UANI Calls For Legislation To Ensure That U.S. Taxpayer Dollars Will Not Go To Iran
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 30, 2009
Contact: [email protected]
Phone: (212) 554-3296
UANI Calls For
Legislation To Ensure
That U.S. Taxpayer Dollars Will Not Go To Iran
New York, NY - United Against Nuclear
Iran (UANI) today
called on Congress introduce legislation to ensure that U.S. taxpayer
dollars
are not paid to companies doing business with Iran.
"We urge members of congress to work in a bipartisan manner to
guarantee
every American that their tax dollars are not paid to companies that do
business with Iran. Taxpayer support of such companies
directly
strengthens a regime that is developing nuclear weapons and that has
brutally
repressed its own people," said Ambassador Mark D. Wallace, President
of
UANI. "No company doing business with the United States
should be
doing business with Iran," Wallace said.
UANI applauds recent efforts by Senators Graham, Lieberman, McCain and
Schumer
to push for international restrictions on electronic equipment sold to
Iran.
We urge further action. Congress should create an "Iran
Business
Certification Act" (the "IBC Act"). Under the terms of the
IBC Act any firm or business receiving federal taxpayer funds such as
by
stimulus spending, bailout support or government contracting will be
required
to certify that they are not engaged in any business with
Iran. UANI has
proposed model language for such an Act and it is attached.
For more
information please visit http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/ibr.
UANI will work with all Congressional offices to seek support for the
Act. In the coming weeks UANI will support the IBC Act with a
national
television advertising campaign and a Capitol Hill focused print and
web based
advertising campaign.
In addition, UANI will work with companies to ensure that they
voluntarily
declare themselves to be free of Iranian business by executing the
following
pledge for publication in the Iran Business Registry (http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/files/UANI_certification.pdf).
UANI's hopes to advance America's diplomatic objectives at a moment
when the
global financial crisis and lower oil prices have weakened Iran's
economy. Iran's quest for a nuclear weapon is one of the most
difficult
foreign policy challenges facing the west, and Iran's growing economic
isolation provides a unique opportunity for action.
BACKGROUND
It was recently reported that Nokia and Siemens, a major U.S.
government
contractor, provided the Iranian regime with the technology it needs to
spy on
Iranians, monitor their communication and activities and to brutally
crackdown
on dissent. Nokia and Siemens have contributed directly to
the Iranian
regime's ability to repress its citizens protesting the results of the
Iranian
presidential election. Additionally, as part of the federal
bailout of
AIG it has recently come to light that billions of taxpayer dollars
went
through AIG to a series of European banks, such as Barclays, Credit
Suisse and
Deutsche Bank, that are currently conducting or have recently conducted
business in Iran.
Iran Uses Siemens and Nokia Technology To Spy On Citizens
The Iranian regime has developed, with the assistance of European
telecommunications companies, one of the world's most sophisticated
mechanisms
for controlling and censoring the Internet, allowing it to examine the
content
of individual online communications on a massive scale...The monitoring
capability was provided, at least in part, by a joint venture of
Siemens AG,
the German conglomerate, and Nokia Corp., the Finnish cellphone
company, in the
second half of 2008, Ben Roome, a spokesman for the joint venture,
confirmed.
(The Wall Street Journal, Iran's Web Spying Aided By Western
Technology, Christopher
Rhoads and Loretta Chao, June 22, 2009)
Two European companies - a major contractor to the U.S. government and
a top
cell-phone equipment maker - last year installed an electronic
surveillance
system for Iran that human rights advocates and intelligence experts
say can
help Iran target dissidents. Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN), a joint
venture
between the Finnish cell-phone giant Nokia and German powerhouse
Siemens,
delivered what is known as a monitoring center to Irantelecom, Iran's
state-owned telephone company. (Washington Times, Fed
contractor, Cell
Phone Maker Sold Spy System to Iran, Eli Lake, April 13, 2009)
* Since 2005, Siemens had done more than
$900 million worth
of business with the U.S. government and employs about 70,000 people in
the
United States. Nokia is one of the leading mobile handset providers in
the
United States.
