The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining whether a person is a “United States person.” They are illustrative, not comprehensive.

(i) U.S. bank A has a branch office in foreign country P. Such branch office is a United States person, because it is a permanent foreign establishment of a domestic concern.

(ii) Ten foreign nationals establish a manufacturing plant, A, in the United States, incorporating the plant under New York law.

A is a United States person, because it is a corporation organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States.

(iii) A, a foreign corporation, opens an office in the United States for purposes of soliciting U.S. orders. The office is not separately incorporated.

A's U.S. office is a United States person, because it is a permanent establishment, in the United States, of a foreign concern.

(iv) A, a U.S. individual, owns stock in foreign corporation B.

A is a United States person. However, A is not a “domestic concern,” because the term “domestic concern” does not include individuals.

(v) A, a foreign national resident in the United States, is employed by B, a foreign corporation.

A is a United States person, because he is resident in the United States.

(vi) A, a foreign national, who is resident in a foreign country and is employed by a foreign corporation, makes occasional visits to the United States, for purposes of exploring business opportunities.

A is not a United States person, because he is not a United States resident or national.

(vii) A is an association of U.S. firms organized under the laws of Pennsylvania for the purpose of expanding trade.

A is a United States person, because it is an association organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States.

(viii) At the request of country Y, A, an individual employed by U.S. company B, is assigned to company C as an employee. C is a foreign company owned and controlled by country Y. A, a U.S. national who will reside in Y, has agreed to the assignment provided he is able to retain his insurance, pension, and other benefits. Accordingly, company B has agreed to keep A as an employee in order to protect his employee benefits, and company C has agreed to pay for A's salary. At all times while he works for C, A will be under C's direction and control.

A is not a United States person while under C's direction and control, because he will be resident outside the United States and assigned as an employee to a non-United States person. The arrangement designed to protect A's insurance, pension, and other benefits does not destroy his status as an employee of C so long as he is under the direction and control of C.

(ix) A, a U.S. citizen, has resided in Europe for three years, where he is a self-employed consultant for United States and foreign companies in the communications industry.

A is a United States person, because he is a U.S. national and because he is not a resident outside the United States who is employed by other than a United States person.

The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining the circumstances in which a foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment of a domestic concern is “controlled in fact.” They are illustrative, not comprehensive.

(i) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. Fifty-one percent of the voting stock of A is owned by U.S. company B.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(ii) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. Ten percent of the voting stock of A is owned by U.S. company B. A has an exclusive management contract with B pursuant to which A is operated by B.

As long as such contract is in effect, A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(iii) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. Ten percent of the voting stock of A is owned by U.S. company B. A has 10 persons on its board of directors. Six of those persons are also members of the board of directors of U.S. company B.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(iv) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. Thirty percent of the voting securities of A is owned by U.S. company B and no other person owns or controls an equal or larger share.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(v) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. In A's articles of incorporation, U.S. company B has been given authority to appoint A's board of directors.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(vi) Company A is a joint venture established in a foreign country, with equal participation by U.S. company B and foreign company C. U.S. Company B has authority to appoint A's chief operating officer.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B. This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control does not, in fact, lie with B.

(vii) Same as (vi), except that B has no authority to appoint A's chief operating officer.

B is not presumed to control A, absent other facts giving rise to a presumption of control.

(viii) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. U.S. companies B, C, and D each own 20 percent of A's voting securities and regularly cast their votes in concert.

A is presumed to be controlled in fact by B, C, and D, because these companies are acting in concert to control A.

(ix) U.S. bank B located in the United States has a branch office, A, in a foreign country. A is not separately incorporated.

A is deemed to be controlled in fact by B, because A is a branch office of a domestic concern.

(x) Company A is incorporated in a foreign country. Fifty-one percent of the voting stock of A is owned by company B, which is incorporated in another foreign country. Fifty-one percent of the voting stock of B is owned by C, a U.S. company.

Both A and B are presumed to be controlled in fact by C. The presumption of C's control over B may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control over B does not, in fact, lie with C. The presumption of B's control over A (and thus C's control over A) may be rebutted by competent evidence showing that control over A does not, in fact, lie with B.

(xi) B, a U.S. individual, owns 51 percent of the voting securities of A, a manufacturing company incorporated and located in a foreign country.

A is not “controlled in fact” under this part, because it is not controlled by a “domestic concern.”

