Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Under Congressional Mandate, OFAC Asserts Jurisdiction Under North Korea Sanctions Regulations Over Non-US Entities Owned or Controlled by US Financial Institutions

By Peter Jeydel, Brian Egan & Nicholas Turner on April 29, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In a Federal Register notice published on April 10, 2020, the US Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), amended its North Korea Sanctions Regulations (NKSR) to extend their application to non-US entities owned or controlled by US financial institutions. The change was mandated by Congress in Section 7121 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020.

This jurisdictional expansion involving US sanctions on North Korea is noteworthy. With the exception of the Cuba and Iran sanctions programs, US sanctions prohibitions typically do not apply directly to non-US entities owned or controlled by US persons. Historically, the extension of US sanctions prohibitions to foreign subsidiaries of US companies has been one of the most controversial “extraterritorial” aspects of US sanctions programs. (So-called “secondary sanctions” do generally apply to non-US entities, but they do not impose “prohibitions” under US law.)

New Section 510.214 of the NKSR extends the broad prohibitions of the NKSR to “any person that is owned or controlled by a US financial institution and established or maintained outside the United States.” This appears to include non-financial companies that are owned or controlled by US financial institutions. In general, “control” can include minority ownership combined with other important rights, such as executive appointments or board representation. Moreover, a “US financial institution” includes branches or offices of non-US financial institutions that are located in the United States – conceivably an exercise of “control” by such a US branch or office over a non-US entity could trigger OFAC jurisdiction.

  • The comprehensive prohibitions in the NKSR include prohibitions on exports, imports, and new investments, as well as “blocking” sanctions against the Government of North Korea and the Workers’ Party of Korea. Practically speaking, this latter prohibition effectively restricts all activity in or relating to the formal economy of North Korea, where the North Korean government is ubiquitous and unavoidable. The NKSR also prohibit dealings with the many non-North Korean parties that have been designated on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list under the NKSR. This includes numerous trading and shipping companies and vessels domiciled in various jurisdictions, among others.
  • The term “US financial institution” includes “any US entity (including its foreign branches) that is engaged in the business of accepting deposits, making, granting, transferring, holding, or brokering loans or other extensions of credit, or purchasing or selling foreign exchange, securities, commodity futures or options, or procuring purchasers and sellers thereof, as principal or agent. It includes depository institutions, banks, savings banks, trust companies, securities brokers and dealers, commodity futures and options brokers and dealers, forward contract and foreign exchange merchants, securities and commodities exchanges, clearing corporations, investment companies, employee benefit plans, and US holding companies, US affiliates, or US subsidiaries of any of the foregoing. This term includes those branches, offices, and agencies of foreign financial institutions that are located in the United States, but not such institutions’ foreign branches, offices, or agencies.”

The new prohibitions only apply when such prohibited activity is conducted “knowingly.” It some circumstances, a party may not know that it is dealing with North Korea or its instrumentalities or affiliates, which often operate internationally through shell entities and other deceptive structures that may not be readily apparent to their counterparties. That said, OFAC generally expects parties to conduct risk-based due diligence to ascertain whether a party involved in a transaction may be subject to US sanctions, and the term “knowingly” includes circumstances in which a party “should have known” of the relevant facts.

Given the relative isolation of North Korea from the global economy, this change may not have significant immediate practical impact.  But US-based institutions (including US branches or offices of non-US institutions) that have not fully implemented US sanctions compliance policies and procedures with respect to their foreign owned or controlled entities should carefully review their compliance program to be sure it adequately accounts for this new rule. The parent institution is subject to fines and other penalties if any non-US entity that it owns or controls violates, attempts to violate, conspires to violate, or causes a violation of the NKSR.

Photo of Peter Jeydel Peter Jeydel

Peter Jeydel‘s practice focuses on US export controls and economic sanctions, including the Commerce Department’s Export Administration Regulations (EAR), the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), and sanctions regulations administered by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)…

Peter Jeydel‘s practice focuses on US export controls and economic sanctions, including the Commerce Department’s Export Administration Regulations (EAR), the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), and sanctions regulations administered by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the State Department. His practice spans all aspects of these regimes, including counseling, compliance, transactional advice, licensing and opinions, disclosures, and enforcement actions. He has also represented companies and individuals seeking de-listing from OFAC’s sanctions list. In addition, Pete has assisted clients in anti-corruption matters, including under the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and has experience handling reviews and investigations by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

Read Pete’s full bio.

Read more about Peter JeydelEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Brian Egan Brian Egan

Brian Egan advises on a number of international legal issues that affect US and foreign clients, including economic sanctions, export controls, and anti-money laundering programs; national security trade and investment reviews; international arbitration and other cross-border disputes; international cybersecurity and data privacy; and…

Brian Egan advises on a number of international legal issues that affect US and foreign clients, including economic sanctions, export controls, and anti-money laundering programs; national security trade and investment reviews; international arbitration and other cross-border disputes; international cybersecurity and data privacy; and issues of public international law. He has worked in various senior legal positions for the US government, giving him keen insight into domestic and international legal matters that influence US government national security and foreign relations policies and programs. Before joining Steptoe, Brian served as the Legal Adviser to the US Department of State, the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council, Deputy White House Counsel, and Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement and Intelligence with the US Department of the Treasury. Brian has regularly appeared in public fora to speak on international legal issues, including testifying before Congress, public speaking engagements, and panel presentations.

Read Brian’s full bio.

Email
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Government and Public Policy
  • Blog:
    International Compliance Blog
  • Organization:
    Steptoe LLP

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo