited under OFAC.
The Entity List: BIS's Primary Enforcement Tool
Within the EAR, the Entity List is the mechanism BIS uses most actively to restrict specific foreign parties. Entities on the list require a license — typically under a presumption of denial — to receive items subject to the EAR. Read our dedicated Entity List deep-dive for the full mechanics, or our Huawei case study to see how a single addition reshaped an entire supply chain.
Classification: Knowing What You're Shipping
Before any US export control obligation can be assessed, an item must be classified. Most dual-use items get an Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) from the Commerce Control List; items outside the CCL default to EAR99, which is largely uncontrolled except to embargoed destinations. Misclassification is one of the most common compliance failures — see our ECCN classification guide for a walkthrough.
The Foreign Direct Product Rule
The FDPR is the most consequential expansion of US export jurisdiction in the last decade. It asserts control over foreign-made items that are the "direct product" of specified US-origin software, technology, or equipment — meaning a chip fabricated entirely outside the US, using no US company as a party to the transaction, can still fall under US jurisdiction if it was made using US-origin design tools or manufacturing equipment. See our FDPR guide for the 2022-2023 expansions specific to semiconductors.
Building a Compliance Program
A defensible US export compliance program typically includes: (1) classification of every product/technology against the CCL and USML, (2) restricted-party screening against the Entity List, Denied Persons List, Unverified List, and OFAC's SDN and sectoral sanctions lists, (3) end-use and end-user due diligence for red flags, and (4) real-time monitoring of Federal Register rule changes, since BIS updates the Entity List and CCL on a near-weekly basis. Quarterly manual checks are not fast enough — additions can carry immediate effect.
Related Reading
- What Is Export Control? — start here if you need the fundamentals first.
- China Export Controls — how US rules specifically target China-bound technology.
- Export Control Law — the legal architecture behind the EAR, ITAR, and IEEPA.
- US export control runs through three regimes — the EAR (dual-use), ITAR (defense articles), and OFAC sanctions — each with its own agency and scope.
- The Entity List is BIS's primary tool for restricting specific foreign parties within the EAR; most entries impose a license requirement, not an outright ban.
- The Foreign Direct Product Rule extends US jurisdiction to foreign-made products built using US-origin tools or technology, even without a US party in the transaction.
- Classification (ECCN vs. EAR99) determines what obligations apply before screening or licensing questions are even relevant.
- BIS and OFAC update their lists near-weekly — periodic manual review cycles routinely miss changes with immediate compliance impact.