OFAC FAQ (Current) # 840 -FAQ Related to the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Date issued: Sep. 25 2020

Last substantive commentary amendment:
Dec. 08 2023

TURBOFAC Commentary (452 words)

Notes:

1) This FAQ is substantively similar to other FAQs clarifying the relationship between blocked government officials and the activities in which a U.S. person can engage involving entities controlled by such SDNs. Compare FAQ # 285 (Burma) and FAQ # 505 (Venezuela). See also FAQ # 398 (concerning non-blocked entities controlled by SDNs).

This FAQ adds clarity to the issue by stating that “U.S. persons may, for example, enter into HKSAR government contracts signed by a non-SDN official of the HKSAR to whom the HKSAR government has delegated the authority to enter such contracts.” This is consistent with OFAC’s practice in the private sector context, discussed in Sec. 2b) of Consolidated Comment on the Civil Penalty Issued in ExxonMobil Corporation (2017), the Administrative Record Underlying the Penalty, and the Ensuing Litigation. U.S. persons are prohibited from “indirect dealings” with SDNs, but entering into contracts with non-blocked entities that are signed by non-blocked persons is not prohibited, or considered an “indirect dealing” with an SDN, simply because the blocked person delegated authority to a signatory of the contract.

This is the first FAQ that includes the “routine interaction” language, but the discussion of contracts in the following paragraph indicates that that language should not be taken to suggest that only “routine interactions” with agencies headed by SDNs are permitted.

Compare Open Society Justice Initiative et al v. Trump et al (1:20-cv-08121) (SDNY 2020) - OFAC/USG Memo. in Opp. to Pl. Motion for P.I., which was drafted subsequent to the issuance of this FAQ. The DOJ, representing OFAC, argued that the fact that two key ICC prosecutors were blocked did not mean that U.S. persons were prevented “from providing assistance or other services to the ICC or the Office of the Prosecutor (which have not been designated) and Plaintiffs generally can assist on ICC investigations so long as they do not transact with the two designated individuals, including by providing funds, goods, or services to them or for their benefit, or otherwise deal in their property or property interests.” One of the blocked prosecutors was the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. To the degree that the position taken there could be considered to reflect OFAC’s position in an across-the-board manner, it is notable inasmuch as OFAC acknowledges that U.S. persons’ ability to deal effectively with non-blocked entities headed by blocked persons is not limited to large corporations or government ministries.

2) Accord/compare FAQ # 993 (Taliban-related). Contrast Case No. COTED-6-1.

3) Compare FAQ # 1145 (similar but specifies that “receiving an invoice bearing the blocked individual’s signature for a commercial transaction, would be prohibited by the GMSR unless authorized by OFAC or exempt”).