Siemens Expects To Receive Billions In U.S. Taxpayer Dollars
German industrial conglomerate Siemens AG said it expects to land about
$21
billion globally in new orders as governments seek to help industries
cut
energy consumption. The company could receive $8 billion in revenue
from the
U.S. stimulus spending plan alone...Siemens estimates it is vying for
about
$208 billion of the global stimulus spending. In the U.S., Siemens
thinks it
can compete for $110 billion of the $787 billion in the American
Recovery and
Restoration Act that Congress passed in February. (The Wall
Street
Journal, Siemens Expects To Land $21 Billion From Global Stimulus
Spending,
Paul Glader, June 22, 2009)
Billions Of Taxpayer Dollars Funneled To European Banks
[T]he revelations that-billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars were funneled
through
AIG to Goldman Sachs -- one of Wall Street's most politically connected
firms
-- and to European banks including Deutsche Bank, France's Societe
Generale and
the UK's Barclays could stoke further outrage at the entire U.S. bank
bailout.
(Reuters, AIG Payments To Banks Stoke Bailout Rage, John O'Callaghan
and Lilla
Zuill, March 16, 2009)
* Through three separate types of
transactions, Goldman
received an aggregate U.S. $12.9-billion. Among European banks, SocGen
was the
biggest recipient at U.S. $11.9-billion, Deutsche got U.S.
$11.8-billion and
Barclays was paid U.S. $8.5-billion. The AIG disclosures are still
incomplete
in that they do not include payments to the banks since December 31.
Reports Of Barclays In Iran
There are nine other banks that we think were doing this, said Mr.
Morgenthau
in an interview, including Barclays PLC of the U.K. A Barclays
spokesman had no
comment beyond a prior disclosure confirming the inquiry. Other banks
under
scrutiny in the probe include Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, people
with
knowledge of the inquiries said. (The Wall Street Journal, Fresh Clues
of Iranian
Nuclear Intrigue, Glenn R. Simpson and Jay Solomon, January 16, 2009)
It also emerged at the end of March that three European banks--Barclays
and
Lloyds TSB, both of the UK, and Credit Suisse of Switzerland--face
investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and the New York district
authorities over whether they purposely hid the origins or destinations
of
transactions in order to circumvent sanctions against Iran, Cuba, Sudan
and
Libya. The investigations follow a federal probe into a Dutch bank, ABN
Amro,
in 2005, after it was fined for obscuring references in wire transfers
and
processing payments involving Iran and Libya. The U.S. Treasury
Department said
in a warning to financial institutions in March that banks in Iran
disguised
their involvement in proliferation and terrorism. Like many other
European
banks, Credit Suisse moved to cut ties with Iran at the end of 2005.
(Economist
Intelligence Units Country Commerce)
Reports Of Deutsche Bank In Iran
There are nine other banks that we think were doing this, said Mr.
Morgenthau
in an interview, including Barclays PLC of the U.K. A Barclays
spokesman had no
comment beyond a prior disclosure confirming the inquiry. Other banks
under
scrutiny in the probe include Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, people
with
knowledge of the inquiries said. (The Wall Street Journal, Fresh Clues
of
Iranian Nuclear Intrigue, Glenn R. Simpson and Jay Solomon, January 16,
2009)
Another step the Obama administration should take is to sustain
American
pressure on foreign banks and oil companies to halt their dealings with
Iran's
energy sector. This effort has led such major firms as Germany's
Deutsche Bank
and Commerzbank, England's HSBC, Credit Suisse and Royal Dutch Shell to
halt or
limit their business with Iran. (The Baltimore Sun, Facing The Iranian
Threat,
Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, December 9, 2008)
U.S. outreach to foreign banks and to oil companies considering
investing in
Iran's energy sector has reportedly convinced more than 80 banks and
several
major potential oil-field investors to cease all or some of their
business with
Iran. Among them: Germanys two largest banks (Deutsche Bank and
Commerzbank),
London-based HSBC, Credit Suisse, Norwegian energy company
StatoilHydro, and
Royal Dutch Shell. (The Wall Street Journal, How To Put The Squeeze On
Iran,
Orde F. Kittrie, 11/13/08)
Listed by U.S. Government as doing business in Iran. (U.S. Securities
and
Exchange Commission, List of Companies Doing Business With State
Sponsors Of
Terror, Removed from the internet in July of 2007)
PROPOSED MODEL LANGUAGE FOR IRAN BUSINESS CERTIFICATION ACT
To ensure and certify that companies operating in the United States
that
receive U.S. government funds are not conducting business in Iran.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States
of America in Congress, assembled,
SEC. 1. IRAN BUSINESS CERTIFICATION ACT.
