China bans exports to 10 US defence firms, triggering compliance risks

For legal practitioners, the dual-use export ban and government procurement prohibition create a web of compliance risks, particularly the extraterritorial reach to third countries, which may conflict with WTO commitments and force multinationals to reassess their exposure.

On June 22, 2026, China announced two significant retaliatory measures against the United States in direct response to Washington’s recent decision to designate several Chinese tech giants as military-linked companies. China’s Commerce Ministry imposed an export ban on dual-use items to 10 American defense-related companies, while the Finance Ministry separately barred government entities from procuring products from 46 U.S. firms, including units of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics. The actions mark a sharp escalation in the ongoing strategic competition between the world’s two largest economies, targeting supply chains that have so far been seen as relatively insulated from trade war friction.

“

China accounts for over 60% of global rare earth mining and 85% of processing, giving it unique leverage in downstream defense manufacturing.

The immediate trigger was the U.S. Department of Defense’s expansion of its List of Chinese Military Companies to include technology behemoths Alibaba and Baidu – a move Beijing called “wrongful expansion.” Although Baidu rejected the allegation as “totally baseless,” the listing already carries significant compliance burdens for U.S. companies doing business with those firms. China’s retaliation was deliberately calibrated: the 10 targeted U.S. companies – including military drone maker Red Cat and Simi Valley-based AVEOX – are involved in defense manufacturing and rare earth mining, sectors where China holds substantial global sway. By focusing on dual-use goods that have both civilian and military applications, and by extending the export ban to third-party countries, China widened the enforcement net beyond its borders.

George Chen, partner at The Asia Group, captured the paradox of the sanctions: “Those companies are not going to do business in China, so the impact will be quite symbolic.” Indeed, many of these U.S. defense firms have minimal direct commercial exposure to China. However, their supply chains depend on rare earth minerals and specialized components where China remains a dominant supplier. China accounts for over 60% of global rare earth mining and 85% of processing, giving it unique leverage in downstream defense manufacturing. This is particularly critical for drone and missile production, where rare earths are essential for magnets, sensors, and precision guidance systems.

The separate Finance Ministry directive banning government purchases from 46 U.S. companies – including major prime contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics – is likely to have a more tangible operational impact. While these firms do not sell directly to the Chinese government, their global supply networks often rely on components sourced from China or Chinese-controlled entities. For example, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet program sources rare earth magnets from China for its critical avionics. The prohibition forces these companies to reassess their supply chain vulnerabilities and accelerates the already urgent push to diversify rare earth sourcing away from China. The U.S. Department of Defense has invested heavily in domestic rare earth processing under the Defense Production Act, but these efforts are years from reaching full capacity.

The diplomatic backdrop deepens the significance of the announcement. The sanctions directly undercut the consensus reportedly reached between President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump during Trump’s visit to Beijing on May 14, 2026, when both leaders signaled a potential thaw in trade relations. By invoking that visit and accusing the U.S. of breaking its spirit, China is signaling that it is willing to use economic coercion even after high-level summits, eroding the predictability that markets seek. The bifurcation of technology supply chains – already stark in semiconductors – is now extending more deeply into aerospace, defense electronics, and advanced materials.

For the international business community, the most far-reaching provision is the prohibition on third-country transfers. By making it illegal for any company or individual in a third country to re-export Chinese-origin dual-use items to the sanctioned U.S. firms, China is exporting its sanctions policy extraterritorially, akin to U.S. secondary sanctions. This puts pressure on trading hubs like Singapore, the UAE, and European countries, where middlemen now face potential liability if they facilitate such transfers. It also complicates global logistics and procurement, as compliance departments must trace products to their origin and end use, adding costs and delays.