Two more applications above $100m have reached the Export-Import Bank, one for satellites and one for industrial cable, and both notices describe production inside the United States

The Export-Import Bank of the United States filed two notices in Friday morning's 8.45 batch, both of them applications for a long term loan or a financial guarantee above $100m. One is for satellites. The other is for industrial cable. Neither transaction, on the face of the notice that announces it, is an export in the ordinary sense of the word.

The satellite application is docketed EIB-2026-0266 and carries the reference AP300125XX. The obligor is given as SPV/Astranis Space Technologies Corp. The guarantor is Astranis Space Technologies Corp. The money would, in the notice's own words, finance components for use in domestic satellite production and the related launch and insurance costs, which is a wider perimeter than hardware and is worth reading twice.

Under the heading the form reserves for the description of items being exported, the entry reads: satellite telecommunication services. The anticipated use is to enable the provision of those services.

The cable plant

The second application is docketed EIB-2026-0265, reference AP300003XX. Its stated purpose is to expand domestic capacity to provide United States manufactured industrial cables, and the anticipated use is to provide industrial cables for domestic and foreign customers. The obligor is Tele-Fonika Cable Americas Corp. The guarantor is Tele-Fonika Kable S.A.

Here the items being exported are given as industrial cables, which is at least a good rather than a service.

What neither notice gives

Neither gives an amount. Both stop at the statutory threshold that triggered the notice in the first place, in excess of $100 million, and say nothing further about the size of the loan or the guarantee.

Both name the principal supplier as various suppliers. Nobody is identified. That is a change in wording from the Nashwauk notice this desk read nine days ago, which gave the principal supplier as various United States entities, and the difference is recorded here without an inference attached to it.

Both carry the standard paragraph explaining what has been withheld: confidential or proprietary business information, information whose disclosure would violate the Trade Secrets Act, and information that would jeopardise United States jobs by handing competitors something they could use.

A programme name that is missing

That earlier notice, for an iron ore mine and a direct reduction iron plant at Nashwauk, Minnesota, named the agency's Make More in America initiative twice, and said in terms that the financing would be used for domestic purposes.

Friday's two notices both describe production in the United States. Neither names that initiative, or any other programme, anywhere in its text.

This item draws no conclusion from that. It is what the three documents say and do not say, and all three are linked here and in the archive for anyone who wants to form their own view.

The clock, and where the answer lands

Publication is set for Monday 24 August. Comments are due 25 days after that, which is 18 September, and they go to the EXIM board of directors before it takes final action on either transaction.

Both notices rest on section 3(c)(10) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, codified at 12 U.S.C. 635a(c)(10), the provision that requires this kind of public notice above $100m. Both are signed by Matthew Paprocki, an attorney advisor at the bank. The second document, for the cable application, is at Public Notice EIB-2026-0265.

There will be no announcement either way. The notices direct readers instead to the summary minutes of the board's meetings, which is where a decision on each application will appear.