Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

OFAC Reactivates Sanctions against Belarussian Companies and Provides 45-day Wind Down Period

By Peter Jeydel, Ed Krauland & Brian Egan on April 20, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On April 19, 2021, OFAC effectively reactivated longstanding sanctions against nine Belarussian companies and their subsidiaries, revoking a general license that had authorized transactions involving those entities since 2015.  These sanctions may impact a significant number of Belarussian companies, as several of the listed entities are large conglomerates.

US sanctions on Belarus were first imposed in 2006 under Executive Order 13405, with similar EU sanctions beginning in 2004, in response to concerns about the electoral process and human rights abuses in Belarus.  However, in 2015, OFAC had issued a general license broadly authorizing transactions with these nine companies and their subsidiaries, but without actually lifting the underlying sanctions.  This limited and conditional sanctions relief in 2015 was part of a coordinated US/EU policy brought about by an improved political and human rights climate in Belarus at the time.  Until now, this general license had regularly been extended since it was first issued in 2015 (as we previously discussed, along with a more detailed history of this sanctions program).

In this action, OFAC has replaced General License No. 2G, which had set forth the limited authorization to engage in certain types of transactions with these nine companies and entities of which they owned 50% or more, with General License No. 2H, which now only authorizes transactions that are “ordinarily incident and necessary to the wind down” of activities with such entities until June 3, 2021.  Until that date, activity inconsistent with the “wind down” of pre-existing business may be prohibited, and after that date all transactions or dealings involving these companies or their “interests in property” (including entities of which they own 50% or more) will be prohibited (absent OFAC authorization) if US persons are involved.  Even if no US persons are involved, there may still be US sanctions risks in light of the authority in Executive Order 13405 to impose sanctions on any person determined “to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of” activities that are sanctionable under that order or persons sanctioned under that order, or “to be owned or controlled by, or acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly,” any such person.

The nine companies listed in these general licenses are:

  • Belarusian Oil Trade House
  • Belneftekhim
  • Belneftekhim USA, Inc.
  • Belshina OAO
  • Grodno Azot OAO
  • Grodno Khimvolokno OAO
  • Lakokraska OAO
  • Naftan OAO
  • Polotsk Steklovolokno OAO

The previous requirement to file detailed reports with the US State Department regarding any transactions in excess of $50,000 with these companies or their subsidiaries remains in place in connection with the currently authorized “wind down” activities.  This reporting requirement underscores that stakeholders should exercise caution in relying on this “wind down” authorization.

The US government has indicated since the initial issuance of this general license in 2015 that it could be modified or revoked should political or human rights conditions in Belarus deteriorate, underscoring the risk in engaging in activity relating to Belarus under this conditional and limited form of sanctions relief.  Absent a significant improvement in the political environment and human rights situation in Belarus, we expect these sanctions to remain in place, and stakeholders should be prepared for the possibility that additional sanctions may be imposed on Belarus.

The US government, in coordination with the EU and other partners, has been ramping up sanctions against Belarus in recent months in the wake of the August 9, 2020 elections in Belarus that were widely criticized as being fraudulent, as well as the ensuing crackdown against protesters, journalists, opposition candidates, and others.  This recent sanctions escalation began in October 2020, when the US imposed the first new sanctions under its Belarus authorities since 2011.  The US took additional action in December 2020.  However, this particular action is generally speaking the most consequential taken to-date for industry, as the other actions in the past few months have primarily targeted government officials and bodies, as opposed to commercial enterprises.

The US Secretary of State in his remarks about this new sanctions action highlighted the detention of political prisoners in Belarus and stated that the “nine state-owned enterprises affected by this action finance and support the Lukashenka regime, facilitating its violent repression of the Belarusian people and repeated rejection of the rule of law.”  This statement of policy underscores the risk that other commercial enterprises viewed as providing funds or other support to the regime could potentially be targeted in the future.

We will continue to  monitor developments in Belarus and related US sanctions policy.  Please contact a member of the Steptoe International Trade and Regulatory Compliance team with any questions.

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 Ed Krauland Ed Krauland

Edward J. Krauland focuses on export controls/economic sanctions. Ed’s extensive experience includes representing clients on matters involving US and multilateral economic sanctions, defense and nuclear export controls, dual-use export controls under the EAR, anti-boycott compliance, internal investigations and enforcement work, and review of…

Edward J. Krauland focuses on export controls/economic sanctions. Ed’s extensive experience includes representing clients on matters involving US and multilateral economic sanctions, defense and nuclear export controls, dual-use export controls under the EAR, anti-boycott compliance, internal investigations and enforcement work, and review of government procurement regulations in the cross-border context. His practice spans all aspects of these laws, including counseling, compliance work, transactional advice, licensing and opinion work, internal reviews, disclosures, and enforcement actions. He has served as co-chair of the International Trade Committee of the ABA Section of International Law and Practice. He is former Chairman of an ABA-wide Task Force on Gatekeeper Regulation (anti-money laundering compliance), and senior adviser to the ABA Section of International Law and Practice’s anti-money laundering committee.

Read Ed’s full bio.

Read more about Ed KraulandEmail
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:
    Administrative and Regulatory
  • Blog:
    International Compliance Blog
  • Organization:
    Steptoe LLP

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

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • 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