U.S. Regulators Emphasize Pursuit of Enforcement Actions Against Non-U.S. Persons and Entities
The guidance mirrors the recent, broader impulse among U.S. prosecutors and regulatory agencies to extend application of U.S. law to foreign persons and entities, even when those persons and entities have only threadbare connections to the U.S.
May 13, 2024 at 11:07 AM
11 minute read
Regulation
What You Need to Know
- U.S. regulators recently issued a Tri-Seal Compliance Note emphasizing that non-U.S. persons and entities must comply with U.S. sanctions and export controls law, and cautioning that they could be subject to civil and criminal liability for a failure to do so.
- The Tri-Seal Compliance Note makes clear that OFAC's sanctions enforcement dovetails with the country's broader national security and foreign policy interests.
- The trend of global enforcement of OFAC sanctions seems unlikely to slow or reverse, making it essential that non-U.S. companies take steps outlined in the Compliance Note and in this article.
On March 6, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) collectively issued a Tri-Seal Compliance Note emphasizing that non-U.S. persons and entities must comply with U.S. sanctions and export controls law, and cautioning that they could be subject to civil and criminal liability for a failure to do so. See, U.S. Dep't of Com., U.S. Dep't of the Treasury & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Tri-Seal Compliance Note: Obligations of Foreign-based Persons to Comply with US Sanctions and Export Control Laws (Mar. 6, 2024) (Compliance Note). Tri-Seal Compliance Notes are not frequently issued, and practitioners should take note when all three sanctions regulators speak on an issue with a single voice.
The guidance mirrors the recent, broader impulse among U.S. prosecutors and regulatory agencies to extend application of U.S. law to foreign persons and entities, even when those persons and entities have only threadbare connections to the U.S. As discussed below, almost 40% of OFAC's publicly announced settlements over the past three years have been against non-U.S. actors, including some settlements that involved the payments of hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties.
The Tri-Seal Compliance Note makes clear that OFAC's sanctions enforcement dovetails with the country's broader national security and foreign policy interests, including the U.S.'s interest in preventing "malign regimes and other bad actors" from "misus[ing] the commercial and financial channels that facilitate foreign trade." (See, Compliance Note at 1). Foreign companies should brace themselves for legal exposure on multiple fronts, with DOJ, BIS, and OFAC likely to coordinate their efforts against non-U.S. persons. In this article, we discuss the increased trend of global enforcement, examine some of the high-profile cases, and consider what non-U.S. companies and individuals can do to prevent becoming the next target of OFAC or DOJ enforcement of U.S. sanctions programs.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
