Summary of CPAC Meeting to Discuss Proposed Cultural Property Agreement with Vietnam and Renewals of Cultural Property Agreements with Chile, Costa Rica, Italy and Morocco

 On May 20, 2025, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to accept comments regarding a proposed Cultural Property Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam as well as renewals of current agreements with the Republics of Chile, Costa Rica, and Italy and the Kingdom of Morocco.  The meeting was rescheduled from an earlier date of February 4-6, 2025, pursuant to President Trump’s regulatory freeze, which has now been lifted.  The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, the Global Heritage Alliance, and the International Association of Professional Numismatists all sought an additional postponement to allow time for the Trump Administration to appoint its own CPAC members and decision-maker, but this request was denied.

The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website describes these requests as follows:

Vietnam

Vietnam seeks protection for archaeological and ethnological materials from ca. 75,000 BCE to 1945 CE, from the following time periods and cultures: Paleolithic (c. 75,000 BCE – 10,000 BCE), Neolithic period (c. 10,000 BCE – 2,000 BCE), Bronze Age (c. 2,000 BCE – 1,000 BCE), and Iron Age (c. 1,000 BCE – 200 CE), the Ancient period (2,879 BCE - 179 BCE), Northern domination period (179 BCE – 939 CE), and the Dynasty and Monarchy period (939 – 1945 CE) including objects made from gold, silver, ceramic, stone, metal, copper, bronze, iron, bone, horn, ivory, gems, silk and textiles; lacquerware and wood; bamboo and paper; glass; coins; and painting and calligraphy.

Chile

Extending the Chile MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 31,000 B.C. to 1868 A.D.

Costa Rica

Extending the Costa Rica MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 12,000 B.C. to the time of the establishment of Hispanic culture in Costa Rica (approximately 1550 A.D.).

Italy

Extending the Italy MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 900 B.C. to 400 A.D.

Morocco

Extending the Morocco MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately one million B.C. to approximately 1750 A.D. and certain ethnological material from the Saadian and Alaouite dynasties, ranging in date from approximately 1549 to 1912 A.D.

Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, May 20-23, 2025, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Media Center (amended May 1, 2025) available at  https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-may-20-23-2025  (last visited May 21, 2025).

The CPAC members did not introduce themselves before the public session, but CPAC currently includes the following individuals appointed by President Biden: (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Mirriam Stark, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, Professor of Anthropology, University of Hawaii); (4) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); ( (5) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (6) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (7) Amy Cappellazzo, Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Principal, Art Intelligence Global; (8) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); (9) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois);  (10) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); and, (11) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)).

The meeting was conducted entirely on Zoom.  None of the members identified themselves to the speakers so it was difficult to ascertain who attended the meeting.

There were also Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center staff present, including  Glen Davis, Director of the Cultural Heritage Center and Andrew Zonderman, a Foreign Affairs Officer who is serving as CPAC’s Executive Director.  Messrs. Davis and Zonderman are new to their positions.   

The Chair, Alexandra Jones, welcomed the speakers.  She thanked the speakers for attending, indicated that all comments had been read, and that speakers would be given five minutes each to present their oral comments. 

Dr. Ömür Harmanşah spoke as the Vice President for Cultural Heritage, Archaeological Institute of America (“AIA”).  Given time constraints, he focused his comments on Italy and Morocco and the new MOU with Vietnam.  He stated that the AIA was chartered by Congress in 1906 and that today it has some 200,000 members which includes professionals and members of the interested public.  Dr. Harmanşah argued that all three countries suffered from looting which is a global phenomenon. He praised the work of the Carabinieri, noting that had successfully dismantled two looting networks recently. He indicated that the French government had repatriated 35,000 objects to Morocco seized from and illicit collection. He further indicated that bronze and iron age sites suffered from looting in Vietnam.   He further indicated that all three countries had taken self-help measures to protect their own cultural patrimony.  The work of the Carabinieri and their cooperation with the Manhattan DA’s office and Homeland Securities Investigations is well known.  Harmanşah  also highlighted loans being used for cultural exchange purposes.  He mentioned that Morocco loaned materials to Northwestern University’s Block Museum of Art for the exhibition, “Caravans of Gold, Fragments in Time: Art, Culture, and Exchange across Medieval Saharan Africa.”

