[See linked document for full text]
[...]
"One area which constantly raises questions is the similar, but not identical, structure and language of the various sanctions regimes.[] OFAC sometimes takes the view that the language is specific to each sanctions regime, and that the regimes should be read independently of each other.[] But OFAC has also taken the view that the analysis is the same no matter which sanctions regime is involved, even though the 'facilitation or approval' language is found only in the Iranian and Sudanese transactions regulations. In an interpretive ruling involving Libya and Iraq,[] for example, OFAC cautioned an unnamed U.S. person against facilitation, despite the fact that no facilitation language is found in either Iraqi or Libyan sanctions regulations [], only evasion is prohibited under those sanctions regimes.[] Similarly, the interpretive sections of the Sudanese transaction regulations, which incidentally only prohibit facilitation,...
1) In its 2007 "Guidance on the Provision of Certain Services Relating to the Requirements of U.S. Sanctions Laws," OFAC formally clarified that its general prohibition on "facilitation" applies to every blocking program, including list-based, non-embargo programs, none of which have explicit facilitation provisions in them. While practitioners typically regard what constitutes "facilitation" to be uniform across programs, OFAC has not explicitly stated as much. The information reported in this article, coming from OFAC's Chief Counsel, is the closest thing to a printed statement attributable to the agency that the scope of facilitation is uniform across programs. Even as of 1/2021, the provision referred to, § 538.407 - Facilitation by a United States person (1998, Sudan), is arguably still the most detailed explanation of what constitutes facilitation.