Obama’s Treasury Department: Our Sanctions Regime Is SEKRIT

Screen shot 2013-02-20 at 12.48.34 PMTreasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Controljust sent out its invite for a symposium helping the Financial Industry learn about how to comply with sanctions. The symposium will include the following:

The Financial Symposium will feature a Keynote Address by OFAC Director Adam Szubin and presentations by key OFAC personnel on topics such as:

  • Changes to the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, NDAA and CISADA
  • Enforcement guidelines and enforcement actions
  • SDN List updates and information on the designation process
  • Securities and Insurance
  • Licensing procedures and guidance
  • Compliance with U.S. economic and trade sanctions

In addition to formal presentations, OFAC staff will be available throughout the day for individual questions and ad hoc roundtable discussion on issues unique to the financial industry.

It’s actually fairly important that the sanctions regime be well-publicized. Not only does it help ensure compliance from any entity that might be considered liable. But that’s what gives it legitimacy: not just the fact that sanctions and their rationale appear well thought out (if you believe Iranians should have no access to medical devices and dental equipment, that is), but also that sanctions are somewhat fairly applied (which they’re not).

Apparently, Obama’s Treasury Department doesn’t see it this way.

 The event is closed to press.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

7 Responses to Obama’s Treasury Department: Our Sanctions Regime Is SEKRIT

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel Isn't Armageddon something that should be left in the Bible? https://t.co/zjUNe42Hvs
2mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @jonathanhsinger That assumes the Majority Leader brings it up for a vote. @DemFromCT
5mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Scalia: The guy who survived Dick Cheney's second-most famous quail hunt, but not one w/o Cheney?
8mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @dandrezner Twitter, the corporation? Ah, well, that's okay too bc Scalia wanted corporations to have expansive personhood.
10mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Sort of surprised that every right winger is saying Scalia is the finest. I mean, sure, he could write, but Thomas & Alito even nuttier.
11mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @PradhanAlka: Those saying @POTUS for SCOTUS clearly haven't read @TheJusticeDept's GTMO briefs or MilCom prosecution briefs. #unconstit
12mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Now that the GOP Senate has utterly politicized Scalia's death, no holds barred on commentary about him, is that the rule?
13mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Okay, McConnell, it's on, motherfucker. You guys block a nominee before the election, Dems should never approve another Republican nominee.
16mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @edhenry Uh, ranking member. Grassley is Chair. @NickBaumann
19mreplyretweetfavorite
February 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728