A hire can be an export before a single box ships.

A software company hires a new engineer on a work visa, and the onboarding checklist stops cold at one line: the source code this person will touch is subject to the EAR, and handing it to a foreign national inside a building in Austin counts as an export to that person's home country, no shipment involved. Nobody in the room has classified this technology before. The offer letter is signed. The start date is fixed. The GC has days, not weeks, to find someone who actually does this work.

The classification question is already a search, long before anything ships

Export-controls work starts with a single question asked at the wrong moment: is this item, this technology, this piece of software subject to the EAR, the ITAR, or a sanctions program, and what license or exception applies. That question shows up when a product is about to ship internationally, when a new customer or country raises a flag, when an internal audit finds a classification nobody ever actually confirmed, or when a hire or a visitor triggers a deemed-export question no one saw coming. None of those moments come with much lead time.

Trade-association dinners and GC referrals are real sources for this work, but they run on a calendar that has nothing to do with a shipment deadline. The GC facing a hold on an order this week does not wait for the next dinner to hear a name; the search happens today, from a desk, not a networking room.

Government-contracts compliance, cost accounting and contract audits, is a distinct practice: see government-contracts compliance. Government contract claims and disputes live entirely on the contract-resolution hub. Export classification governs where and to whom something can go. It has nothing to do with how a government contract was priced.

What a buyer is actually searching

The GC or trade lead with a live determination types export classification consultant, EAR ITAR compliance, end-use screening, deemed export review, almost always with a shipment or a hire waiting on the answer. A company building a program from scratch searches more broadly: export controls compliance program, trade compliance consultant, with less urgency and more emphasis on the foundational build.

A generic "trade compliance" campaign cannot tell these two searches apart, and it also cannot tell a live classification question from a sanctions screening question, two different disciplines a specialist keeps separate and a generalist keyword list does not.

Objections we hear

Our GC already handles this. Most in-house GCs are generalists who correctly flag that a question exists but do not have EAR or ITAR classification depth themselves, which is exactly why they end up searching for a specialist rather than resolving it alone.

We ask around at trade association events. That network is real, but it runs on its own calendar, and a shipment on hold or a hire starting Monday does not wait for the next meeting to produce a name.

This is the same as government contracts compliance. It is not. Export classification governs where and to whom an item or technology can go. Government contracts compliance governs how a contract with the government itself was priced and performed, a completely separate regulatory question.

An export does not require a shipment

The deemed export rule catches companies that have never shipped anything overseas: releasing controlled technology, technical data, or source code to a foreign national employee, contractor, or visitor inside the United States is treated as an export to that person's home country, the moment access is granted. A hiring decision, a visiting engineer, or an internal transfer can trigger this without a single package leaving the building, and a due-diligence review during an acquisition is one of the more common places this gap gets found, usually after the deal is already in motion.

Ready to grow your pipeline?

Share a few details and we'll follow up with exactly how this works for a firm like yours.

Leave blank

Name *

Firm / Company *

Email *

Phone

Send

What runs, and what we will not do

Google ads built around the specific search a GC or trade lead actually types, a classification question, an end-use screen, a deemed-export review, not one generic "trade compliance" campaign competing for every unrelated query. Foundational web presence, so the click lands on a firm that reads in the language of the regime, EAR, ITAR, OFAC sanctions, not a fear slogan and not a volume mill.

LinkedIn placements aimed at trade and government-contracts lawyers who send this work once they already know which firm actually classifies for a living, run as paid placements only, never InMail, connection-request sequences, or direct messages. We do not run that channel, and it is not part of this program under any name.

What we will not do: write into the determination. We do not build a solicitation list of defense contractors or dual-use manufacturers, and we do not mail, email, or call a trade lead who has not searched or asked. We do not classify the item or sit the license ourselves. We make the firm findable. The firm does the work.

Why a generalist agency gets this practice wrong

An agency running one broad "trade compliance" campaign cannot separate a GC with a shipment on hold from a company doing generic supply-chain research, and the keyword bidding shows it. They also cannot tell classification work apart from government-contract disputes, two different practices that sound adjacent and are not, which means a real share of the traffic they buy never had a matching deliverable to sell.

This campaign exists for the buyer who already has a shipment, a hire, or an audit finding with a real deadline attached, not the researcher reading a primer on what ITAR stands for.

Referring counsel matter as much as the search itself

Trade and government-contracts lawyers see classification questions constantly but rarely staff the determination work themselves, and a client asking for that build puts counsel in the position of naming a specialist fast, often with a shipment already waiting. That referral relationship deserves deliberate attention, not whichever firm happens to come up first.

The LinkedIn side of this program exists for that purpose: a small number of paid placements in front of the lawyers who send this work, built as material worth their time, not an ad asking for a meeting.

How this is billed

This is Visibility Program work, not the outbound program. You pay ad spend directly to the platforms, Google and, where it runs, LinkedIn. ROI Wire bills a retainer that scales with that spend, not a flat project fee and not a percentage of closed files.

A landing page may be included at no additional cost. A full website build is always quoted and billed separately. Copywriting, directory work, and the reputation surfaces a GC checks before trusting a firm with a live determination sit under this track as the credibility layer that holds the traffic, not as a correspondence program running in parallel. Ads can be live in under a week. Approval on your side, the keywords, the spend, the page the click lands on, usually determines the timeline, not the platforms.

Who this fits, and who it does not

This fits firms that actually classify items and technology and clear shipments, in the regimes and industries they know, with the capacity to turn around a determination on a shipment's or a hire's timeline. The lead worth the spend is a GC or trade lead with a real classification or license question, not a company browsing what export controls even means.

It does not fit a firm whose real business is government-contract audits or disputes, or one without EAR/ITAR classification depth. That is not government-contracts compliance either, which covers cost accounting and contract performance under an entirely different regulatory framework, and lives on its own page.