903. Do the prohibitions of Executive Order (E.O.) 13959, as amended, apply to U.S. persons who are employed by non-U.S. entities and who, in the ordinary course of their employment, are involved in purchases or sales of Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies’ (CMICs) securities on behalf of their non-U.S. employer?
For purposes of E.O. 13959, as amended, U.S. persons employed by non-U.S. entities are not prohibited from being involved in, or otherwise facilitating, purchases or sales related to a covered security on behalf of their non-U.S. employer, provided that such activity is in the ordinary course of their employment and the underlying purchase or sale would not otherwise violate E.O. 13959, as amended, (e.g., neither the purchase nor sale of the covered security is for the ultimate benefit of a U.S. person; neither the purchase or sale is a willful attempt to evade the prohibitions of E.O. 13959,...
1) See section II(ii) Consolidated Comment on the Chinese Military Companies Sanctions Under the EO Issued June 3, 2021 for discussion of the relationship between the EO and the "facilitation" prohibition that is implicit in all OFAC-administered regulations. As is the case with FAQ # 863, this FAQ appears to constitute a significant, one-off interpretation of the "facilitation" prohibition that is implicit in all OFAC-administered sanctions programs. FAQ # 863, where OFAC says that certain activities would be “considered permissible,” here OFAC prefaces the FAQ with “[f]or purposes of E.O. 13959” (suggesting that the logic cannot be extended to other sanctions programs). The activities described here would fall squarely within the standard “facilitation” prohibition in the context of an ordinary sanctions prohibition.