This Act may be cited as the "Iran Business Certification Act".
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE DANGER OF IRAN'S UNACCEPTABLE
AND
ILLEGAL NUCLEAR PROGRAM
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.---It is the sense
of Congress that---
(1) the United States should continue to
support diplomatic
efforts in the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United
Nations
Security Council to end Iran's illicit nuclear activities;
(2) businesses should not aid in Iran's
illegal nuclear
program;
(3) the United States, European Union and
United Nations
Security Council sanctions have had an effect on Iran, and lower oil
prices
have also adversely affected Iran's economy. As a result Iran
is now more
susceptible than ever to economic pressure. Iran must feel
that its
economic isolation and foreign policy isolation has grown to the point
of being
unbearable to lay the groundwork for a diplomatic resolution of this
matter;
(4) Iran still relies on international
companies that do
business in Iran to support its fragile economy and changing the
behavior of
even a few of these companies will result in further stress to Iran's
economy;
(5) the many international companies who
do business in Iran
must be made to feel the pressure to pull out of Iran.
Short-term
economic profits cannot be a justification to circumvent even in spirit
those
international sanctions designed to thwart Iran from developing nuclear
weapons;
(6) with Iran's economy weakened,
effective economic measures
to isolate the regime may make the difference between a diplomatic
resolution
and a nuclear standoff. To make a diplomatic
solution possible,
international firms doing business in Iran must not continue to provide
the
last crutch of support to the Iranian economy; and
(7) this Act seeks to prohibit those
entities that do
business with the United States from doing business with Iran.
SEC. 3. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On October 29, 1987 the President of
the United States
issued Executive Order 12613 imposing an import embargo on
Iranian-origin goods
and services in response to Iran's "actively supporting terrorism as an
instrument of state policy" and "aggressive and unlawful military
action against U.S.-flag vessels and merchant vessels of other
non-belligerent
nations engaged in lawful and peaceful commerce in international waters
of the
Persian Gulf."
(2) On March 16, 1995 the President of
the United States
issued Executive Order 12957 prohibiting U.S. persons from entering
into
contracts that lead to the development of Iran's petroleum sector in
response
to the "actions and policies of the Government of Iran [that]
constitute
an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign
policy,
and economy of the United States."
(3) On May 6, 1995, the President of the
United States issued
Executive Order 12959 substantially tightening sanctions against Iran
"to
deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national
security,
foreign policy, and economy of the United States."
(4) On August 5, 1996 the Iran and Libya
Sanctions Act was
signed into law. In 2006, the title of this legislation was changed to
the Iran
Sanctions Act (ISA). The ISA notes that "the efforts of the Government
of
Iran to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver
them and
its support of acts of international terrorism endanger the national
security
and foreign policy interests of the United States and those countries
with
which the United States shares common strategic and foreign policy
objectives," and therefore requires the President to sanction U.S. and
foreign companies if the President determines that such companies have
invested
in Iran's petroleum or natural gas sectors.
(5) On August 19, 1997, the President of
the United States
issued Executive Order 13059 clarifying Executive Orders 12957 and
12959 and
confirming that virtually all trade and investment activities with Iran
by U.S.
persons, wherever located, are prohibited, "to deal with the unusual
and
extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and
economy of
the United States...in response to the actions and policies of the
Government
of Iran," and also expanded the import prohibition to cover goods or
services owned or controlled by the Government of Iran.
