If this is your first time here, take a look at our FAQ page and get a sense of our unique scope of coverage by perusing the Research System interface.
Also, please note that this website is not yet fully functional on mobile browsers. We recommend adjusting your mobile browser settings to view the site in Desktop Mode.
If this is your first time here, take a look at our FAQ page and get a sense of our unique scope of coverage by perusing the Research System interface.
Ed. Note: if you’re new to TURBOFAC, please take note that the text string filtration function generally shouldn’t be used for terms such as “ordinarily resident,” “causing” or “new debt”. For research on the meaning of words and phrases such as those, i.e. terms central to the key legal issues in sanctions law that appear on a cross-programmatic basis, you’re typically better off locating and checking the appropriate box in the “Key Legal Issues” search category, which will limit the results to those that have been manually assessed as being relevant for the interpretation of the terms at issue.
Try typing your search term (“ordinarily resident,” “new debt,” or something else) in the “Find a Search Filter” box at the top of the page, and the corresponding “Key Legal Issues” check box will pop up instantly, if one exists. Once you check the box (e.g. “new debt,” with ~55 results), you can always use the text string filtration function to further refine your search (e.g. by typing “invoice” and narrowing the ~55 results to ~10).
Note in addition that the same applies to text string searches such as “14071” (if you’re looking for items related to EO 14071). By typing “14071” in the “Find a Search Filter” field up top, you will be able to instantly narrow the results down to items manually assessed as relating to EO 14071. Ditto terms such as “515.204” or “Iran General License G” (try the “Discrete Legal Provision” search category).
Please contact [email protected] or [email protected] with any questions on search results and efficiency.
Please click "Apply Text String Filters" again after clicking the "Close" button immediately below.
No external link available.
1) See also interpretive Guidance letter in Case No. Ukraine-EO13662-2018-354754-1, dealing with the question of the scope of "maintenance" in the secondary sanctions context. That guidance suggests, without saying so explicitly as is the case here, that "transactions ordinarily incident to the continuity of operations" is the applicable standard.
See also the interpretive guidance letters and other documents dealing with the scope of "winding down" operations generally, as those transactions are permitted under Ukraine GL 14, Ukraine GL 15 and Ukraine GL 16 in a manner distinct (i.e. narrower) from the authorizations related to the "maintenance" of operations. In those cases, new significant contracts may be outside the scope of a "wind-down" GL, but within the scope of a "maintenance" GL. Indeed, OFAC appears to be explaining what falls within the scope of "maintenance" as much as it is explaining what is not within the scope of "winding down."
Query whether the "contingent contracts" described in the FAQ are within the scope of a wind-down GL that does not include "maintenance." It seems not.
2) With the exception of the “executory contracts” bit, a general rule of thumb that seems extractable from this guidance is that if OFAC could be persuaded that a given deal would have been done even in the absence of the sanctions, it falls within the scope of permitted “maintenance.”
3) Compare FAQ 648, virtually identical substantively in the Venezuela context, and FAQ 806.
4) FAQ Amended on 7-22-2020 to reflect the expiry of GLs 14 and 16, which also contained "maintenance" provisions.
5) See generally Examples of Transactions Deemed to be, and not to be, Within the Scope of the Standard "Wind-down" and "Maintenance" GLs
6) FAQ amended on 1-24-2022 to update the number of the GL to the one that was active at the time.
7) FAQ removed between 1-25-2022 and 5-17-2022.