Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

103cases from 10 jurisdictions
€3.56bnTotal of monetary amounts (93 cases with an amount)
€884.2mLargest single case: an international crypto exchange
€1.45mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

When?

per year, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
20228€34.1m
202320€1.76bn
202417€273.1m
202532€425.8m
202626€1.06bn

103 cases

24 Aug 2026 Container Manufacturing Ltd.Small US machinery supplier exported spare parts for can presses to Russia USAExport control and dual-use goods €857,339

Between March 2023 and March 2025, the Ohio manufacturer of presses for beverage can ends (nine employees) supplied, in ten instances, spare parts for aluminium forming tools worth around 264,700 USD – partly via the UAE and Turkey – without a licence to a Russian customer whose group also supplies defence precursors. In two instances, the company acted with knowledge of the violation; it admitted the allegations, which were brought by the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).

What organisations can take from it

Even small businesses with few employees must check tariff codes against Russia restrictions and treat deliveries via third countries as a warning sign.

Relevance to training and awareness

HTS-based export restrictions on Russia, diversion via third countries

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Administration Regulations, § 746.8(a)(5) (HTS-Codes Supplement No. 4 to Part 746), §§ 764.2(a), 764.2(e)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
Under 50
Mitigating circumstances
Full cooperation; compliance programme subsequently expanded with screening, an approval process and additional export control training
Published
24 Aug 2026

Original amount 1,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

14 Aug 2026 Plexon, Inc.Plexon: brain research recording systems to listed Chinese military medical academy – 1.7 million USD suspended USAExport control and dual-use goods €1.47m

The neurotechnology company from Dallas, described by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS, the export control agency of the US Department of Commerce) as small, delivered neural data acquisition systems (“OmniPlex”) and accessories worth around 179,000 USD on eight occasions in 2022/23 via its Asian distributor to the Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences, which has been on the Entity List (the US export control list of restricted parties) since December 2021. The penalty of 1.7 million USD is suspended for five years and then waived, provided that Plexon submits an external audit of its export compliance programme on time and commits no further violations; a five-year denial of export privileges is likewise suspended, and Plexon must also provide export control training.

What organisations can take from it

Screen orders placed via distributors against the Entity List before production – research equipment can also end up with listed military institutions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Entity List screening for orders via distribution partners

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Administration Regulations, 15 C.F.R. § 764.2(a), § 744.11
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Healthcare
Mitigating circumstances
Penalty and denial of export privileges fully suspended for five years, conditional on an external export control audit.
Published
14 Aug 2026

Original amount 1,700,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

12 Aug 2026 Rice Lake Weighing Systems, Inc.Scale manufacturer Rice Lake liable for Italian subsidiary's indirect exports to Iran USABreaches of sanctions and embargoes €52,632

In eight instances in 2019–2021, the Italian subsidiary Dini Argeo supplied weighing equipment worth around 121,500 USD to a trader in the UAE, although it knew that the goods would be passed on to a former direct Iranian customer. The parent company had passed on the Iran ban only by an English-language e-mail without explanation; the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) considered it a non-egregious, voluntarily self-disclosed case.

What organisations can take from it

Implement sanctions requirements at foreign subsidiaries in an understandable way, in the local language and with training for all relevant employees – indirect supplies via traders are also prohibited.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sanctions training for foreign subsidiaries, indirect supplies via third countries

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, § 560.215 (Auslandstöchter von US-Personen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
no
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary self-disclosure, immediate internal investigation, low significance for turnover, no prior violations, cooperation; subsequent training of the subsidiary's employees and screening of traders
Published
12 Aug 2026

Original amount 60,764 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

11 Aug 2026 Citibank, N.A., London BranchOFSI imposes 4.7 million GBP on Citibank London over Russia payments United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €5.54m

Mainly between February and November 2022, the London branch processed 970 payments totalling around 19.7 million GBP that breached Russia and anti-corruption sanctions. The causes were overloaded alert handling after the wave of designations, delayed escalation and human error; the bank voluntarily disclosed most of the breaches and received a 20% reduction from HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI).