(1) For purposes of this part, the activities of a United States person located in the United States are in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States if they involve the sale, purchase, or transfer of goods or services (including information) between:

(i) Two or more of the several States (including the District of Columbia);

(ii) Any State (including the District of Columbia) and any territory or possession of the United States;

(iii) Two or more of the territories or possessions of the United States; or

(iv) A State (including the District of Columbia), territory or possession of the United States and any foreign country.

(2) For purposes of this part, the export of goods or services from the United States and the import of goods or services into the United States are activities in United States commerce. In addition, the action of a domestic concern in specifically directing the activities of its controlled in fact foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment is an activity in United States commerce.

(3) Activities of a United States person located in the United States may be in United States commerce even if they are part of or ancillary to activities outside United States commerce. However, the fact that an ancillary activity is in United States commerce does not, in and of itself, mean that the underlying or related activity is in United States commerce.

(4) Hence, the action of a United States bank located in the United States in providing financing from the United States for a foreign transaction that is not in United States commerce is nonetheless itself in United States commerce. However, the fact that the financing is in United States commerce does not, in and of itself, make the underlying foreign transaction an activity in United States commerce, even if the underlying transaction involves a foreign company that is a United States person within the meaning of this part.

(5) Similarly, the action of a United States person located in the United States in providing financial, accounting, legal, t ransportation, or other ancillary services to its controlled in fact foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment in connection with a foreign transaction is in United States commerce. But the provision of such ancillary services will not, in and of itself, bring the foreign transaction of such subsidiary, affiliate, or permanent foreign establishment into United States commerce.

(6) Any transaction between a controlled in fact foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment of a domestic concern and a person located in the United States is an activity in United States commerce.

(7) Whether a transaction between such a foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment and a person located outside the United States is an activity in United States commerce is governed by the following rules.

(8) A transaction between a domestic concern's controlled in fact foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment and a person outside the United States, involving goods or services (including information but not including ancillary services) acquired from a person in the United States is in United States commerce under any of the following circumstances—

(i) If the goods or services were acquired for the purpose of filling an order from a person outside the United States;

(ii) If the goods or services were acquired for incorporation into, refining into, reprocessing into, or manufacture of another product for the purpose of filling an order from a person outside the United States;

(iii) If the goods or services were acquired for the purpose of fulfilling or engaging in any other transaction with a person outside the United States; or

(iv) If the goods were acquired and are ultimately used, without substantial alteration or modification, in filling an order from, or fulfilling or engaging in any other transaction with, a person outside the United States (whether or not the goods were originally acquired for that purpose). If the goods are indistinguishable as to origin from similar foreign-trade goods with which they have been mingled in a stockpile or inventory, the subsequent transaction involving the goods is presumed to be in United States commerce unless, at the time of filling the order, the foreign-origin inventory on hand was sufficient to fill the order.

(9) For purposes of this section, goods or services are considered to be acquired for the purpose of filling an order from or engaging in any other transaction with a person outside the United States where:

(i) They are purchased by the foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment upon the receipt of an order from or on behalf of a customer with the intention that the goods or services are to go to the customer;

(ii) They are purchased by the foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment to meet the needs of specified customers pursuant to understandings with those customers, although not for immediate delivery; or

(iii) They are purchased by the foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment based on the anticipated needs of specified customers.

(10) If any non-ancillary part of a transaction between a domestic concern's controlled foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment and a person outside the United States is in United States commerce, the entire transaction is in United States commerce. For example, if such a foreign subsidiary is engaged in filling an order from a non-United States customer both with goods acquired from the United States and with goods acquired elsewhere, the entire transaction with that customer is in United States commerce.

(11) A transaction between a domestic concern's controlled foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment and a person outside the United States, not involving the purchase, sale, or transfer of goods or services (including information) to or from a person in the United States, is not an activity in United States commerce.

(12) The activities of a domestic concern's controlled foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment with respect to goods acquired from a person in the United States are not in United States commerce where:

(i) They were acquired without reference to a specific order from or transaction with a person outside the United States; and

(ii) They were further manufactured, incorporated into, refined into, or reprocessed into another product.

(13) The activities of a domestic concern's controlled foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment with respect to services acquired from a person in the United States are not in United States commerce where:

(i) They were acquired without reference to a specific order from or transaction with a person outside the United States; or

(ii) They are ancillary to the transaction with the person outside the United States.

(14) For purposes of this section, services are ancillary services if they are provided to a controlled foreign subsidiary, affiliate, or other permanent foreign establishment primarily for its own use rather than for the use of a third person. These typically include financial, accounting, legal,transportation, and other services, whether provided by a domestic concern or an unrelated entity.

