InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
2nd Circuit: Court upholds dismissal of whistleblower suit alleging Iran sanctions violations
On October 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied a petition for a panel rehearing en banc in a False Claims Act (FCA) suit that was dismissed in 2020. The whistleblower suit, filed in 2019, alleged violations of the U.S.’s sanctions on Iran by exchanging foreign currency for U.S. dollars on behalf of Iranian and related terrorist entities. In July 2020, the whistleblower suit was dismissed after the court agreed with U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York’s motion to dismiss because the compliant was “legally deficient as it is premised on an incorrect legal theory of liability that is inconsistent with both the FCA and the law regarding civil forfeiture.” The plaintiff appealed to the 2nd Circuit arguing that the district court needed to hold a hearing; however, the 2nd Circuit found the suit had been properly dismissed and that the judge considered extensive briefing before making the determination of the dismissal.
OFAC sanctions darknet marketplace for selling stolen data
On April 5, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions, pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13694, as amended by E.O. 13757, against one of the world’s largest darknet marketplaces for its involvement in the theft and sale of device credentials and related sensitive information. According to OFAC, the marketplace accesses victims’ devices without authorization and sells the stolen data, including usernames and passwords, on the darknet. The action was taken in coordination with the DOJ and international partners from a dozen countries who are also taking action against market users across multiple jurisdictions and seizing associated website domains. The designation built upon previous actions taken against darknet marketplaces, including sanctions issued last year against the world’s most prominent darknet market. (Covered by InfoBytes here.) OFAC also referenced FinCEN’s 2019 Advisory on Illicit Activity Involving Convertible Virtual Currency, to warn “that darknet markets frequently include offers for the sale of illicit goods and services that use virtual currencies as a method of payment.” (Covered by InfoBytes here.) As a result of the sanctions, all property and interests in property belonging to the sanctioned entity in the U.S. must be blocked and reported to OFAC. OFAC noted that U.S. persons are prohibited from participating in transactions with sanctioned persons, and that “persons that engage in certain transactions with the entity designated today may themselves be exposed to sanctions.”
The DOJ stated in its press release that, along with its partners, it had “dismantled” the marketplace and “arrested many of its users around the world.” The DOJ explained that the marketplace “was also one also one of the most prolific initial access brokers [] in the cybercrime world,” and “attract[ed] criminals looking to easily infiltrate a victim’s computer system.” The marketplace sold access to ransomware actors looking to attack computer networks in the United States and globally, the DOJ said, adding that the marketplace also sold device “fingerprints” used to trick third-party websites into thinking the marketplace user was the actual account owner.
House Republican concerned about Treasury sanctions on virtual currency mixer
On August 23, Representative Tom Emmer (R-MN) sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen raising privacy and due process concerns related to recent “first-of-their-kind” sanctions issued against a virtual currency mixer accused of allegedly laundering more than $7 billion in virtual currency, including more than $455 million stolen by a Democratic People’s Republic of Korea state-sponsored hacking group that is separately subject to U.S. sanctions (covered by InfoBytes here). The U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) said the sanctions resulted from the company “having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, a cyber-enabled activity originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States that is reasonably likely to result in, or has materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States and that has the purpose or effect of causing a significant misappropriation of funds or economic resources, trade secrets, personal identifiers, or financial information for commercial or competitive advantage or private financial gain.” (Covered by InfoBytes here.)
Emmer stressed, however, that adding the company to OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List seemed to diverge from previous OFAC precedent since several of the company’s designated “smart contract addresses” do not appear to be a person, entity, or property, but rather are distributed technological tools that are not controlled by any entity or natural person. “OFAC has a long, commendable history of utilizing financial sanctions to enhance the national security of the United States,” the letter said. “Nonetheless, the sanctioning of neutral, open-source, decentralized technology presents a series of new questions, which impact not only our national security but the right to privacy of every American citizen.” Emmer referenced May 2019 guidance issued by FinCEN (covered by InfoBytes here), which he said drew “a distinction between ‘providers of anonymizing services’ (including ‘mixers’)” which are subject to Bank Secrecy Act obligations and “‘anonymizing software providers’” which are not. Emmer recognized that OFAC is not bound by FinCEN regulations, but said it is his understanding that the sanctioned company is “simply the anonymizing software deployed on the blockchain.”