What organisations can take from it

During waves of designations, alert handling needs additional trained capacity – backlogs and wrong decisions in screening are themselves sanctions breaches.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling sanctions alerts, escalation and freezing

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations 2021; s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Predominantly voluntary disclosure and cooperation (20% reduction); exceptional burden caused by the 2022 sanctions packages taken into account
Published
2 Sep 2026

Original amount 4,732,830.58 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

11 Aug 2026 Volga-Dnepr Airlines LLCFederal Court: cargo airline Volga-Dnepr remains on Canadian sanctions list CanadaBreaches of sanctions and embargoes Order

The Russian cargo airline had been added to the list of the Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations in April 2023; the Minister of Foreign Affairs rejected the application for delisting. The Federal Court (2026 FC 1048) dismissed the application for judicial review: the Minister had not exercised her broad discretion unreasonably, and there was no procedural error.

What organisations can take from it

Listed logistics partners often remain listed for years – anyone buying air freight must continuously screen carriers and parent companies against sanctions lists.

Relevance to training and awareness

Listings of transport service providers in partner screening

Authority / court
Federal Court (2026 FC 1048); Minister of Foreign Affairs
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Special Economic Measures Act; Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations, SOR/2014-58, ss. 2(a), 8
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

5 Aug 2026 Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. und Everlight Americas, Inc.Everlight: 5.15 million USD – Chinese LEDs declared as Taiwanese via Taiwan USACustoms €4.46m

The Taiwanese LED manufacturer and its Texas subsidiary allegedly transshipped LEDs made in China via Taiwan from 2018 to 2022 and declared them to US customs as being of Taiwanese origin in order to avoid Section 301 tariffs (US punitive tariffs on Chinese goods); in addition, Chinese and Taiwanese chips were not kept separate in production until 2025. The settlement of 5.15 million USD resolves a whistleblower lawsuit brought by a former employee, who receives around 876,000 USD.

What organisations can take from it

Where goods are routed through third countries, document their origin by manufacturing step – repackaging in Taiwan does not turn Chinese goods into Taiwanese ones.

Relevance to training and awareness

Rules of origin and origin of goods when transshipping via third countries

Authority / court
U.S. Attorney’s Office District of Maryland (Department of Justice) mit U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Customs
Legal basis
False Claims Act; Tariff Act of 1930 (Vergleich; Haftung nicht festgestellt)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Published
5 Aug 2026

Original amount 5,150,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

4 Aug 2026 BAE Systems, Inc.DDTC: USD 36 million against BAE Systems for ITAR violations, including a China link USAExport control and dual-use goods €31.3m

The DDTC settled with BAE Systems, Inc. for a civil penalty of USD 36 million. The allegations concerned unauthorised exports and retransfers of defence articles to several countries, in one case to the People's Republic of China, the unauthorised furnishing of defence services and breaches of authorisation provisos. USD 18 million is suspended for approved compliance measures and USD 18 million is payable in three instalments; the agreement requires, among other things, an external compliance audit. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

What organisations can take from it

Retransfers by recipients must be controlled contractually and organisationally just as strictly as one's own exports.

Relevance to training and awareness

ITAR compliance: retransfers, defence services and authorisation provisos

Authority / court
U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Arms Export Control Act § 38 (22 U.S.C. § 2778); ITAR, 22 C.F.R. Parts 120–130, insbesondere Part 127 und § 128.11
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Defence and security
Mitigating circumstances
The company reported the matters in voluntary disclosures and in response to a disclosure directed by the DDTC, and cooperated with the review.

Original amount 36,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

30 Jul 2026 Airbus Operations LimitedAirbus Operations pays 6.4 million GBP for export control breaches in technology transfer United KingdomExport control and dual-use goods €7.48m

Over an extended period before November 2022, Airbus Operations Ltd breached the Export Control Order 2008: transfers of controlled technology under three open general export licences (OGEL) were not correctly documented, required registers were missing, and one individual licence was not complied with. The case came to light through voluntary disclosure and was concluded by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) by way of a compound settlement (date of publication).