The AIA’s written comments about the Proposed MOU with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0181

The AIA’s written comments on the Renewal with the Republic of Chile can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0178

The AIA’s written comments about the Renewal with the Republic of  Italy can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0179

The AIA’s written comments about the Renewal with the Kingdome of Morocco can be found in the 2024 docket here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0180  

Peter Tompa spoke as executive director for the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN).  He indicated that the Trump Administration’s emphasis on promoting American business and scaling back regulations require CPAC to consider a new paradigm, one which facilitates the lawful trade in common items like coins, particularly where they are already legally available for sale in countries seeking restrictions.   With regard to the Italian renewal, there should be no further expansion of the current designated list to include late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins.  One cannot assume that Roman Imperial coins are found in Italy.  Scholarly evidence demonstrates that only 5.24% of the 15,000 coin hoards containing 6 million coins are found there.  Larger denomination Greek era coinage that circulated in international trade should be delisted.  Given Italy’s large internal market, issuance of export certificates should be mandated and US Customs should also recognize legal exports from Italy’s sister European Union countries as legal imports under the MOU.  There should be no new restrictions placed on coins for Vietnam. Coins are openly sold there at a gift shop at the Hue UNESCO World Heritage site.  It would be confusing to place restrictions on cash coins that are inconsistent with those for China, given the fact that many more times such coins are found in China. There should be no restrictions on machine struck coins of the French protectorate, minted in France or in the US, as they do not fit the definitions of either archaeological or ethnological objects. The Moroccan designated list should be scrapped because it is so broad that importers lack fair notice of what particular coins are actually restricted. Spanish colonial and early Republican era coins that circulated in Costa Rica and Chile circulated in far greater quantities elsewhere, including as US legal tender until 1857 and should remain unrestricted.

Peter Tompa’s oral statement can be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2025/05/its-time-for-reset.html

IAPN’s written comments seeking an additional postponement can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0014

IAPN’S written comments on the Proposed MOU with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0019

IAPN’s written comments on Renewal with the Republic of Chile can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0017

IAPN’s written comments on the Renewal of the MOU with the Republic of Costa Rica can be found here, https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0013

IAPN’s written comments on the Renewal with the Republic of Italy can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0018

IAPN’s written comments on the Renewal with the Kingdom of Morocco can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0020

Peter Tompa’s personal comments as supplemented can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0041

Elias Gerasoulis spoke as executive director of the Global Heritage Alliance (GHA) and also on behalf of the Committee for Cultural Policy (CCP). Gerasoulis indicated each request failed to meet the four requirements for either a new or extended MOU. He also noted that the number of MOUs issued by CPAC has more than doubled in recent years. Over thirty countries are now covered. Import restrictions now extend over virtually all cultural material dating from prehistory to the early 20th century, lacking any connection to actual looting or risk.  Gerasoulis indicated that a MOU with Italy is no longer necessary given the Carabinier’s successful efforts to bring looting under control.  Gerasoulis indicated that Morocco has prioritized tourism over archaeological preservation and that there is no credible evidence of serious looting. Gerasoulis also indicates that there is no evidence of serious current looting in either Chile or Costa Rica.  He also mentions that the Director of Costa Rica’s national museum was previously arrested for looting.  Gerasoulis then commented on the proposed MOU with Vietnam. Vietnam has a strong, public domestic legal market, and is clearly focused on tourism rather than archaeological protection – yet it seeks restrictions up until the mid-20^th century.  The MOU request is about asserting national branding and control over diaspora heritage.

CPAC member Andrew Connor disputed Gerasoulis’ statements about looting arguing that proponents of the MOUs have all produced evidence of looting.  [CPO Comment: One of the findings before a MOU can be completed is that “the cultural patrimony of the State Party is in jeopardy from the pillage of archaeological or ethnological materials.”  19 USC Section 2602 (a) (1) (A).  Proponents and opponents argue about the extent and timing of the looting necessary to justify a MOU.  Is historic looting with some continuing looting enough as proponents maintain or must there be serious current looting to justify an agreement as opponents argue?  Given the State Department’s desire to reach agreement on as many MOUs as possible as “soft power” measures a lower bar for looting seems to have won out, at least for the present.]

CCP’s and GHA’s written comments on the Proposed MOU with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0011

CCP’s and GHA’s written comments on the Proposed Renewal of the MOU with Chile can be found in the 2024 docket here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0092

CCP’s and GHA’s written comments on the Proposed Renewal of the MOU with Costa Rica can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0108

CCP’s and GHA’s written comments on the Proposed Renewal of the MOU with Italy can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0010

CCP’s and GHA ‘s written comments for the Renewal with the Kingdom of Morocco can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0009

Frances Hayashida, the Director of the Latin American and Iberian Institute at the University of New Mexico, spoke in support of  the MOU with Chile.  She stated artifacts were still being looted from Chilean sites despite the best efforts of Chilean authorities.  She specifically pointed to a sale of textiles being stopped in 2021.  She stated that import restrictions create a chilling effect on the market.  She further stated that the current MOU has helped stimulate cultural exchanges between scholars in Chile and the U.S. 

CPAC member Andrew Connor commends Hayashida for her testimony that calls into question the statements about a lack of looting from another speaker.

Scott Palumbo, an anthropologist at the College of Lake County, Illinois, spoke in support of the MOU with Costa Rica.  He has observed significant looting in Costa Rica with sites looking like WWI battlefields.   He referenced the existence of a large archeological society in Costa Rica.  He suggested that enforcement of laws against looting has meant that the country is even running out of room to store recovered antiquities.   He added that the current MOU had helped stimulate cultural exchanges between scholars. 

