Case No. CU-2015-324039-1

Date issued: Jul. 23 2018

You've hit a wall. Sign in if you have an account, or learn more about TURBOFAC and subscription options.
TURBOFAC is a module of the compliance platform OverRuled. To learn more about OverRuled, visit www.overruled.com.

TURBOFAC Commentary (153 words)

Notes:

1) The redactions leave not much to see here, but this letter is notable as an additional example of OFAC licensing using constructions such as the following:

"Because the proposed activities appear to be authorized by general license, they require no further authorization from OFAC." Compare Case No. CU-2015-322096-1.

Hedging language such as "may" or "appear", when used in these determinations, does not necessarily signal a degree of uncertainty requiring the applicant to wonder whether OFAC actually regards the activities at issue as being illegal. Otherwise, it would not follow that OFAC would refuse to issue a specific license. Indeed, where OFAC is genuinely doubtful as to whether a given activity is covered by a GL or exemption but unwilling to rule it out, the standard mechanism for addressing that is to issue a