What organisations can take from it

Technology transfers by e-mail or data room are also exports – conditions, registers and records of general licences must be put into practice day to day.

Relevance to training and awareness

Licence conditions and record-keeping obligations in technology transfer

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) / Export Control Joint Unit
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Control Order 2008, Art. 29(2) und 29(3) (Auflagen und Register bei OGELs) sowie Auflage einer SIEL; Straftaten nach Art. 38(1)(a) und (b); Compound Settlement durch HMRC
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure, full cooperation, remedial measures
Published
30 Jul 2026

Original amount 6,409,388 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

15 Jul 2026 New York Packaging II LLC (Redi-Bag USA)Redi-Bag USA: 7.3 million USD – “Made in China” marking on carrier bags concealed USACustoms €6.4m

The packaging supplier allegedly imported plastic carrier bags made in China via Hong Kong and declared them as goods from Hong Kong in order to evade anti-dumping duties of up to 77.57%. According to the US Department of Justice (DOJ), the company had employees cover up “Made in China” markings, concealed the origin from its customs broker and cancelled orders that were due to be inspected; the settlement of 7.3 million USD (a joint payment with a further settling party) resolves a whistleblower lawsuit.

What organisations can take from it

Never instruct staff to conceal origin markings – doing so turns a tariff issue into deliberate customs fraud; give employees a reporting channel for such instructions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Origin declarations and handling of origin markings in goods receipt

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, und U.S. Attorney’s Office District of New Jersey
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Customs
Legal basis
False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 ff. (Vergleich; Haftung nicht festgestellt)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
15 Jul 2026

Original amount 7,300,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

29 Jun 2026 Petrofac Facilities Management LimitedPetrofac Facilities Management: £569,157 settlement over Russia sanctions breaches United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €660,160

The company paid HMRC a compound settlement of £569,157.07 for alleged breaches of the Russia sanctions. According to HMRC, while withdrawing from Russia in 2022/2023 it allegedly made sanctioned industrial goods available on two occasions to a person connected with Russia or for use in Russia, and provided related technical assistance. According to HMRC, this is the first time it has publicly named the company behind such a settlement.

What organisations can take from it

Even when withdrawing from a sanctioned market, the prohibitions on making goods available and on technical assistance apply in full.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sanctions screening of goods supplied and technical assistance when exiting a market

Authority / court
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Reg. 46Y(2)(c) und Reg. 46Z(1)(b) Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure and full cooperation with HMRC.
Published
29 Jun 2026

Original amount 569,157.07 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

16 Jun 2026 Robert Bosch GmbHBosch pays 36 million USD for sensor supplies to Huawei USAExport control and dual-use goods €31.2m

Between September 2020 and September 2024, Bosch exported MEMS sensors and vehicle software worth around 72.4 million USD from outside the US without a licence to Huawei and affiliated companies on the Entity List (Foreign Direct Product Rule). Bosch voluntarily disclosed the violations; around 3.6 million USD of the penalty imposed by the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is credited against a disgorgement agreed with the DOJ.

What organisations can take from it

Even products manufactured outside the US can be subject to US export controls via US technology – supplies to Entity List customers need their own review.

Relevance to training and awareness

US export law for foreign-made products (Foreign Direct Product Rule)

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Administration Regulations (Foreign Direct Product Rule, Entity List)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Automotive
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation
Published
17 Jun 2026

Original amount 36,184,680 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

1 Jun 2026 FTI Consulting, Inc.OFAC: USD 1.05 million settlement with FTI Consulting over prohibited extension of credit to a Russian state-owned bank USABreaches of sanctions and embargoes €901,597