CPAC member Andrew Connor praises Palumbo’s testimony about looting and further states that tourism and protection of cultural heritage are not mutually exclusive and can complement each other.

Randy Myers spoke as a board member on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). He touched on several points focused on the MOU with Italy.  First, he indicated while the State Department is doing better providing notice, the time provided remains inadequate, making it difficult to solicit informed public comment.  Second, Myers noted that the State Department’s public notice indicates that the MOU is being treated as an extension of the current agreement with Italy, not an expansion of the current designated list.  He stated if an expansion of the current designated list is being contemplated, the State Department must provide the public with notice about this proposal and allow additional comment.  Third, he emphasized that unlike many ancient artifacts coins are mass produced, with dies used to strike as many as 10,000 to 15,000 coins each.  This large production of coins combined with their wide dispersion means that one cannot assume that late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins are found in Italy.  He then referenced the same analysis that IAPN did that only 5% of Roman Imperial coin hoards are found in what it today Italy.  For that reason, he concluded that one cannot assume that a Roman coin means  an Italian one.  He further indicated that he believes that the State Department should encourage Italy and other countries to implement programs akin to the Tresure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme as the most effective self-help measures. 

 CPAC member Alex Baker asks a question, but it is difficult to hear.  Myers interprets it as a question about what is the best way to address looting to which Myers again reiterates the benefits of the UK’s system.   

The ACCG’s comments regarding the Renewal of the MOU with Italy can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0042

Doug Mudd spoke on behalf of the American Numismatic Association (ANA), where he is the Curator of the Money Museum.  He focused his comments on the proposed renewal of the MOU with Italy.  As an archaeologist, he has seen the damaging effects of looting but he believes that because of the massive quantities that were produced coins should be treated  differently.   He reiterated Tompa’s and Myers’ statements that one cannot assume that a Roman coin was found where it was minted.  He asked that no new import restrictions be imposed on late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins.   He also asked that other widely circulating coins be delisted. Mudd believes that restrictions on bringing  coins into the US negatively impacts the education of our own people about our own cultural heritage.

The ANA’s comments regarding the Renewal of the MOU with Italy can be found  in the 2024 docket here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0089

Benjamin Utting is an archeologist and anthropologist specializing in the prehistoric cultures of  Southeast Asia.  He spoke in support of the new MOU with Vietnam.  He indicated that an MOU would stop the flow of black market antiquities into the U.S. and would also encourage Vietnamese authorities to take further protective steps and spur collaboration.

Notable Additional Written Comments

 CINOA’s comments, which can be found on the 2024 docket  here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0048-0063

The Oriental Numismatic Society’s comments regarding the proposed MOU with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2025-0003-0015

The speakers finished 20 minutes early.  As there were no additional questions, the Chair thanked the speakers before closing the public session and continuing discussions in private.

Should American Collectors Get at Least the Same "Due Process Rights" as Illegal Aliens Who Are Alleged to be MS-13 Gang Members?

No, at least according to the the Hon. J. Harvie Wilkinson, the 4th Circuit Judge, who mainstream media is lauding for his recent take down of the Trump Administration for refusing to give an illegal alien alleged to also be a MS-13 gang member "due process" before "repatriating" him to his own country of El Salvador, where he was thrown in prison.  The Trump Administration had predicated its decision-making on the President's foreign policy powers and the Alien and Sedition Acts, which go back to the John Adams Administration.  

In stark contrast, when Wilkinson wrote the majority opinion in the ACCG case, he held that the President's "foreign policy" powers precluded both judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act of the controversial decision to impose import restrictions on coins as well as any meaningful defense of a resulting forfeiture action.  Indeed, at oral argument, Wilkinson lectured CPO about how the President's power was not subject to anything but the most superficial judicial review, regardless of the ACCG's allegations that State Department officials had ignored governing law, misled Congress and the public in official government reports about the decision, and had engaged in cronyism with archaeological advocacy groups.  

So what gives?  Sadly, Wilkinson's result-oriented decision making is par for the course.  These days the federal judiciary is dominated by former government attorneys like Wilkinson.  Their rulings have been essential to the expansion of government bureaucratic power and the erosion of our rights, including that to our private property.  While such judges are generally all too happy to expand that bureaucratic power further, they balk at Trump's own exercise of his powers, particularly where Team Trump has sought to tear down the status quo and its protections for favored interest groups. Sadly, collectors don't fall in that category.  

So is there any solution?  Yes, Congress must limit bureaucratic and prosecutorial discretion by federalizing all foreign claims to "cultural property," by ensuring that the burden of proof is on the government before that "cultural property" is seized and forfeited, and by making the creation of any import restrictions on "cultural property" subject to the limitations found in the Administrative Procedure Act.  But that will take collector engagement to make it all happen.  