(6) On March 14, 2000 the Iran
Nonproliferation Act was
signed into law, "to provide for the application of measures to foreign
persons who transfer to Iran certain goods, services, or technology,
and for
other purposes."
(7) On September 23, 2001, the President
of the United States
issued Executive Order EO 13224, allowing the President to block the
assets of
persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism. Several
Iranian
entities have been designated under EO 13224 including the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard.
(8) On June 28, 2005, the President of
the United States
issued Executive Order 13382 allowing the President to block the assets
of
proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and their supporters. On
October
21, 2007, the President designated several Iranian entities, including
the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard and several Iranian banks.
(9) On July 31, 2006 the United Nations
Security Council
passed Security Council Resolution 1696 noting with "serious concern"
the many reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Director
General and resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors related to Iran
's
nuclear program. The resolution demanded that Iran suspend all its
uranium
enrichment and reprocessing activities and called on UN Member States
to
prevent the transfer of goods and services that could assist Iran in
its
uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities, or ballistic missiles
programs.
(10) On September 30, 2006 the Iran Freedom Support Act (IFSA) was
signed into
law "to hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening
behavior" and also provided that the President should initiate
investigations upon the receipt of credible information that a U.S. or
foreign
person is investing in Iran's petroleum or natural gas sector in
violation of
the ISA and extended the ISA until December 31, 2011.
(11) On December 23, 2006 the United Nations Security Council passed
Security
Council Resolution 1737 "reiterating its serious concern" with
respect to Iran 's nuclear program, demanding that Iran halt its
uranium
enrichment and reprocessing activities and imposing sanctions on Iran
.
The resolution required Member States to take all necessary measures to
prevent
the supply of certain goods or technologies that could contribute to
Iran 's
uranium enrichment, reprocessing, or heavy water-related activities, or
to the
development of a nuclear weapon, and prohibited Member States from
procuring
such products from Iran .
(12) On March 24, 2007 the United Nations Security Council passed
Security
Council Resolution 1747 reemphasizing its "serious concern" with
respect
to Iran 's nuclear program, demanding that Iran halt its uranium
enrichment and
reprocessing activities and strengthening the existing sanctions on
Iran
. The resolution found that Iran had failed to comply with
Resolutions
1696 and 1737 and prohibited Member States from procuring arms or
related
materials from Iran and called on Member States to prevent the export
of goods
listed on the UN Register on Conventional Arms to Iran . Resolution
1747
further expanded the list of persons whose assets must be frozen by
Member
States and resolution 1747 expanded the list of persons whose entry
Member
States must report to the UN Security Council.
(13) Effective November 10, 2008, the U.S. Treasury Department's Office
of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) revoked authorization for "U-turn"
transfers involving Iran . As of that date, U.S. depository
institutions
are no longer authorized to process transfers involving Iran that
originate and
end with non-Iranian foreign banks.
(14) On March 3, 2008 the United Nations Security Council passed
Security
Council Resolution 1803 reemphasizing its "serious concern" with
respect to Iran's nuclear program, demanding that Iran halt its uranium
enrichment and reprocessing activities and approving a new round of
sanctions
on Iran. The resolution noted with "serious concern" that
Iran
had not fully ceased its uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities
as
previously demanded by the Security Council. It expanded sanctions by
prohibiting the export of additional sensitive goods and technologies
to Iran .
It also prohibited the entry of certain named individuals into Member
States
and expanded the list of persons whose assets must be frozen by Member
States.
SEC. 4. CERTIFICATION.
(a) Any company that has received federal
funds since January
1, 2007 shall certify, under penalties of perjury, within 30 days of
the
effective date of this Act, and within 30 days of the end of each
calendar year
in which such company receives federal funds, that neither it nor any
of its
affiliates directly or through an agent, representative or
intermediary:
(1) has engaged in any business or
provided any goods or
services in Iran other than the provision of goods or services to
relieve human
suffering in Iran or the dissemination of news and information
worldwide via
the Internet;
(2) has been a party to any agreement
with any Iranian entity
or the Government of Iran, or the owner of an interest in, any Iranian
entity;
or
(3) the owner or operator of any plant,
property, equipment
or other assets located in Iran .
(b) The certification required under Section 4(a)
shall be executed
on behalf of the applicable company by an authorized officer of the
company and
shall not deviate from the language set forth therein.
(c) In the event that a company is unable
to make the
certification required under Section 4(a) because it or one of its
affiliates
has engaged in one or more of the activities specified in clauses (1),
(2) and
(3) thereof, the company shall provide to the secretaries concerned,
prior to
the deadline for delivery of such certification, a detailed and precise
description of such activities, such description to be provided under
penalties
of perjury.
(d) The certifications provided under Section 4(a)
and disclosures
provided under Section 4(c) shall be publicly disclosed by the
Secretary of the
Treasury.
SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION OF IRAN BUSINESS CERTIFICATION ACT.
(a) MANAGEMENT.---The Secretaries
concerned shall administer
this Act.
SEC. 6. REPORT REQUIREMENT
(a) No later than 90 days following the
effective date of
this Act and 90 days following the end of each calendar year, the
Secretary of
the Treasury shall submit a report to the Speaker of the House, the
President
Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Chair and Ranking Members of the House
Committee
on Financial Services, Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Committee, and
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, explaining the
extent to
which all companies receiving federal funds or any of their affiliates,
directly or indirectly:
(1) has engaged in any business or
provided any goods or
services in Iran other than the provision of goods or services to
relieve human
suffering in Iran or the dissemination of news and information
worldwide via
the Internet;
(2) has been a party to any agreement
with any Iranian entity
or the Government of Iran, or the owner of an interest in, any Iranian
entity;
or
(3) the owner or operator of any plant,
property, equipment
or other assets located in Iran.
SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) SECRETARY CONCERNED.---The term
"Secretary
concerned" means---
(a) with respect to administering U.S.
federal government
funds under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the
Treasury, the Secretary
of the Treasury; and
(b) with respect to businesses operating in the
U.S. under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Commerce.
(2) COMPANY.---The term "company" means---
(a) a sole proprietorship, organization,
association,
corporation, partnership, limited liability company, venture, or other
entity,
its subsidiary or affiliate; and
(b) includes a company owned or controlled, either
directly or
indirectly, by the government of a foreign country, that is established
or
organized under the laws of, or has its principal place of business in,
such
foreign country and includes U.S. subsidiaries of the same.
(3) AFFILIATE.---The term "affiliate"
means any
individual or entity that directly or indirectly controls, is
controlled by, or
is under common control with, the company, including without limitation
direct
and indirect subsidiaries of the company.
(4) ENTITY.---The term "entity" means a
sole
proprietorship, a partnership, limited liability corporation,
association,
trust, joint venture, corporation, or other organization.
(5) FEDERAL FUNDS.---The term "federal
funds" means
a sum of money or other resources derived from U.S. taxpayers, which
the U.S.
government may provide to companies through government grants or loans,
or
through the terms of a contract with the federal government, or through
the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 "Troubled Asset Relief
Program" or other similar and related transaction vehicles
(6) GOVERNMENT OF IRAN.---The term
"Government of
Iran" includes the Government of Iran, any political subdivision,
agency,
or instrumentality thereof, and any person owned or controlled by, or
acting
for or on behalf of, the Government of Iran.
(7) IRAN.---The term "Iran" means the
territory of
Iran and any other territory or marine area, including the exclusive
economic
zone and continental shelf, over which the Government of Iran claims
sovereignty, sovereign rights, or jurisdiction, provided that the
Government of
Iran exercises partial or total de facto control over the area or
derives a
benefit from economic activity in the area pursuant to international
arrangements.
###
Receive Iran News in Your Inbox.
Eye on Iran is a news summary from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), a section 501(c)(3) organization. Eye on Iran is available to subscribers on a daily basis or weekly basis.