Enforcement Release: Swedbank Latvia AS

Date issued: Jun. 20 2023

Last substantive commentary amendment:
Dec. 08 2023

You've hit a wall. Sign in if you have an account, learn more about TURBOFAC and subscription options, or purchase access to the text of the document on this page, the native .pdf file, and the associated TURBOFAC original commentary.
TURBOFAC is a module of the compliance platform OverRuled. To learn more about OverRuled, visit www.overruled.com.

TURBOFAC Commentary (750 words)

Notes:

1) IP ADDRESSES AND BEING "IN" A SANCTIONED DESTINATION

From a legal basis standpoint, this is a straightforward example of a non-U.S. bank "causing" a U.S. person processing bank to export financial services to Crimea, which includes the exportation of any service to a person in or ordinarily resident in Crimea. Consistent with typical practice, OFAC regards evidence of services being provided to person with a sanctioned destination IP address as evidence, effectively irrebuttable, that such person was located "in" the sanctioned destination at the time the services were provided. Compare Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (1st action), suggesting that the violation was based on the failure to use IP addresses to “identify registered users located in Iran”.

2) ABSENCE OF URSR REFERENCE

OFAC cites violations of Section 6(a) of