Summary of April 26, 2022, Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to Discuss Proposed MOU with Islamic Republic of Pakistan

                 On April 26, 2022, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met to consider a proposed MOU with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.  The following members were present: (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology); Rachael Fulton Brown (Archaeology); (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property); (8) Mark Hendricks (Sale of International Cultural Property); and (9) David Tamasi (International Sale of Cultural Property).  Allison Davis, CPAC’s State Department Executive Director, and Michele Prior, also of ECA, were also present.

                Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments which he found helpful and useful.   As there were only four speakers, while a five-minute limit would be observed, there would be time left over for questions. 

                The following speakers addressed the Committee: (1) Dr. Brian Daniels (Archaeological Institute of America); (2) Randy Myers (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG); (3) Peter Tompa (Peter Tompa Law representing the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN)); and (4) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy and Global Heritage Alliance).

                Dr. Brian Daniels (BD) indicated there was plenty of evidence of site looting, particularly of Gandharan material.  This was most recently demonstrated by the NY DA’s recent repatriation of Gandharan sculpture.  BD indicated that Pakistan met all the criteria for a MOU.  There are antiquities laws on the books which are now enforced at a regional level.  U.S.-Pakistani archaeological collaborations have taken place at Harappa in Punjab Province, Pakistan.  Pakistani scholars have expressed an interest in supplying loans to US museums. 

                The AIA’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0008-0036

                Randy Myers (RM) focused on two procedural objections and one substantive objection.  He indicates that the notice period of fourteen days is simply too short to elicit much informed comment.  He also indicates that the notice was procedurally deficient because there was little justification provided for the apparent inclusion of coins in this request.  He stated that as a retired U.S. Government attorney who worked on administrative matters, he believed that the notice of this hearing provided to the public to comment was deficient.  Substantively, RM focused on one issue related less drastic measures to be considered before import restrictions may be imposed.  He indicated that Pakistan should consider a program akin to the Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act as an alternative to import restrictions on coins.

                The ACCG’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0008-0007

                Peter Tompa (PT) focused on three major points.  First, how can Customs assume a given coin was “first discovered within” and “subject to” Pakistani export control given the overlap in find spots in  Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and Bangladesh?  Second, why restrict coins at all given the existence of a large internal market in Pakistan itself?  The rationale for import restrictions is that they will dampen market demand and hence decrease the incentive for looting, but US import restrictions would only have a negligible impact on demand because the primary market for Pakistani coins appears to be within Pakistan itself.  Finally, even if coins are restricted, CPAC should condition any import restrictions on coins on the provision the availability of easily obtainable export certificates. 

                The IAPN’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0008-0010

                Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) starts her presentation discussing a screen shot posted on Twitter from 2020 showing construction workers smashing a large Gandharan Buddhist statue with sledgehammers in the city of Mardan, Pakistan.  She goes on to describe poor stewardship of Pakistan’s cultural heritage that goes back at least to the 1970s. She notes that Pakistan has pawned off caring for cultural heritage to localities and that a scant $300,000 is spent annually on archaeology, which mostly goes to salaries of the cultural heritage bureaucracy.  She suggests that lack of interest, lack of education and discomfort about teaching pre-Islamic history in schools are major culprits. However, the main problem is top to bottom corruption in Pakistani society.  She urges that the State Department provide grants and educational help to try to build a cultural infrastructure that will enable basic protections inside Pakistan. She indicates this will be far more effective in safeguarding heritage than an MOU that will have no domestic effect inside Pakistan, and no legal justification under US law.

                The CCPs and GHAs written submission can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2022-0008-0037  

                Chairman Passantino then allowed CPAC members a brief time for questions.

                Anthony Wisniewski asks KFG about open sales of cultural heritage in Pakistan.  She noted that coins are widely sold at the bazar in Peshawar.  She also indicates that items like old copper pots are often repurposed, noting that a pot she once owned while she lived in Pakistan showed up as a prop on a Pakistani TV program.  She also indicated that beautiful old wooden architectural carvings are shipped out of Pakistan by the container load.  The use of modern air conditioning has prompted homeowners to strip wood decorations out of their homes because it does not react well to an air-conditioned environment.  KFG does not believe a MOU will have any positive impact on the preservation of cultural heritage because of the endemic corruption in Pakistan. 

                Rachael Fulton Brown asks KFG if she believes import restrictions limited to specific period like the Hellenistic and Gandharan period could be effective.  KFG did not believe so because of the endemic corruption.  She also notes in passing that the material seized by the NY DA left Pakistan at least ten years ago and much of it appeared to be fake. 

                Ricardo St. Hilaire asks BD if he agrees with KFG’s characterizations of an internal market in Pakistan.  He indicates that while such a market is tolerated, that does not mean that it legal or that such material would be allowed to be exported. BD believes that a MOU would function as a loadstar to encourage Pakistani officials to crack down on corruption and the illicit trade. 

