OFAC Releases Crimea Sanctions Advisory

Aug 5, 2015

Reading Time : 5 min

Pursuant to its Russia- and Ukraine-related sanctions programs, OFAC also added 11 individuals and 15 entities to its Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List, and added 35 companies owned 50 percent or more by Vnesheconombank (VEB) or Rosneft (including RDIF, the Russian Direct Investment Fund Management Company and other noteworthy entities) to the existing list of entities expressly named in its Sectoral Sanctions Identifications (SSI) List. These companies added to the SSI List on July 30 were all, in fact, already subject to the same SSI financing sanctions restrictions because of the pre-existing equity ownership interests in these entities already held by VEB or Rosneft, in accordance with OFAC’s 50 percent rule guidance on application of the sanctions. OFAC’s stated purpose in adding their names to the SSI List is to better identify them to enable more effective compliance by U.S. companies with SSI sanctions restrictions.

OFAC has publicly described its most recent designations as intended “to counter attempts to circumvent [U.S.] sanctions, to further align U.S. measures with those of our international partners, and to provide additional information to assist the private sector with sanctions compliance.” Moreover, it is our understanding that, within the executive branch, this action is generally regarded as a form of “maintenance” to ensure that this sanctions program remains active and effective as a means to maintain pressure on Russia in connection with U.S. policy concerns in Ukraine and Crimea.

A. Crimea Guidance

On December 19, 2014, President Obama issued Executive Order 13685, which implemented an investment, import and export ban against Crimea. OFAC characterizes these sanctions as prohibiting “virtually all direct and indirect transactions” with Crimea, unless authorized by OFAC or exempted by statute.

On July 30, 2015, OFAC issued a Crimea Sanctions Advisory, which highlights some of the practices that have been used to circumvent or evade U.S. sanctions related to Crimea, noting that “U.S. persons and persons conducting business in or through the United States should be aware of these practices in order to implement appropriate controls, commensurate with their OFAC sanctions risk profile, to ensure compliance with their OFAC obligations.”

The Advisory specifically notes the following evasive practices that have been used since the Crimea-related sanctions went into effect:

  • omission or obfuscation of references to Crimea and locations within Crimea in documentation underlying transactions involving U.S. persons or the United States
  • omission of originator or beneficiary addresses information from SWIFT messages involving individuals ordinarily resident in, or entities located in, Crimea
  • listing counterparties on financial and trade documents as being located in Russia rather than in Ukraine.

To mitigate the risk of processing transactions in apparent violation of OFAC sanctions related to Crimea, OFAC suggests implementing the following types of measures, in addition to other measures specifically tailored to a company’s risk profile:

  • ensuring that transaction monitoring systems include appropriate search terms corresponding to major geographic locations in Crimea and not simply references to “Crimea”
  • requesting additional information from parties (including financial institutions, corporate entities and individuals) that previously have violated or attempted to violate U.S. sanctions on Crimea
  • clearly communicating U.S. sanctions obligations to international partners (in both the financial and trade sectors) and discussing OFAC sanctions compliance expectations with correspondent banking and trade partners; such communications should include a description of the prohibition on the direct and indirect exportation or reexportation of goods, technology and services (including financial services) from the United States to Crimea.

B. SDN List Designations

Additionally, on July 30, 2015, OFAC added 11 individuals and 15 entities to its SDN List, pursuant to its Russia- and Ukraine-related sanctions programs. The individuals and entities added to the list include persons deemed responsible for supporting and sustaining evasion of existing sanctions, entities that operate in the arms or related material sector of Russia, former Ukrainian governmental officials or close associates, Crimean port operators and a Crimean ferry operator.

New individuals added to the SDN list on July 30, 2015 are:

  • Bulyutin, Andrey
  • Klyuyev Andriy Petrovych
  • Kolbin, Petr
  • Kurchenko, Sergey Vitalievich
  • Omelchenko, Aleksander
  • Paananen, Kai
  • Rotenberg, Roman, Beregovaya
  • Semenova, Olena Yurevna
  • Stavytsky, Eduard Anatoliyovych
  • Usachev, Oleg
  • Yanukovich, Oleksandr Viktorovych.