(15) Thus, the provision of the project financing by a United States bank located in the United States to a controlled foreign subsidiary unrelated to the bank is an ancillary service which will not cause the underlying transaction to be in United States commerce. By contrast, where a domestic concern, on behalf of its controlled foreign subsidiary, gives a guaranty of performance to a foreign country customer, that is a service provided to the customer and, as such, brings that subsidiary's transaction with the customer into United States commerce. Similarly, architectural or engineering services provided by a domestic concern in connection with its controlled foreign subsidiary's construction project in a third country are services passed through to the subsidiary's customer and, as such, bring that subsidiary's foreign transaction into United States commerce.

(16) Regardless of whether the subsequent disposition of goods or services from the United States is in United States commerce, the original acquisition of goods or services from a person in the United States is an activity in United States commerce subject to this part. Thus, if a domestic concern's controlled foreign subsidiary engages in a prohibited refusal to do business in stocking its inventory with goods from the United States, that action is subject to this part whether or not subsequent sales from that inventory are.

(17) In all the above, goods and services will be considered to have been acquired from a person in the United States whether they were acquired directly or indirectly through a third party, where the person acquiring the goods or services knows or expects, at the time he places the order, that they will be delivered from the United States.

(18) Implementation of a letter of credit in the United States by a United States person located in the United States, including a permanent United States establishment of a foreign concern, is an activity in United States commerce.

(19) Implementation of a letter of credit outside the United States by a United States person located outside the United States is in United States commerce where the letter of credit (a) specifies a United States address for the beneficiary, (b) calls for documents indicating shipment from the United States, or (c) calls for documents indicating that the goods are of United States origin.

(20) See § 760.2(f) of this part on “Letters of Credit” to determine the circumstances in which paying, honoring, confirming, or otherwise implementing a letter of credit is covered by this part.

The following examples are intended to give guidance in determining the circumstances in which an activity is in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States. They are illustrative, not comprehensive.

(i) U.S. company A exports goods from the United States to a foreign country. A's activity is in U.S. commerce, because A is exporting goods from the United States.

(ii) U.S. company A imports goods into the United States from a foreign country. A's activity is in U.S. commerce, because A is importing goods into the United States.

(iii) U.S. engineering company A supplies consulting services to its controlled foreign subsidiary, B. A's activity is in U.S. commerce, because A is exporting services from the United States.

(iv) U.S. company A supplies consulting services to foreign company B. B is unrelated to A or any other U.S. person.

A's activity is in U.S. commerce even though B, a foreign-owned company located outside the United States, is not subject to this part, because A is exporting services from the United States.

(v) Same as (iv), except A is a bank located in the United States and provides a construction loan to B.

A's activity is in U.S. commerce even though B is not subject to this part, because A is exporting financial services from the United States.

(vi) U.S. company A issues policy directives from time to time to its controlled foreign subsidiary, B, governing the conduct of B's activities with boycotting countries.

A's activity in directing the activities of its foreign subsidiary, B, is an activity in U.S. commerce.

(i) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, purchases goods from the United States.

A's purchase of goods from the United States is in U.S. commerce, because A is importing goods from the United States. Whether A's subsequent disposition of these goods is in U.S. commerce is irrelevant. Similarly, the fact that A purchased goods from the United States does not, in and of itself, make any subsequent disposition of those goods an activity in U.S. commerce.

(ii) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, receives an order from boycotting country Y for construction materials. A places an order with U.S. company B for the materials.

A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because the materials are purchased from the United States for the purpose of filling the order from Y.

(iii) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, receives an order from boycotting country Y for construction materials. A places an order with U.S. company B for some of the materials, and with U.S. company C, an unrelated company, for the rest of the materials.

A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because the materials are purchased from the United States for the purpose of filling the order from Y. It makes no difference whether the materials are ordered from B or C.

(iv) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, is in the wholesale and retail appliance sales business. A purchases finished air conditioning units from the United States from time to time in order to stock its inventory. A's inventory is also stocked with air conditioning units purchased outside the United States. A receives an order for air conditioning units from Y, a boycotting country. The order is filled with U.S.-origin units in A's inventory.

A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because its U.S.-origin goods are resold without substantial alteration.

(v) Same as (iv), except that A is in the chemicals distribution business. Its U.S.-origin goods are mingled in inventory with foreign-origin goods.