                Karol Wight asks BD to comment on museum loans in the absence of an AAMD (Association of Art Museum Directors) representative speaking.  BD indicates there has been efforts to secure loans.  He suggests that the visa problems Pakistani couriers had transporting an exhibit to the Asia Society may have made Pakistan gun shy.  He believes that a MOU could smooth over such issues.

                Mark Hendricks asks BD whether he believes that the existence of a large internal market in Pakistan will limit the impact of a MOU on looting. BD believes that a MOU will help encourage Pakistani officials to crack down on illegal activity and prohibit illicit exports.

                Anthony Wisniewski asks BD if items made in quantity can have cultural significance.  BD answers they can because studying groups of objects can tell us significant things about ancient cultures.  He gives the example of the forensic examination of the metallurgy of a collection of bronze ingots.

                Anthony Wisniewski asks PT whether a coin made outside of Pakistan could be claimed as Pakistani under the CPIA.  PT indicated this would require Pakistan to demonstrate with scholarly evidence that the coin type was only found in Pakistan or show that a particular coin actually came from there.  He also indicated that it would be difficult to show that such a coin had cultural significance to Pakistan.  PT believes that BD has confused archaeological interest with cultural significance, which requires an object to have importance to a given culture.  He indicated that it would be difficult for Pakistan to show that a coin made outside of Pakistan had cultural significance to Pakistan.             

                Chairman Passantino then thanked the speakers and CPAC went into a recess before reconvening in a closed session. 

Import Restrictions on "Albanian" Coins Announced

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has announced new import restrictions on "Albanian coins" as part of another overbroad laundry list of import restrictions on anything and everything that may be found in Albania from 300,000 B.C. to 1913.

Effective date:  March 17, 2022

Source: 87 FR 15079-15084 (March 17, 2022), available at             https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/17/2022-05685/imposition-of-            import-restrictions-on-categories-of-archaeological-and-ethnological-material-of

The Designated list of coins subject to import restrictions is as follows. 

8. Coins—This category includes coins of Illyrian, Greek, Macedonian, Roman provincial, Byzantine, Medieval, and Ottoman types that circulated primarily in Albania, ranging in date from approximately the 6th century B.C. to A.D. 1750. Coins were made in copper, bronze, silver, and gold. Examples are generally round, have writing, and show imagery of animals, buildings, symbols, or royal or imperial figures.

Comment:  The designated list of coins is particularly broad and includes coins that circulated regionally as well as internationally.  It goes far beyond coins that "primarily circulated" within Albania. Despite the assumption contained in the regulation, no Greek, Byzantine, and Ottoman types “circulated primarily” within Albania or were even made there.  As for Illyrian coins, hoard evidence indicates that popular cow/calf coins from the Roman Republican period “circulated primarily” in Romania, not Albania.  The only bright spot is that neither Roman Republican nor Roman Imperial coins seem to be restricted. 

A case can be made that the “circulated primarily” standard is statutorily deficient because it is contrary to the CPIA requirement that restricted items must be first discovered within and subject to export control of a particular country.  There also is a fair notice issue because how is a typical collector or dealer to know whether or not a particular issue “circulated primarily” in Albania or not?

It is frustrating that the State Department invites public comment, and then promptly ignores it. Both ACCG and IAPN prepared detailed papers about coin circulation in Albania, but either no one at the State Department bothered to read them or no one cared what facts were presented.

Another abuse of power designed to ensure the broadest possible import restrictions apply.  

Summary of Oct. 27, 2020 CPAC Meeting to Accept Public Comments on Proposed MOU with Nigeria and Proposed Renewals with Bolivia and Greece

 On October 27, 2020, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) met to consider a proposed MOU with Nigeria and proposed renewals with Bolivia and Greece. The following members were present:  (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology) and (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property).  Allison Davis, CPAC’s State Department Executive Director, and Catherine Foster, a Cultural Heritage Center staffer, were also present.

In advance of this meeting, there was a major shake-up on CPAC.  The following Obama appointees were removed or resigned:  (1) Adele Chatfield-Taylor (Public); (2) James Reep (Public); and (3) Lothar Von Falkenhausen (Archaeology).  At the last CPAC public session to discuss a renewal the MOU with Italy, von Falkenhausen told ancient coin collectors (who were represented at the meeting) that he believed that they should take up another hobby.  It is unclear if this comment had anything to do with his departure.  President Trump appointed Messrs. Bledsoe and Demming to replace Ms. Chatfield-Taylor and Mr. Reep.  One archaeological slot remains unfilled.

Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments, and that given the large number of speakers, each would only be allowed 3 minutes to focus on points most important to them.  Chairman Passantino called on speakers who had put in papers on Nigeria first, then speakers who had written about Bolivia, and finally Greece.  There was some overlap because some speakers put in papers on more than one topic.  He deferred questions to the end to be assured everyone who registered to speak would be heard.