Emmer requested clarification from Treasury on several questions, including the factors OFAC considers when designating technology to the SDN List and how OFAC plans to “uphold the appeals process for the sanctioned addresses that have no ability to appeal the sanction to OFAC” because they “are smart contracts with no agency, corporate or personal, and as such cannot speak for themselves or those whose funds they hold.”
E.O. blocks property of Afghan bank
On February 11, President Biden issued an Executive Order (E.O.) on Protecting Certain Property of Da Afghanistan Bank [DAB] for the Benefit of the People of Afghanistan. The E.O. generally blocks “[a]ll property and interests in property of DAB that are held, as of the date of this order, in the United States by any United States financial institution, including the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.” The E.O. establishes that “[a]ny transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.” Among other things, the order's prohibitions “apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted before the date of this order.” The E.O. also prohibits any transactions by U.S. persons—or within the U.S—that evade or avoid, have the purpose of evading or avoiding, cause a violation of, or attempt to violate the provisions set forth in the order, as well as any conspiracy to violate any of these prohibitions. Additionally, the Secretary of the Treasury—after consulting with heads of other executive departments as deemed appropriate—is authorized to take actions, including promulgating rules and regulations, to carry out the purposes of the E.O.
OFAC sanctions Hizballah financiers in Lebanon
On January 18, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13224 against three Hizballah-linked financial facilitators and their Lebanon-based travel company. According to OFAC, “Hizballah’s widespread network of financial facilitators has helped the group exploit Lebanon’s financial resources and survive the current economic crisis.” The designated persons allow Hizballah “access to material and financial support through the legitimate commercial sector to fund its acts of terrorism and attempts to destabilize Lebanon’s political institutions,” OFAC stated, adding that the sanctions demonstrate the agency’s “ongoing efforts to target Hizballah’s continued attempts to exploit the global financial sector and evade sanctions.” As a result of the sanctions, all transactions by U.S. persons or in the U.S. that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons are generally prohibited. Additionally, “any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly 50 percent or more by them, individually, or with other blocked persons, that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, must be blocked and reported to OFAC.” U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any dealings involving the property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons, unless exempt or authorized by a general or specific OFAC license. OFAC further warned that the agency “can prohibit or impose strict conditions on the opening or maintaining in the United States of a correspondent account or a payable-through account by a foreign financial institution that either knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant transaction on behalf of a Specially Designated Global Terrorist,” or “knowingly facilitates a significant transaction for Hizballah or certain persons designated for their connection to Hizballah.”
OFAC sanctions Iranian officials in plot to kidnap American citizen in the U.S.
On September 3, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13553 against four Iranian intelligence operatives who allegedly targeted a U.S. citizen and Iranian dissidents in a wide-ranging campaign to silence critics of the Iranian government. According to OFAC, a senior official led a network that plotted to kidnap a U.S. journalist, which failed and led to the indictment of members of the network. OFAC also noted that this network has played a key role in the Iranian government’s brutal human rights abuses against Iranians. As a result of the sanctions, “all property and interests in property of these persons that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons must be blocked and reported to OFAC.” OFAC further noted that its regulations “generally prohibit all dealings by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons,” and warned foreign financial institutions that knowingly facilitating significant transactions or providing significant financial services to the designated individuals may subject them to U.S. correspondent account or payable-through sanctions.
