16.2 Sanctions Scope, Ownership and Blocking Decisions

---

1. Statutory Authorities and Strict Liability

OFAC derives its regulatory authority from a combination of permanent and emergency statutory enactments:

• Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 (TWEA, 50 U.S.C. App. 1-44): Applies during wartime or national emergencies declared prior to 1977; serves as the statutory foundation for comprehensive sanctions against Cuba.
• International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA, 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.): Grants the President expansive authority to declare national emergencies regarding unusual and extraordinary foreign threats, authorizing OFAC to freeze foreign assets, prohibit transactions, and block trade.
• Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA): Establishes mandatory sanctions targeting state actors and cyber-threat networks.
• Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act & AEDPA: Authorizes targeted economic sanctions against international narcotics cartels and foreign terrorist organizations.

The Strict Liability Standard

OFAC regulations impose a strict liability civil standard. In regulatory enforcement proceedings:

• OFAC is not required to prove that a financial institution acted with criminal intent, knowledge, or negligence.
• The mere processing, facilitation, or settlement of a prohibited transaction constitutes an actionable violation of federal law.
• OFAC evaluates violations under its Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines (31 CFR Part 501, Appendix A), distinguishing between non-egregious and egregious violations. Mitigating factors include maintaining an effective compliance program, prompt self-disclosure, and comprehensive cooperation, whereas aggravating factors include willful blindness, management involvement, and high systemic harm.

Jurisdictional Reach

OFAC compliance is mandatory for all U.S. persons, which includes:

• All U.S. citizens and permanent resident aliens (green card holders), wherever located globally;
• All entities organized under U.S. federal or state law, including their foreign branch offices;
• Any person physically present within the United States;
• Foreign subsidiaries owned or controlled by U.S. parent entities under specific sanctions programs (notably Cuba and Iran);
• Any cross-border transaction denominated in U.S. dollars that clears through a U.S. depository institution or correspondent account.

---

2. OFAC Sanctions Regimes and the 50 Percent Rule

OFAC sanctions are categorized into two primary frameworks:

Comprehensive (Country-Based) Sanctions

Comprehensive sanctions impose blanket economic and trade embargoes against entire geographic territories or sovereign jurisdictions (e.g., Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and the Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk regions of Ukraine). Virtually all direct or indirect commercial, trade, financial, or investment transactions involving these jurisdictions, their governments, or their resident entities are prohibited, unless authorized by an OFAC general or specific license.

Targeted (List-Based) Sanctions

Targeted sanctions prohibit transactions with specific individuals, corporate entities, commercial vessels, and aircraft identified on OFAC-administered sanctions lists:

• Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List: The primary OFAC interdiction list containing thousands of individuals, corporate entities, and vessels worldwide whose assets within U.S. jurisdiction must be blocked and with whom U.S. persons cannot engage in any transaction.
• Sectoral Sanctions Identifications (SSI) List: Enforces targeted restrictions against specific sectors of foreign economies (such as the Russian energy, defense, and banking sectors). SSI restrictions prohibit specific types of debt financing or equity transactions beyond defined maturity tenors (e.g., 14 days or 90 days), rather than mandating total asset blocking.
• Foreign Sanctions Evaders (FSE) List & Non-SDN Lists: Lists targeting persons who have facilitated sanctions evasion or are subject to non-blocking menu-based sanctions.

The OFAC 50 Percent Rule

Under OFAC's formal 50 Percent Rule guidance, compliance officers must evaluate entities that may not be named on the SDN List:

• Aggregation Principle: If Blocked Person A owns a 30% equity stake in Company X, and Blocked Person B owns a 20% equity stake in Company X, Company X is automatically blocked (30% + 20% = 50%), even though neither SDN owns 50% independently.
• Indirect Ownership Chains: Ownership percentages are traced through corporate holding tiers. If SDN A owns 60% of Parent Corp, and Parent Corp owns 50% of Operating Sub, Operating Sub is blocked because Parent Corp is blocked.
• Compliance Risk: Compliance screening software may not generate an alert on Company X if it is not named on the SDN List. Financial institutions must identify beneficial owners during CDD onboarding and cross-reference ownership tiers against the SDN List.

---

3. Core Operational Actions: Blocking vs. Rejecting

When a bank's interdiction screening software identifies a potential sanctions nexus, compliance staff must determine whether the transaction requires Blocking (Freezing) or Rejecting (Returning).

Blocking (Freezing) of Assets

• Legal Trigger: A transaction must be blocked when: (1) It involves an SDN, a target of comprehensive sanctions, or an entity blocked under the 50 Percent Rule; AND (2) The blocked person or government holds a property interest in the underlying funds or assets.

• Operational Action: The institution must immediately freeze the funds. The bank cannot return the funds to the originator, process prohibited transfers or allow unauthorized dealings. Ownership title remains with the blocked entity, but all rights of disposition, withdrawal, and transfer are suspended.

• Segregated Blocked Account: Applicable sanctions programs generally require blocked funds to be held in an interest-bearing blocked account; Part 501 governs reporting and records rather than imposing this account rule for every program. The funds must earn interest at commercially reasonable rates prevailing for similar accounts.

• Illustration: Assume an operative sanctions rule prohibits an unlicensed trade payment and diligence confirms that no blocked person has a property interest. Reject rather than block the prohibited payment. A country reference or absence from the SDN list alone cannot establish these facts.