A's sale to Y of unaltered goods from its general inventory is presumed to be in U.S. commerce unless A can show that at the time of the sale the foreign-origin inventory on hand was sufficient to cover the shipment to Y.

(vi) A, a foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, receives an order from boycotting country Y for computers. A places an order with U.S. company B for some of the components; with U.S. company C, an unrelated company, for other components; and with foreign company D for the rest of the components. A then assembles the computers and ships them to Y.

A's transaction with Y is an activity in U.S. commerce, because some of the components are acquired from the United States for purposes of filling an order from Y.

(vii) Same as (vi), except A purchases all the components from non-U.S.sources.

A's transaction with Y is not an activity in U.S. commerce, because it involves no export of goods from the United States. It makes no difference whether the technology A uses to manufacture computers was originally acquired from its U.S. parent.

(viii) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, manufactures computers. A stocks its general components and parts inventory with purchases made at times from the United States and at times from foreign sources. A receives an order from Y, a boycotting country, for computers. A fills that order by manufacturing the computers using materials from its general inventory.

A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce, because the U.S.-origin components are not acquired for the purpose of meeting the anticipated needs of specified customers in Y. It is irrelevant that A's operations may be based on U.S.-origin technology.

(ix) Same as (viii), except that in anticipation of the order from Y, A orders and receives the necessary materials from the United States.

A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because the U.S.-origin goods were acquired for the purpose of filling an anticipated order from Y.

(x) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, manufactures typewriters. It buys typewriter components both from the United States and from foreign sources. A sells its output in various places throughout the world, including boycotting country Y. Its sales to Y vary from year to year, but have averaged approximately 20 percent of sales for the past five years. A expects that its sales to Y will remain at approximately that level in the years ahead although it has no contracts or orders from Y on hand.

A's sales of typewriters to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the U.S. components are not acquired for the purpose of filling an order from Y. A general expectancy of future sales is not an “order” within the meaning of this section.

(xi) U.S. company A's corporate counsel provides legal advice to B, its controlled foreign subsidiary, on the applicability of this Part to B's transactions.

While provision of this legal advice is itself an activity in U.S. commerce, it does not, in and of itself, bring B's activities into U.S. commerce.

(xii) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, is in the general construction business. A enters into a contract with boycotting country Y to construct a power plant in Y. In preparing engineering drawings and specifications, A uses the advice and assistance of B.

A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's services are used for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y. B's services are not ancillary services, because the engineering services in connection with construction of the power plant are part of the services ultimately provided to Y by A.

(xiii) Same as (xii), except that A gets no engineering advice or assistance from B. However, B's corporate counsel provides legal advice to A regarding the structure of the transaction. In addition, B's corporate counsel draws up the contract documents.

A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce. The legal services provided to A are ancillary services, because they are not part of the services provided to Y by A in fulfillment of its contract with Y.

(xiv) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, enters into a contract to construct an apartment complex in boycotting country Y. A will fulfill its contract completely with goods and services from outside the United States. Pursuant to a provision in the contract, B guarantees A's performance of the contract.

A's transaction with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's guaranty of A's performance involves the acquisition of services from the United States for purposes of fulfilling the transaction with Y, and those services are part of the services ultimately provided to Y.

(xv) Same as (xiv), except that the guaranty of A's performance is supplied by C, a non-U.S. person located outside the United States. However, unrelated to any particular transaction, B from time to time provides general financial, legal, and technical services to A.

A's transaction with Y is not in U.S. commerce, because the services acquired from the United States are not acquired for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y.

(xvi) A, a foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, has a contract with boycotting country Y to conduct oil drilling operations in that country. In conducting these operations, A from time to time seeks certain technical advice from B regarding the operation of the drilling rigs.

A's contract with Y is in U.S. commerce, because B's services are sought for purposes of fulfilling the contract with Y and are part of the services ultimately provided to Y.

(xvii) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, enters into a contract to sell typewriters to boycotting country Y. A is located in non-boycotting country P. None of the components are acquired from the United States. A engages C, a U.S. shipping company, to transport the typewriters from P to Y.

A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because in carrying A's goods, C is providing an ancillary service to A and not a service to Y.

(xviii) Same as (xvii), except that A's contract with Y calls for title to pass to Y in P. In addition, the contract calls for A to engage a carrier to make delivery to Y.

A's sales to Y are in U.S. commerce, because in carrying Y's goods, C is providing a service to A which is ultimately provided to Y.

(xix) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, has general product liability insurance with U.S. company C. Foreign-origin goods sold from time to time by A to boycotting country Y are covered by the insurance policy.