2nd Circuit: No contempt sanctions against Chinese banks in $1 billion counterfeit case
On August 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that a district court did not err in denying an investment firm’s motion to hold a group of Chinese banks in contempt for failure to implement certain asset restraints. According to the opinion, in 2015, an athletic apparel corporation and one of its subsidiaries won a more than $1 billion default judgment against hundreds of participants in several Chinese counterfeiting networks (counterfeiters). The judgment enjoined the counterfeiters “and all persons acting in concert or in participation with any of them . . . from transferring, withdrawing or disposing of any money or other assets into or out of [the counterfeiters’ accounts] regardless of whether such money or assets are held in the U.S. or abroad.” The investment firm (the corporation’s successor-in-interest) moved to hold the Chinese banks in contempt for failing to implement the asset restraints and asked the district court to impose a $150 million penalty, claiming, among other things, that the Chinese banks allowed the counterfeiters to transfer more than $32 million from their accounts after the Chinese banks were informed of the asset restraints. The investment firm further claimed that the Chinese banks also failed to produce documents during discovery. The district court denied the motion.
In agreeing with the district court, the 2nd Circuit concluded that (i) until the contempt motion was filed, the corporation and the investment firm never sought to enforce the asset restraints against the Chinese banks; (ii) “there is a fair ground of doubt as to whether, in light of New York’s separate entity rule and principles of international comity, the orders could reach assets held at foreign bank branches”; (iii) “there is a fair ground of doubt as to whether the [b]anks’ activities amounted to ‘active concert or participation’ in Defendants’ violation of the asset restraints that could be enjoined under Federal 16 Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)”; and (iv) the investment firm failed to provide clear and convincing evidence of a discovery violation.
OFAC sanctions Eritrean official
On August 23, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13818 against an Eritrean individual under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. According to OFAC, the sanctioned individual is the leader or official of an entity that is involved in human rights abuse committed during the continuing conflict in Tigray. As a result of the sanctions, all transactions by U.S. persons or in the U.S. that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons are generally prohibited. OFAC notes that its regulations generally prohibit U.S. persons from participating in transactions with these persons, which include “the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods or services from any such person.”
Biden’s executive order addresses Belarus
On August 9, President Biden issued an Executive Order (E.O.) on “Blocking Property of Additional Persons Contributing to the Situation in Belarus.” According to the E.O., expanding the scope will address the national emergency declared in E.O. 13405, “finding that the Belarusian regime’s harmful activities and long-standing abuses aimed at suppressing democracy and the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Belarus—including illicit and oppressive activities stemming from the August 9, 2020, fraudulent Belarusian presidential election and its aftermath, such as the elimination of political opposition and civil society organizations and the regime’s disruption and endangering of international civil air travel—constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” The E.O blocks property and interests in property that are in the U.S. or in the possession or control of certain persons who meet one or more of the criteria set forth in the order, including those who are determined, among other things: (i) “to be a political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality of the Government of Belarus”; (ii) “to be or have been a leader or official of the Government of Belarus”; and (iii) “to operate or have operated in the defense and related materiel sector, security sector, energy sector, potassium chloride (potash) sector, tobacco products sector, construction sector, or transportation sector of the economy of Belarus, or any other sector of the Belarus economy as may be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State.” The Treasury Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is authorized to take actions, including promulgating rules and regulations, to carry out the purposes of the E.O.
The same day, OFAC issued Belarus General License (GL) 4, related FAQs 916, 917 and 918, and added names to OFAC’s SDN list. Specifically, GL 4 authorizes the Wind Down of Transactions Involving Belaruskali OAO through December 8.
OFAC sanctions Cuban officials
On July 30, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions pursuant to Executive Order 13818 against two Cuban individuals and one Cuban entity under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. According to OFAC, the sanctions expand on Treasury’s July 22 designations by sanctioning additional persons in connection with actions to suppress peaceful, pro-democratic protests in that began on July 11 in Cuba (covered by InfoBytes here). As a result of the sanctions, all transactions by U.S. persons or in the U.S. that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons are generally prohibited. OFAC notes that its regulations generally prohibit U.S. persons from participating in transactions with these persons, which include “the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods or services from any such person.”