The following individuals provided public comments:  (1) Tess Davis (Antiquities Coalition); (2) Brian Daniels (Archaeological Institute of America); (3) Kathleen Bickford (Northwestern University); (4) Leslye Amede Obiora (Institute for Research on African Women, Children and Culture); (5) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy); (6) Donna Yates (Maastricht University); (7) Maria Bruno (Dickinson College); (8) Kris Lane (Tulane University); (9) Daniel Sedwick (International Association of Professional Numismatists); (10) Peter Tompa (Global Heritage Alliance); (11)  Christos Tsirogiannis (University of Aarhus, Denmark); (12) Kim Shelton (Berkley); (13) Nathan Elkins (Baylor University); (14) Ute Wartenberg-Kagan (Columbia University); (15) Morag Kersel (DePaul University); (16) Dmitry Narkesis (Columbia University); (17) Rocco Dibenedetto (Hahn Loeser- Association of Art Museum Directors); (18) Douglas Mudd (American Numismatic Association); and (19) Randolph Myers (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild).

Tess Davis (TD) indicates that the Antiquities Coalition works with partners in the art market, the U.S. Government and Foreign Governments.  She believes import restrictions help protect the legitimate market.  She denies that import restrictions act as embargoes because they allow listed material into the country that has been documented as being outside the country for which restrictions were provided before those restrictions went into place.  She also believes that U.S. customs should not accept export certificates from other EU governments where objects have been listed for specific EU countries like Greece.  She notes certain EU countries do require export permits within the EU despite the general free circulation of goods within the EU.

The Antiquities Coalition’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0077 (Bolivia)

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0080 (Greece)

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0076 (Nigeria)

Brian Daniels (BD) focuses on the Fourth Determination under the Cultural Property Implementation Act (“CPIA”), regarding the international exchange of cultural patrimony.  He notes that Nigeria has sent several exhibits to the United States.  Most recently, the Block Museum of Art at Northwestern University (Greater Chicago) hosted the 2019 exhibition, Caravans of Gold, Fragments in Time: Art, Culture, and Exchange across Medieval Saharan Africa, which displayed the scope of Saharan trade and the shared history of West Africa, the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe from the eighth to sixteenth centuries. This exhibition involved significant loans from Nigeria. It was slated to travel to the National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian Institution (Washington, D.C.) in 2020, but its opening has been postponed due to COVID-19.  He indicates that both Bolivia and Greece have been similarly generous in sending exhibitions to the United States.

The Archaeological Institute of America’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0083

Kathleen Bickford (KB) discusses her role as curator for the Caravans of Gold exhibit for the Block Museum of Art at Northwestern University.  She states Nigeria's request meets all criteria for determinations in favor of cultural property protections. Important cultural patrimony, ranging from fragments to complete objects, continue to emerge from archaeological sites within the country, while objects of more recent date remain within communities and at royal courts, as well as in homes, shrines, and storehouses. These objects are under severe threat from pillage and theft. Despite efforts to curtail the international market for archaeological and traditional objects from Nigeria, including tighter requirements on provenance among North American museums and accelerating debates about the restitution of African objects from the colonial period, there continues to be a high demand in the international art market for cultural heritage objects from Nigeria.  She also indicates there are many fakes on the market.  Finally, she notes that there is much violence in Nigeria and that cultural heritage is a unifying force.

KB’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0046

 Leslye Amede Obiora (LAO) has been a Professor of Law in the United States since 1992.  She previously served as the Minister of Mines and Steel Development for the Federal Republic of Nigeria.  She states cultural heritage issues are human rights issues. LAO indicates there is a cabal of powerful people involved in looting in Nigeria. She believes a MOU will help bolster civil society, and she wonders why it has taken so long for the United States to offer one to Nigeria.

Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) indicates that the Committee for Cultural Policy and Global Heritage Alliance applaud efforts to help Nigeria address looting, but question whether sufficient evidence has been submitted to support entering into a MOU.  There are many Nigerian materials on the market and in private and museum collections, but the vast majority of these materials left Nigeria decades ago.  Most of this material was removed during the colonial era.  Material produced after 1945 is considered touristic in nature.  There is little in the record about Nigerian self-help measures.  KG is concerned that this request is about closing the barn door after the horses have already left.

The CCP’s and GHA’s written comments on the Nigerian MOU may be found here: https://culturalpropertynews.org/nigeria-support-cultural-expansion-not-art-blockade/

The CCP’s written comments about the Greek MOU can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0075

Donna Yates (DY) indicates that she has tracked illicit Colonial and Republican era Bolivian artifacts. She indicates that while there appears to be less thefts from churches now, it takes years for this material to surface on the market. DY also indicates there is absolutely no social, educational, or scientific benefit to allowing a market for illegally obtained Bolivian cultural objects to exist in the United States. The destruction of the original contexts of these objects in the looting process annihilates our ability to conduct any meaningful archaeological analysis on them. The violent removal of sacred art from churches tears the very fabric that has held small and indigenous communities together for centuries, reducing cultural diversity and survival.

