TRAFEED

Export Controls 2026: US, China, EU, Japan, and Asia in One Comparison Table

Published2026-02-26Updated2026-10-04Ryuta Hamamoto

This is Hamamoto from TIMEWELL. For any company that moves goods or technology across borders, export control is no longer a customs side task.

Export Controls 2026: US, China, EU, Japan, and Asia in One Comparison Table
Share

This is Hamamoto from TIMEWELL. For any company that moves goods or technology across borders, export control is no longer a customs side task. It is a premise of the business model.

As of July 2026, US–China technology and trade measures, national economic-security policies, and new ASEAN regimes are all moving at once. The temporary pause of the US EAR Affiliates Rule, MOFCOM list measures affecting Japanese counterparties, and list updates in the EU and Japan keep rewriting the baseline.

This article puts major jurisdictions into one comparison table as of 21 July 2026, then lays out four actions Japanese companies should start now. Company and list names appear only as published regulatory categories. A listing is a regulatory designation. It is not a judgment on whether a listed organisation is “good” or “bad.”

One table first: 2026 export-control themes

Theme What is happening What companies should take away
US–China reciprocity EAR entity-style controls and China’s dual-use export controls tighten, pause, and retighten Looking at only one side produces bad decisions. Run dual impact assessments
Economic security mainstream Globalised supply chains proved fragile to geopolitics Diversify sourcing and plan alternate parts at the executive level
Multipolar rulebooks EU, Japan, and ASEAN states refresh their own lists and licensing “Comply with the US and you are done” no longer works
Deeper enforcement Affiliates, diversion, and end-use scrutiny keep rising Screen beyond the direct counterparty into group structures

If classification and screening forms are still inconsistent, put the export classification template pack (2026) in place first. The four actions below move faster with a shared paper trail.

United States — EAR and a pause that is only a pause

The Export Administration Regulations, administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), are the core of US dual-use export and re-export control. Japanese exporters can be in scope even when shipping from Japan, through US-origin content, technology, or re-export rules.

One-year suspension of the Affiliates Rule (50% rule)

In late September 2025, BIS expanded end-user controls to certain foreign affiliates of listed parties — the Affiliates Rule, often called the 50% rule. A subsequent final rule suspended that expansion from 10 November 2025 through 9 November 2026, as published in the Federal Register1. The US and China have since announced an extension to 10 January 2027, but as of 3 October 2026 BIS had not published it.

Suspension is not repeal. BIS has said it will keep evaluating national-security and foreign-policy interests related to non-listed foreign affiliates during the pause. Practically:

  • Now: Entity List, MEU, and other EAR duties still apply even while the affiliate expansion is paused
  • When the stay ends (9 November 2026 on paper; 10 January 2027 if the announced extension is published): Assume the affiliate expansion returns, and finish group-structure mapping before then
  • Japanese groups: Screening design must cover overseas subsidiaries, JVs, and indirect ownership

High-value civil settlements involving affiliate transactions have also reminded the market that enforcement can reach parent–subsidiary relationships. Those cases illustrate regulatory reach; they are not verdicts on the character of any named firm.

For detail, see the Affiliates Rule complete guide and what can happen between 9 November and 10 January.

Advanced semiconductors and AI licensing

Licence policy for advanced computing items continues to mix bright-line technical thresholds with case-by-case review. The more discretion sits with BIS, the less predictable the outcome for exporters. Congressional oversight proposals add another layer. A licence granted once is not a permanent business model.

Replace siloed classification work with AI.

METI's FY2024 data shows 52% of foreign exchange law violations stem from classification errors. Download the TRAFEED product catalog covering features and rollout.

China’s Export Control Law (2020) and dual-use regulations structure licensing for dual-use items. Japanese companies feel this on procurement from China and sales into China, through deeper end-use statements, end-user checks, and list screening.

2026 measures toward Japan: regulatory categories from MOFCOM announcements

Timeline as published fact:

  1. 6 January 2026 — MOFCOM announced strengthened dual-use export-control measures involving Japan, effective the same day. Exporters have been asked for more detailed end-user and end-use explanations (including Announcement No. 1 of 2026 and related materials).
  2. 24 February 2026 — MOFCOM announcements placed Japanese entities on an export-control list and a watch list (including Announcements No. 11 and No. 12 of 2026). Dual-use exports to control-list entities are generally prohibited. Watch-list placement is not a total ban, but review and monitoring are stricter2.

