International Trade Law News /title <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <meta name="verify-v1" content="6kFGcaEvnPNJ6heBYemQKQasNtyHRZrl1qGh38P0b6M=" /> <head> <title>International Trade Law News

« Home | Seasons Greetings and Happy New Year From Internat... » | Wassenaar Arrangement Issues Best Practice Guideli... » | U.S. Export Control Reform News and Upcoming Deadl... » | BIS Adds Two Parties in UAE to Entity List For Div... » | OFAC Issues General License Unblocking Most Remain... » | Coalition for Excellence in Compliance Releases Re... » | OFAC Makes Significant Changes to Remaining U.S. S... » | Lessons Learned from Flowserve's BIS and OFAC Volu... » | DHL Express Hosting Export Compliance Program in C... » | Today's Sanctions, Export Controls and FCPA News a... » 

January 12, 2012 

U.S. Imposes Sanctions on Trading Companies in China, UAE and Singapore for Iran-Related Transactions

Today the U.S. Department of State imposed sanctions on three trading companies under the Iran Sanctions Act, as amended by the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA), as a result of their involvement in sales of refined petroleum to Iran.

The three sanctioned companies are:

•Zhuhai Zhenrong Company - The State Department indicated that this Chinese-based company, which is the largest supplier of refined petroleum product to Iran, brokered the delivery of over $500 million in gasoline to Iran between July 2010 and January 2011, with individual deals entered into worth significantly more than the $1 million CISADA threshold under U.S. law and the total value of the transactions well above the $5 million threshold for sanctionable activities within a 12-month period.

•Kuo Oil (S) Pte. Ltd. - Kuo is an energy trading firm based in Singapore. The U.S. determined that Kuo provided over $25 million in refined petroleum to Iran between late 2010 and early 2011, worth significantly more than the $1 million CISADA threshold under U.S. law and the total value of the transactions well above the $5 million threshold for sanctionable activities within a 12-month period.

•FAL Oil Company Limited (FAL) - FAL is an independent energy trader based in the UAE. The U.S. determined that FAL provided over $70 million in refined petroleum to Iran over multiple shipments in late 2010, with individual deliveries worth significantly more than the $1 million CISADA threshold and the total value of the transactions well above the $5 million threshold for sanctionable activities within a 12-month period.

Under the sanctions imposed today, all three companies are prohibited from receiving U.S. export licenses, loans over $10 million in a 12 month period from U.S. financial institutions and U.S. Export Import Bank financing.

While these three companies are subject to the ISA sanctions noted above, today’s action does not make such persons Specially Designated Nationals or Blocked Persons (SDNs). Their names do not appear on the SDN List, and their property and/or interests in property are not blocked.

While these entities do not appear on any BIS or OFAC restricted party list, U.S. banks, exporters and other U.S. persons need to ensure that these entities are captured in their restricted party screening system and that they understand the potential impact of these sanctions on their business operations.

While these sanctions are clearly an offshoot of the larger economic sanctions ramping up on Iran, it's important to remember that China is one of Iran's biggest trading partners. China is happy to play a middleman, hiding the ultimate consignee in Iran, U.S. export laws be damned.

This brings in another curious twist. Because they still adhere to the Arab League's boycott of Israel, Iran doesn't think to relax their boycott requirements when ordering goods from China. And China, not caring one way or the other about Israel, and perhaps ignorant of U.S. Anti-Boycott laws, can include these boycott requirements when ordering from the U.S.

So when you see boycott requirements from, seemingly of all places, China, understand that this is more than an illegal boycott, but very likely a diversion in the making.

Jim Dickeson
Import Export Geeks

I don`t speak on many sites that I come across but I felt I couldn’t pass up the opportunity with this one. Excellent post. I can only imagine what you will be writing in the future.

Love it! Keep the Good Work.

Thanks.
Trade Portal

Post a Comment

Editor

Subscribe

Subscribe to our confidential mailing list

Mobile Version

Search Trade Law News

International Trade and Compliance Jobs

Jobs from Indeed

Archives

Categories

Disclaimer

  • This Site is presented for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed when you use this Site. Do not consider the Site to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney. The information on this Site may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While we try to revise this Site on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed on this Site are the opinions of the individual author.
  • The content on this Site may be reproduced and/or distributed in whole or in part, provided that its source is indicated as "International Trade Law News, www.tradelawnews.com".
  • ©2003-2015. All rights reserved.

Translate This Site


Powered by Blogger