Consulting firm FTI Consulting, Inc. of Washington, D.C. is paying USD 1,050,000 under a settlement with OFAC for apparent violations of the Russia financial sector sanctions. According to OFAC's findings, between April 2019 and May 2021 FTI indirectly extended prohibited debt on six occasions to a Russian state-owned bank subject to Directive 1 under Executive Order 13662: invoices remained unpaid beyond the permitted 14 days or were paid long afterwards while FTI continued to provide services. OFAC treated the apparent violations as non-egregious and not voluntarily self-disclosed; the base penalty was USD 525,000. The settlement amount is above the base penalty; OFAC cited in particular the anticipated impact on future compliance by similarly situated firms. Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), enforcement release "FTI Consulting, Inc., a Global Business Advisory Firm, Settles with OFAC for $1,050,000 Related to Apparent Violations of Dealing in Prohibited Debt of Sanctioned Russian Bank", 1 June 2026, https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/935651/download?inline; summarised in our own words.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Ukraine-/Russia-Related Sanctions Regulations, 31 C.F.R. §§ 589.202, 589.213 i. V. m. Directive 1 zu E.O. 13662 (sechs mutmaßliche Verstöße); Vergleich nach den Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines, 31 C.F.R. part 501, app. A
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Published
1 Jun 2026

Original amount 1,050,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

26 May 2026 Sabre Global Technologies LimitedSabre subsidiary accepted payments from designated Ural Airlines United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €1.16m

The provider of a travel booking system continued to provide services to Ural Airlines, designated in May 2022, requested payments of around 906,600 USD and, after the funds were frozen by the bank, looked for alternative payment routes, which HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) regarded as circumvention. A lack of escalation during a change of roles, vacant leadership positions in legal and compliance, policies focused on US law and screening that did not flag the designation all contributed. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2024, the company had around 150 employees.

What organisations can take from it

If an existing customer is designated, escalate this immediately; looking for alternative payment routes after the bank has frozen funds is itself a breach.

Relevance to training and awareness

Responding to new designations of existing customers, prohibition of circumvention

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, regs. 13, 14, 19
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Employees
50 to 249
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure (31 October 2022) and full cooperation; settlement under the new settlement procedure
Published
17 Jun 2026

Original amount 1,000,920.59 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

20 May 2026 Farjess Inc. und Royal Canadian Steel Inc.Canadian steel companies pay 19 million USD – steel from Asia and Europe declared as Canadian USACustoms €16.4m

Two Canadian steel companies allegedly declared flat-rolled steel from China, Indonesia, Italy, Turkey and Vietnam to US customs as being of Canadian or US origin from May 2019 to January 2025. The settlement of 19 million USD (a joint payment with a further settling party) resolves the lawsuit of a customs broker, who receives around 3.61 million USD.

What organisations can take from it

Base origin declarations in cross-border trade on mill certificates – and take note that your own customs broker is often the first to spot inconsistencies.

Relevance to training and awareness

Proof of origin in steel trading

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, und U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Michigan
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Customs
Legal basis
False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 ff. (Vergleich; Haftung nicht festgestellt)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Steel and metals
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
20 May 2026

Original amount 19,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

18 May 2026 Adani Enterprises LimitedAdani Enterprises pays 275 million USD over Iranian liquefied petroleum gas USABreaches of sanctions and embargoes €236.1m

From November 2023 to June 2025, the Indian conglomerate bought allegedly Omani and Iraqi liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) via a trader in Dubai which in fact originated from Iran; 32 payments totalling around 192 million USD were routed through US banks. The US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) assessed the violations as egregious and not voluntarily self-disclosed; Adani had recklessly ignored numerous warning signs (AIS manipulation by the tankers, implausible loading ports, conspicuous price discounts, irregularities in the certificates of origin).

What organisations can take from it

Companies that source commodities below market price via intermediaries must actively check origin, vessel movements and documents – mere name screening against sanctions lists is not enough.

