New Item for Diligence Review Process: OFAC’s Foreign Sanctions Evaders List

Mar 19, 2014

Reading Time : 2 min

The following is a basic overview of the FSE List and important points to understand in incorporating the FSE List into regular diligence practices.

  • Who is on the FSE List? OFAC will add individuals or entities to the FSE List when the U.S. government determines that they: (1) have violated, attempted to violate, conspired to violate or caused a violation of U.S. sanctions against Syria or Iran; (2) have facilitated deceptive transactions for or on behalf of persons subject to U.S. sanctions against Syria or Iran; and/or (3) are owned or controlled by, or acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, such entities or persons.
  • What is prohibited? Broad sanctions prohibitions preclude U.S. persons from engaging in activities involving parties included on the FSE List. General prohibitions bar U.S. persons from providing or procuring goods or services, including financial services, or technology to or from a listed person without specific prior authorization from OFAC, unless the transaction is otherwise exempt from regulation. Although an FSE’s property is not “blocked” as a matter of law under this OFAC regime (except where such parties are also listed as Specially Designated Nationals or otherwise subject to blocking under other OFAC sanctions programs), OFAC advises that U.S. persons must obtain OFAC authorization to provide, procure or receive property, or services related to that property, to or from an FSE. See also the OFAC FAQs: Question Index. U.S. financial institutions are required to obtain OFAC authorization before allowing the operation of a listed person’s bank account and before allowing the receipt or provision of related wire transfers to such accounts.
  • What are the implications for U.S. Entities? As with other OFAC restricted-party lists, U.S. persons and their subsidiaries or controlled entities outside the United States are effectively prohibited from engaging in “transactions” or activities with FSEs on a strict liability basis. U.S. parties that engage in transactions with an FSE are subject to potential OFAC enforcement and penalties under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
  • What does this mean for you? U.S. entities and individuals must take actions necessary to ensure that they screen effectively against, and do not engage in activities involving, parties included on the FSE List. In particular, the following steps should be incorporated into regular diligence practices to ensure compliance:
    • Use of Vendors for Screening. It is important for entities relying on third-party vendor screening services to check with their providers to ensure that the FSE List is incorporated into automated screening procedures for restricted-party screening. Entities should run test screenings against parties included in the FSE List to verify and document confirmation that their screening safeguards cover this list effectively.
    • Manual Screening. Entities and persons relying on manual screening, including those that use the Consolidated Screening List at www.export.gov, should separately consult the FSE List on OFAC’s website as part of going-forward practices, as long as the FSE List is not incorporated into the Consolidated Screening List.
    • Screening Previously Initiated Transactions. OFAC guidance on the FSE List clearly indicates that there is no “grandfathering” allowance for transactions initiated prior to the listing of an FSE. Where a potential transaction is in process at the time of a listing, U.S. persons are required to terminate and/or cease dealings with the FSE-listed party immediately unless and until otherwise exempted or specifically licensed by OFAC. Accordingly, you may need to review activities screened and initiated prior to February 6, 2014, that have not yet been completed to the extent that FSEs might be involved.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Trade Law

July 19, 2024

Views expressed by Alan Yanovich.1

...

Read More

Trade Law

February 9, 2023

With the enactment of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the announcement of the European Union (EU) Green Deal Industrial Plan, there is now a full-fledged subsidy war between the United States and the European Union. While these subsidies are meant to encourage green technologies, incentivizing firms to produce locally would seem to be an almost as important policy goal. And it is not limited to the U.S. and the EU. Global Trade Alert recently reported that, in 2022, production subsidies accounted for half of all trade-distorting measures, making it the mostly commonly used harmful trade policy measure.1

...

Read More

Trade Law

2023-01-26

At the end of last year, World Trade Organization (WTO) members agreed that the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) of the WTO will take place in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), in February 2024. There is no doubt that the WTO is facing headwinds and is in need of a vigorous push forward. The UAE’s success in transforming itself into a global trade and digital hub and a leader in services trade could serve to drive a successful outcome at MC13.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2023-01-17

On December 21, 2022, the appeal arbitrators in the Colombia – Frozen Fries (DS591) World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute circulated their award (the “Award”). This was the second appeal conducted under Article 25 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and the first appeal under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA), a framework created by a group of WTO members to overcome the challenges posed by the non-operational Appellate Body.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2022-02-10

The United Kingdom just issued a new statutory instrument, effective immediately, which extends the authority to designate persons and entities under the U.K. sanctions against Russia.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2022-01-24

Washington, D.C. partner Kevin Wolf, London partner Jasper Helder and Emily Kilcrease with the Center for New American Security submitted a detailed comment to U.S. and EU export control authorities to help guide and inform efforts to rationalize U.S. and EU export controls.  It can also be a useful resource for anyone interested in the topic and wanting to understand the history and context to current export control policy issues. They note that the US-EU Joint Statement on the role and purpose of export controls “is far more significant than generally recognized because it is the first time the EU (represented by the EC) or any other US ally has stated so explicitly and publicly since the end of the Cold War an agreement with the US that export controls should be used to achieve country-specific and other policy objectives not directly related to weapons of mass destruction or conventional military items.”

...

Read More

Trade Law

2020-06-10

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin Gump’s webinar, “Protecting the Crown Jewels - New U.K. National Security Rules for Foreign Investment in a Post-COVID-19, Post-Brexit World.

...

Read More

© 2025 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.