Back

OFAC FAQ (Current) # 534 - Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) Section 105

Date issued: Oct. 30 2017

PRINT
534. Before October 13, 2017, wasn’t the IRGC already subject to sanctions? What’s different about applying terrorism-related sanctions to the IRGC and foreign persons that are officials, agents, or affiliates of the IRGC?

Before October 13, 2017, the IRGC was blocked under Executive Order 13382 (relating to WMD proliferation), 13553 (relating to Iranian human rights abuses), and 13606 (relating to Iranian and Syrian human rights abuses via information technology), and persons who engaged in certain activity involving the IRGC were already subject to secondary sanctions. OFAC’s October 13, 2017 action designating the IRGC under E.O. 13224 (relating to counterterrorism) and OFAC’s October 31, 2017 action under the Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 594 (GTSR), to block the property and interests in property of foreign persons that have been identified by OFAC as officials, agents, or affiliates of the IRGC carry additional consequences that limit certain activities with respect to the IRGC and foreign persons identified by OFAC as officials, agents, or affiliates of the IRGC. Certain exemptions available under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) relating to personal communications, humanitarian donations, information or informational materials, and travel do not apply to transactions with persons designated under E.O. 13224 or otherwise blocked pursuant to the GTSR, which include the IRGC and foreign persons that have been identified by OFAC as officials, agents, or affiliates of the IRGC. [10/30/2017]
External link location:
https://ofac.treasury.gov/faqs/534

TURBOFAC Commentary (262 words)

Notes:

1) This FAQ confirms OFAC's position, up to that point not clearly discernible from the materials on its website, that it does not consider the Berman Amendment to apply to persons designated under EO 13224 [GTSR].

OFAC does not explicitly state that the Berman Amendment applies to entities designated under other list-based IEEPA-based programs, but this is implied from the fact that the blocking pursuant to the GTSR constitutes "additional consequences" in the form of the loss of otherwise applicable exemptions.

Here, OFAC implies that the Berman Amendment exemptions applied to the three authorities pursuant to which the IRGC was previously blocked, i.e. Executive Order 13382 (relating to WMD proliferation), 13553 (relating to Iranian human rights abuses), and 13606 (relating to Iranian and Syrian human rights abuses via information technology). Note that while the WMDPSR contains a provision implementing the Berman Amendment exemptions (544.206), the regulations implementing EO 13553 (Part 562) did not contain any "exempt transactions" provision, and EO 13606 was not associated with implementing regulations at all.

Accord generally Case No. IA-16194, a guidance letter from 2012 which verifies that OFAC recognizes the application of the Berman Amendment for Iranian entities sanctioned under EO 13382 [NPWMD] but not EO 13224 [GTSR]. The legal reasoning behind this FAQ is discussed in detail at General Note on the Applicability of IEEPA/TWEA Exemptions in EOs and Sanctions Regulations not Specifically Mentioning Them (System Ed. Note).

2) Subsequent to the posting of this FAQ, the IRGC was also designated as an FTO, and became blocked pursuant to the FTOSR.