DY’s written comments can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0010

Maria Bruno (MB) states that Bolivian patrimony remains in jeopardy from pillage through the illicit excavation of archaeological sites with the purpose of selling desired objects. Bolivian governmental and volunteer organizations work tirelessly to protect archaeological sites from destruction and to educate the public on the value of preserving their ancient past.  Local communities also work together to protect their local patrimony from destruction as the revenue generated from tourism to the site provides jobs and contributes to the local pride.

MB’s written comments can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0068

Kris Lane (KL) shares the archaeologists’ concerns about looting, but thinks coins should be treated differently than other objects, like historic records.  While archives should not be removed from their place of origin, items like coins were not state property and were intended to circulate far from where they were made.  This is certainly the case for coins struck in Bolivia.  The Bolivian gold escudo and silver peso were international currencies.  They were even legal tender in the United States before the Civil War. 

Dan Sedwick (DS) indicates that IAPN supports Bolivian efforts to restore the Potosi mint.  DS provides some history.  Bolivian coins are very common.  DS has always had some in inventory.  Minting in Bolivia begins with hand-struck silver coins in 1573-4 under Spanish dominion and continues through early Republic times starting in 1825 to present day. Throughout these four-and-a-half centuries of minting, most of the coins were the property of rich men back in Spain, not the people of Bolivia, and these coins traveled far from the current boundaries of Bolivia, in fact to all the continents of the earth except Antarctica. DS also notes that IAPN’s submission shows that current Bolivian laws do not explicitly treat coins as cultural heritage.  As for Greece, DS states this renewal should not be an excuse to expand current import restrictions to trade coins that circulated around the ancient world.

The International Association of Professional Numismatists’ and the Professional Numismatists Guild’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0067 (Bolivia)

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOS-2020-0036-0024 (Greece)

Peter Tompa (PT) discusses both the Greek and Bolivian MOUs.  First, as to the proposed renewal of the Greek MOU, he states that this renewal is no excuse to expand current import restrictions.  Those restrictions purport to only apply to coin types that circulated locally in Greece in order to comply with the statutory requirements found in 19 U.S.C. § 2601.  That provision requires that such coins were “first discovered within” and are therefore subject to Greek export controls.  Under no circumstances should CPAC recommend expanding those restrictions to widely circulating trade coins which can be found most anywhere.  Second, CPAC should recognize the obvious ramifications of Greece’s membership in the European Union (“E.U.”). Coins on the current designated list may be traded outside the E.U. with or without an export license according to the local law of Greece’s sister E.U. members. CPAC, the State Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) should honor these E.U. export controls, which, after all, are also binding on Greece as an E.U. member.  Finally, he urges that archaeologists be asked to do their own part too.  CPAC should ensure archaeological missions pay diggers a fair living wage and that they be required to file site security plans which take advantage of modern electronic surveillance technology.  

PT’s full oral statement can be found here:  http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2020/10/this-is-no-time-to-expand-restrictions.html

GHA’s written comments on the Greek MOU can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0012

GHA’s and CCP’s written comments on the Bolivian MOU can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0011

Christos Tsirogiannis (CT) has worked with law enforcement, including the DA in New York City and U.S. Homeland Security, to repatriate artifacts to Greece and other countries.  He is also working on a way to detect looted antiquities using new technology.  Recently, Greek police broke up a antiquities smuggling operation in Patras, Greece, that had coins and other artifacts. 

CT’s written comments can be found here:

 https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0088

Kim Shelton (KS) excavates at Nemea.  She has spent sleepless nights in fear of looters.  Economic austerity has made the problem worse.  Coin evidence is important to her work.

Nathan Elkins (NE) supports restrictions on all ancient coins that circulated in quantity in Greece, including trade coins like Athenian Tetradrachms, which currently are not restricted. Looting results in the loss of important contextual information.  Coins can be important dating tools.  They helped date the ruins of an ancient Synagogue he helped excavate in Israel.

NE’s written comments can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0028

Ute Wartenberg-Kagan (UWK) supports restrictions on all ancient coins that circulated in quantity in Greece.  Coins are among the most frequently looted items. Once taken out of their archaeological context, some of the historical and economic meaning is often lost. Sadly, numismatists are used to working with coins that have no archaeological context, and the fact that there is a finite number of coins in the ground makes their protection all the more important. Unfortunately, the trend is going very much in the wrong direction, and here modern technology enables looting on a scale that has not been seen before. Ever more sophisticated and cheaper metal detectors allow more people to dig up coins. Online sales via eBay, vcoins, Amazon, or in Facebook groups, allow the sale of staggering numbers of coins. On any given day, over 100,000 ancient coins and coin lots are for sale on eBay. MOUs should be considered friends of collectors because they help keep looted material off the market.

