As if to provide a not-too-subtle reminder to insurers of the applicability of U.S. trade sanctions to their businesses, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) announced on August 6, that a New York-based marine insurer agreed to remit $271,815 to settle potential civil liability for apparent violations of multiple sanctions programs, including Foreign Assets Control Regulations. The announcement, and the alleged shortcomings of the insurer’s OFAC compliance scheme, demonstrate that insurers required to comply with OFAC sanctions must create, implement, and monitor effective OFAC compliance programs and, on a corporate level between offices located all over the world, develop a keen, uniform understanding of how U.S. sanctions law applies to their lines of business.
According to OFAC, the insurer issued global protection and indemnity insurance policies providing coverage to North Korean vessels and covered incidents that occurred in or involved Iran, Sudan, or Cuba between May 8, 2008 and April 1, 2011. Some of this coverage resulted in the payment of claims. At the time, the insurer lacked a formal OFAC compliance program and its London branch personnel were not fully aware of the applicability of OFAC sanctions regulations.
The total base penalty amount for 48 apparent violations was $755,042. OFAC determined the settlement amount under its Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines, weighing mitigating and aggravating factors. Mitigating factors were that (1) The insurer had not received a penalty notice or a violation finding from OFAC in the five years before the first apparent violation; (2) The insurer appropriately reacted to the apparent violations, in part by creating and implementing a comprehensive OFAC compliance program; and (3) The insurer cooperated with OFAC’s investigation by providing information in an organized, responsive fashion. OFAC also cited aggravating factions, including (1) The insurer’s supervisors and managers knew or should have known that most of the insurance policies and claims payments at issue involved OFAC-sanctioned countries; (2) The insurer is a sophisticated financial institution; and (3) The insurer lacked a formal OFAC compliance program at the time of the apparent violations.
©2026 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.