Neutral baseline (non-negotiable)
Listing is a regulatory category under Chinese law. It does not mean listed Japanese companies or institutions committed wrongdoing, or that they “aided military diversion.” Legitimate civilian manufacturers can fall inside broad control categories. For those parties, the practical task is to understand their position and explain it to customers and suppliers.

This article does not use listed names as cautionary tales. Impact, in general terms:

  • Even without a direct contract, supply-chain involvement of listed categories can delay China-origin materials or trigger extra diligence
  • Because dual-use coverage can be broad, auto parts, electronics, and materials can all feel secondary effects
  • Items tied to strategic minerals such as rare earths can move with policy decisions

For chronology and checklists, see China–Japan export control 2026 and China export risk.

Country comparison table (July 2026 edition)

Jurisdiction Core framework Recent focus Timing What Japanese firms should watch
United States EAR, ITAR Affiliates Rule paused through 9 Nov 2026; base Entity List duties continue Nov 2025– Map group structure; prepare for snap-back
China Export Control Law; dual-use rules End-use controls and control/watch list categories affecting Japan-related trade Jan–Feb 2026 onward Thicker end-use and end-user files on both buy and sell sides
EU Dual-use Reg. 2021/821 Control-list updates; CRA and other product rules in parallel 2025–2027 Classification plus Arts. 4 and 5; see EU export rules
Japan FEFTA; Export Trade Control Order List amendments (e.g. 14 Feb 2026) and complementary (catch-all) review Oct 2025; Feb 2026 Two-step process: list classification, then catch-all
United Kingdom UK export control Sanctions list consolidation; AUKUS-related defence trade debate 2025–2026 End-use and list screening for UK destinations
India SCOMET, FEMA Emerging-technology categories Late 2025– Build ICP early when entering growth markets
Thailand New dual-use regime Phased introduction of dual-use controls 2026– Local procedures and training at manufacturing sites
Vietnam Strategic trade management Operationalisation after decree-based rollout Oct 2025– Refresh practical interpretations regularly
Singapore Strategic Goods Control Alignment on advanced semiconductors and AI 2025– Align internal rules with US-linked expectations
Australia Defence Trade Controls AUKUS-related facilitation 2026– Licence design for defence and space cooperation
Middle East National law + US sanctions AI-chip and tech transfers often reflect US policy 2025– Re-export and end-user checks
Latin America National law + OFAC etc. Country programmes tighten and ease in parallel 2026– Verify primary sources case by case

Export control is not a US–China specialty topic. When Thailand and Vietnam deepen dual-use regimes, Japanese manufacturing footprints need local ICP language and training, not only a Tokyo manual.

Japan — FEFTA and economic-security updates

List amendments and complementary export controls

Japan’s core statutes are the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act (FEFTA) and the Export Trade Control Order. List amendments continue to track multilateral regimes. The package effective 14 February 2026, for example, updated treatment of certain advanced items such as FPGA-related equipment3. The complementary (catch-all) review effective 9 October 2025 changed end-use and end-user practice.

Companies must re-run classification against the current edition and still complete catch-all checks when list classification is negative. “Not listed means free to export” is wrong. See list controls versus catch-all controls.

Defence equipment transfer and investment screening

Debates on the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and a stronger inbound investment screen (sometimes called a Japan CFIUS) sit on adjacent tracks. As technology moves abroad more often, ICP quality and classification accuracy matter more, not less.

Four actions to start now

1. Rebuild screening and classification

Screen past the direct counterparty into parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, and downstream users. Classification is not a datasheet glance; keep end-use narrative and source documents together. Form design is covered in METI guidance forms and the classification template pack.

2. Map and stress-test the supply chain

Who makes what, where, and who buys it. Flag high single-country dependence, counterparties that could enter list categories, and alternate lead times. Diversification is a management decision, not only a compliance ticket.

3. Update the ICP

Document leadership engagement, classification and screening procedures, shipment control, audit, and training. Version-control against 2025–2026 amendments. Overseas subsidiaries are the usual blank spot.

4. Build a primary-source monitoring loop

METI, BIS (Federal Register), MOFCOM announcements, and Commission / Official Journal texts. Do not lock dates and figures from secondary summaries alone. Translate each alert into company impact and push it to executives and operations.

Automating screening with TRAFEED

TRAFEED matches counterparties and items against sanctions lists, export-control lists, and risk sources, and returns reasoned results. Multi-LLM cross-checks have shown 95%+ accuracy (joint validation with Okayama University and internal testing). It also tolerates company-specific file formats.

See the TRAFEED service catalogue (PDF) or contact us.

Key takeaways

  • The US Affiliates Rule pause runs through 9 November 2026. Treat it as preparation time for snap-back
  • China’s Japan-related lists are control and watch categories. Listing is not a moral verdict. Thicken end-use and end-user records on both procurement and sales
  • The EU runs dual-use rules in parallel with product regimes such as the CRA (see the EU article)
  • Japan’s October 2025 catch-all review and February 2026 list amendments belong in classification version control
  • Four actions: screening/classification, supply-chain map, ICP update, primary-source monitoring

Use the table as a starting map, then verify each matter against primary sources. Snapshot date: 21 July 2026.

References

Footnotes

  1. Federal Register, "One Year Suspension of Expansion of End-User Controls for Affiliates of Certain Listed Entities" (12 November 2025). Phase I suspension from 10 November 2025 through 9 November 2026. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/12/2025-19846/ ↩

  2. Based on MOFCOM announcements dated 24 February 2026 and related materials. Control-list and watch-list placement are regulatory categories under Chinese law and do not judge the merits of listed organisations. Confirm the Chinese-language originals on the MOFCOM export-control site. https://exportcontrol.mofcom.gov.cn/ ↩

  3. METI Security Trade Control — laws, ordinances, and amendment notices. https://www.meti.go.jp/policy/anpo/ ↩

This article was produced with the help of AI. A human verified the primary sources and edited the text before publication.

52% of FY2024 export-control violations stem from classification errors. Is your team covered?

METI FY2024 data shows over half of violations stem from classification. Start with a free 5-question light check (~2 min, no email), then continue to the full 10-question report.

Share this article if you found it useful

Share

Newsletter

Get the latest AI and DX insights delivered weekly

Your email will only be used for newsletter delivery.

Free download

Recommended materials

The BIS Affiliates Rule (50 Percent Rule) Readiness Checklist (2026)

A fill-in working checklist for trade compliance teams preparing for the BIS Affiliates Rule. Covers what the rule actually does (aggregation across owners and across lists, cascade/carry-forward, the rule of most restrictiveness, and why exactly 50% is in while below 50% is not automatically out), what is stayed and what is in effect now, where ownership data typically breaks, and a six-phase preparation list from scoping through governance. The stay is set to end on 9 November 2026 "absent a future extension"; in September 2026 the US and China announced an extension to 10 January 2027, which had not been published in the Federal Register as of 5 October 2026 — so the sheet is built to work whichever way it goes. Based on primary sources (90 FR 47201, 90 FR 50857, 15 CFR, and China's Ministry of Commerce). Designation is a regulatory classification, not a judgement about a company; final determinations rest with your export-control officer and the authorities' current guidance.

EAR Classification Flow & EAR99 Practical Checklist (for exporters from Japan, 2026)

A fill-in working sheet covering "subject to the EAR? → ECCN on the CCL? → EAR99?", the crucial "when EAR99 still needs a license" (embargoes, end-use, end-user), de minimis / FDP, counterparty screening, and the two-track cross-check with Japan's classification (FEFTA / Appended Table 1). Based on primary sources (15 CFR, the Federal Register, BIS, METI); the EAR changes frequently, so treat the authorities' latest guidance and your export-control officer as authoritative.

China Business Travel: Technology Pre-Departure Worksheet (fill-in, 2026)

A fill-in worksheet for engineers, sales and researchers travelling to China, and for the teams that send them. Under Japan's Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act, taking technical information on a trip can amount to providing technology in a foreign country (Art. 25(1)), and carrying it on a laptop or opening it from abroad can fall within Art. 25(3)(i). Most trips stay within the exemptions in Article 9 of the Ordinance on Trade Relations Invisible Trade (publicly available technology, basic scientific research, patent filings, technology incidental to exported goods). This worksheet shows where the line sits, situation by situation, with fill-in sections for before, during and after the trip. The China side reflects State Council Order No. 841 (in force 15 September 2026) Arts. 3 and 5, the Exit and Entry Administration Law Art. 28, and Japan's MOFA overseas safety advisory. Classification and licensing decisions rest with your export-control officer.

Talk with us about export-control operations

Share your screening, classification, or compliance workflow. We will map where TRAFEED can help—via our contact form (no cold booking).

Related Articles