UWK’s written comments can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0078

Morag Kersel (MK) says she was interviewing a collector who had a Cyclodelic figurine which the collector said was worth $1 million.  He indicated now that ancient art is an investment.  MK indicates that the high prices for ancient art helps stimulate looting.

Dmitry Narkesis (DN) has witnessed looting at archaeological digs.  Looting is real problem that impacts archaeology.  It takes a lot of time and effort to try to fight it.

Rocco Dibenedetto (RD) states that the AAMD does not oppose the Greek MOU, but Greece should be held to account for its obligations under Art. II of the current agreement.  One of those undertakings is to facilitate loans of materials to U.S. museums.  Despite Greece’s promises to do so, that has not happened.  The designated list should also be scrutinized to ensure that it only covers archaeological objects over 250 years old. 

The AAMD’s written comments can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0072

Douglas Mudd (DM) states that current import restrictions have hurt the ANA’s educational mission because foreign scholars have been unwilling to bring their collections to the United States for fear of them being seized by U.S. customs.  Despite import restrictions being renewed over and again, looting remains a problem which suggests they are not working.  DM states that a new paradigm needs to be considered given their failure, one based on Britain’s Portable Antiquities Scheme, which encourages people to report finds with the prospect of a cash award for any coins kept by the government.  While expense is an issue, perhaps aid from wealthy countries can help get these programs going.

The ANA’s written comments can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0023

Randolph Myers (RM) states there can be no dispute ancient coins circulated in great numbers far from where they were found.  This is detailed in a report appended to the ACCG’s written comments.  This is significant because as recognized by a U.S. District Court import restrictions are only appropriate on archaeological objects both first discovered within and subject to the export control of a specific country. 

The ACCG’s written comments can be found here:

https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2020-0036-0003

Question and Answer Period

Karol Wight asks LAO about the situation in Nigeria.  LAO states Nigeria is under siege, but that is no reason not to enter into a MOU on its behalf.  She again suggests a MOU is a human rights issue.

Anthony Wisniewski asks TD and DY if they receive foreign government money.  (The State Department recently issued a directive calling for the disclosure of such information.  See https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/13/trump-think-tanks-foreign-funding-429209)  TD states that the Antiquities Coalition does not receive such funding.  DY indicates she receives such funding from the European Union.  (She currently holds a €1.5 million European Research Council grant to study the illicit trafficking of cultural objects.)

Anthony Wisniewski asks UWK if it is unremarkable that Roman or Byzantine coins from the Thessalonica mint can be found in large numbers in today’s Turkey and Albania.  She agrees with this statement.  

Joan Connelly asks KS about what coins have been found at Nemea.  KS indicates that coins from many different Greek cities have been found there probably because it was the center for sacred games.  They also find many different coins at a Christian sanctuary on the site.

Karol Wight asks KB if she has had any other interaction with Nigerian scholars outside her work on exhibits.  KB says all her work has been on exhibits. 

J.D. Demming asks DM to elaborate on his ideas to disincentivize looting. DM states that the U.K.’s Portable Antiquities Scheme incentivizes people to report their finds.  Perhaps there can be a global antiquities scheme with funding from richer countries.

Ricardo St. Hilaire asks LAO about whether she saw any parallels between looting and illegal mining.  LAO says Nigeria recognized that it takes a thief to catch a thief so it invested resources to help illicit miners become clean.  She refers to DM’s statements about PAS and says there may be parallels.

Supreme Court Denies ACCG's Petition for Certiorari

On Feb. 19, 2019, the Supreme Court denied the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild’s petition for certiorari. See https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/18-767.html

That petition asked the Court to review the Fourth Circuit’s decision that treats import restrictions on ancient Cypriot and Chinese coins under the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) as embargoes. The Guild had argued the plain meaning of the statute and the Guild’s Fifth Amendment Takings and Due Process rights require the CPIA to be read to only apply to coins of types on designated lists proven to be illicitly exported from Cyprus or China after the effective date of government regulations. The Fourth Circuit instead approved the forfeiture of Cypriot and Chinese coins of types on designated lists imported into the United States after the effective date of the applicable regulations, i.e., an embargo of all coins of restricted types rather than targeted, prospective import restrictions that do not impact the purchase of coins from the legitimate marketplace abroad.

Denials of certiorari have no precedential value. The Fourth Circuit’s opinion is only binding within its jurisdiction (Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North and South Carolina). Nevertheless, the decision will likely be cited as precedent elsewhere, and the archaeological lobby and the US cultural bureaucracy will likely pitch it as approving broad executive authority in the area.

CPO finds it frustrating that broad declarations of executive authority that find little support in statutory language and raise constitutional concerns only seem to provoke public outrage and judicial scrutiny selectively.  That in turn also raises the fundamental question whether Fifth Amendment Takings and Due Process rights are as jealously guarded today as other constitutional rights.  Or, maybe this is just another example where private property rights-- which were of great importance to the "Founding Fathers" -- are being eroded further without much notice from the general public and the media.