New entities added to the SDN list on July 30, 2015 are:

  • Airfix Aviation OY
  • IPP Oil Product (Cyprus) Limited
  • Izhevsky Mekhanichesky Zavod JSC
  • Open Joint Stock Company “Konsern Izhmash”
  • OY Langvik Capital LTD
  • Private Joint-Stock Company Mako Holding
  • Set Petrochemicals OY
  • Southeast Trading OY
  • Southport Management Services Limited
  • State Enterprise Evpatoria Sea Commercial Port
  • State Enterprise Feodosia Sea Trading Port
  • State Enterprise Kerch Sea Commercial Port
  • State Enterprise Sevastopol Sea Trading Port
  • State Enterprise Yalta Sea Trading Port
  • State Shipping Company Kerch Sea Ferry.

C. SSI List Designations

On July 30, 2015, OFAC also added 35 entities owned 50 percent or more by VEB and Rosneft to its SSI List. Prior to July 30, these entities were already subject to the same SSI financing restrictions as their parent entities, which were sanctioned last year. OFAC has included these entities on the SSI List to help companies better identify them and comply with applicable restrictions.

Specifically, OFAC added 18 entities owned 50 percent or more by VEB to its SSI List pursuant to Directive 1 under Executive Order 13662. (VEB was designated pursuant to Directive 1 on July 16, 2014.) Under Directive 1, U.S. persons and persons within the United States are prohibited from transacting in, providing financing for or otherwise dealing in new equity or new debt of greater than 30 days’ maturity with designated companies.

OFAC also added 17 entities owned 50 percent or more by Rosneft to its SSI List pursuant to Directives 2 and 4 under Executive Order 13662.  (Rosneft was designated pursuant to Directive 2 on July 16, 2014, and Directive 4 on September 12, 2014.) Under Directive 2, U.S. persons and persons within the United States are prohibited from transacting in, providing financing for or otherwise dealing in new debt of greater than 90 days’ maturity issued by designated companies. Under Directive 4, U.S. persons and persons within the United States are prohibited from engaging in the direct or indirect provision, exportation or reexportation of goods, services (not including financial services) or technology in support of exploration or production for deepwater (greater than 500 feet), Arctic offshore, or shale projects that have the potential to produce oil in Russia, or in maritime area claimed by Russia and extending from its territory, that involve designated companies.

Below, we list the companies OFAC added to the SSI List on July 30 pursuant to Directive 1 and Directives 2 and 4:

Directive 1 Entities (Linked to VEB):

  • Bank Belveb OJSC
  • Development Corporation of North Caucasus OJSC
  • Exiar
  • Eximbank of Russia
  • Far East and Baikal Region Development Fund OJSC
  • Federal Center for Project Finance
  • Globexbank
  • Kraslesinvest CJSC
  • Prominvestbank
  • Resad LLC
  • Rose Group Limited
  • Russia Direct Investment Fund Management Company
  • SME Bank
  • Sviaz-Bank
  • VEB Asia Limited
  • VEB Capital
  • VEB Engineering LLC
  • VEB Leasing OJSC

Directive 2 and 4 Entities (Linked to Rosneft):

  • CJSC Vankorneft
  • Neft-Aktiv LLC
  • OJSC Achinsk Refinery
  • OJSC Angarsk Petrochemical Company
  • OJSC Kuybyshev Refinery
  • OJSC Novokuybyshev
  • OJSC Orenburgneft
  • OJSC RN Holding
  • OJSC Russian Regional Development Bank
  • OJSC Samotlorneftegaz
  • OJSC Syzran Refinery
  • PJSC Verkhnechonskneftegaz
  • RN-Komsomolsky Refinery LLC
  • RN-Yuganskneftegaz LLC
  • Rosneft Finance S.A.
  • Rosneft Trade Limited
  • Rosneft Trading S.A.

D. Additional Information

To view OFAC’s press release announcing these new sanctions, see here.

To view official identifying information released by OFAC for these new SDN and SSI listings, see here.

To view OFAC’s Crimea Sanctions Advisory, see here.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.