A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the insurance provided by C is an ancillary service provided to A which is not ultimately provided to Y.

(xx) A, a controlled foreign subsidiary of U.S. company B, manufactures automobiles abroad under a license agreement with B. From time to time, A sells such goods to boycotting country Y.

A's sales to Y are not in U.S. commerce, because the rights conveyed by the license are not acquired for the specific purpose of engaging in transactions with Y.

The following examples are intended to illustrate the factors which will be considered in determining whether the required intent exists. They are illustrative, not comprehensive.

(i) U.S. person A does business in boycotting country Y. In selecting firms to supply goods for shipment to Y, A chooses supplier B because B's products are less expensive and of higher quality than the comparable products of supplier C. A knows that C is blacklisted, but that is not a reason for A's selection of B.

A's choice of B rather than C is not action with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because C's blacklist status is not a reason for A's action.

(ii) Same as (i), except that A chooses B rather than C in part because C is blacklisted by Y.

Since C's blacklist status is a reason for A's choice, A's action is taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott.

(iii) U.S. person A bids on a tender issued by boycotting country Y. A inadvertently fails to notice a prohibited certification which appears in the tender document. A's bid is accepted.

A's action in bidding was not taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because the boycott was not a reason for A's action.

(iv) U.S. bank A engages in letter of credit transactions, in favor of U.S. beneficiaries, involving the shipments of U.S. goods to boycotting country Y. As A knows, such letters of credit routinely contain conditions requiring prohibited certifications. A fails to take reasonable steps to prevent the implementation of such letters of credit. A receives for implementation a letter of credit which in fact contains a prohibited condition but does not examine the letter of credit to determine whether it contains such a condition.

Although Y's boycott may not be a specific reason for A's action in implementing the letter of credit with a prohibited condition, all available evidence shows that A's action was taken with intent to comply with the boycott, because A knows or should know that its procedures result in compliance with the boycott.

(v) U.S. bank A engages in letter of credit transactions, in favor of U.S. beneficiaries, involving the shipment of U.S. goods to boycotting country Y. As A knows, the documentation accompanying such letters of credit sometimes contains prohibited certifications. In accordance with standard banking practices applicable to A, it does not examine such accompanying documentation. A receives a letter of credit in favor of a U.S. beneficiary. The letter of credit itself contains no prohibited conditions. However, the accompanying documentation, which A does not examine, does contain such a condition.

All available evidence shows that A's action in implementing the letter of credit was not taken with intent to comply with the boycott, because A has no affirmative obligation to go beyond applicable standard banking practices in implementing letters of credit.

(vi) A, a U.S. company, is considering opening a manufacturing facility in boycotted country X. A already has such a facility in boycotting country Y. After exploring the possibilities in X, A concludes that the market does not justify the move. A is aware that if it did open a plant in X, Y might object because of Y's boycott of X. However Y's possible objection is not a reason for A's decision not to open a plant in X.

A's decision not to proceed with the plant in X is not action with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because Y's boycott of X is not a reason for A's decision.

(vii) Same as (vi), except that after exploring the business possibilities in X, A concludes that the market does justify the move to X. However, A does not open the plant because of Y's possible objections due to Y's boycott of X.

A's decision not to proceed with the plant in X is action taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott, because Y's boycott is a reason for A's decision.

(viii) A, a U.S. chemical manufacturer, receives a “boycott questionnaire” from boycotting country Y asking, among other things, whether A has any plants located in boycotted country X. A, which has never supported Y's boycott of X, responds to Y's questionnaire, indicating affirmatively that it does have plants in X and that it intends to continue to have plants in X.

A's responding to Y's questionnaire is deemed to be action with intent to comply with Y's boycott because A knows that the questionnaire is boycott-related. It is irrelevant that A does not also wish to support Y's boycott.

(ix) U.S. company A has a manufacturing facility in boycotted country X. A receives an invitation to bid on a construction project in boycotting country Y. The invitation states that all bidders must complete a boycott questionnaire and send it in with the bid. The questionnaire asks for information about A's business relationships with X. Regardless of whether A's bid is successful, A intends to continue its business in X undiminished and in fact is exploring and intends to continue exploring an expansion of its activities in X without regard to Y's boycott.

A may not answer the questionnaire, because, despite A's intentions with regard to its business operations in X, Y's request for completion of the questionnaire is for boycott purposes and by responding, A's action would be taken with intent to comply with Y's boycott.