Relevance to training and awareness

Warning signs in commodity and shipping transactions (origin, AIS gaps, price discounts)

Authority / court
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations (31 C.F.R. part 560); IEEPA
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Mitigating circumstances
Remedial measures after discovery and cooperation with OFAC
Published
18 May 2026

Original amount 275,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

12 May 2026 Perfectus Aluminum Inc., Perfectus Aluminum Acquisitions LLC und vier verbundene LagergesellschaftenPerfectus Aluminum: 549.5 million USD – aluminium extrusions imported as sham pallets USACustoms €468.1m

From July 2011 to June 2014, the companies imported more than 2.2 million Chinese aluminium extrusions that had merely been spot-welded into “pallets”, and declared them as finished goods not subject to anti-dumping and countervailing duties – there were never any buyers for the pallets. A jury had already convicted the companies in 2021 of, among other things, conspiracy to defraud the United States; the civil settlement of 549.5 million USD resolves several whistleblower lawsuits.

What organisations can take from it

Do not use minimal processing to declare goods as finished products outside the scope of anti-dumping duties – that is duty evasion; classify goods according to what they actually are.

Relevance to training and awareness

Tariff classification and evasion of anti-dumping duties

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, und U.S. Attorney’s Office Central District of California
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Customs
Legal basis
False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 ff. (zivilrechtlicher Vergleich)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Steel and metals
Culpability
intentional
Published
12 May 2026

Original amount 549,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

30 Apr 2026 Deutsche Bank AG London BranchOFSI: GBP 165,000 settlement penalty for Deutsche Bank AG London Branch over payments to an app developer United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €190,476

On 30 April 2026 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 165,000 on the London branch of Deutsche Bank AG by way of settlement. According to OFSI's findings, in June and July 2022 the branch processed two payments totalling GBP 635,618.75 for a customer to a Russian app developer owned by a designated entity. According to OFSI, its screening provider's list did not contain ownership information on the designated entity, so the beneficiary was not identified. The bank had voluntarily disclosed the payments on 20 September 2022. After a notice of intent of 12 September 2025, which OFSI upheld on 2 December 2025, the bank requested a ministerial review on 23 January 2026; the proceedings ended in settlement. The publication does not state the amount originally proposed. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of Monetary Penalty – Deutsche Bank AG London Branch (“DBLB”)", 19 May 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-deutsche-bank-ag-london-branch-dblb. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 12; Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Published
19 May 2026

Original amount 165,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

17 Apr 2026 General Electric CompanyDDTC: USD 36 million against General Electric for technical data exports to China USAExport control and dual-use goods €30.5m

The DDTC settled with General Electric Company for a civil penalty of USD 36 million for ITAR violations: unauthorised exports of technical data to the People's Republic of China, breaches of authorisation provisos, unauthorised exports of defence articles and failure to report material changes to its ITAR registration. USD 18 million is suspended for approved compliance measures and USD 18 million is payable in three instalments. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

What organisations can take from it

Changes to one's own ITAR registration must also be reported and belong in the compliance calendar.

Relevance to training and awareness

ITAR registration and control of technical data with a China link

Authority / court
U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Arms Export Control Act § 38 (22 U.S.C. § 2778); ITAR, 22 C.F.R. Parts 120–130, insbesondere Part 127 und § 128.11
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Defence and security
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
The allegations are based on facts that the company itself disclosed to the DDTC.

Original amount 36,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

13 Apr 2026 Coastal PVA Technology, Inc.Coastal PVA: 1.7 million USD (suspended) for brushes sold to SMIC – without an export compliance programme USAExport control and dual-use goods €1.45m

The Californian manufacturer of PVA brushes for wafer cleaning sold goods worth around 400,000 USD on 18 occasions between 2021 and 2024 via two Chinese distributors to SMIC Beijing and SMIC North, both on the Entity List (the US export control list of restricted parties). The company had no formal export compliance rules; the penalty of 1.7 million USD is suspended for one year owing to limited ability to pay and will be waived if training and an internal audit are completed on time.

What organisations can take from it

Obtain a licence even for unlisted everyday goods (EAR99) when the end customer is on the Entity List – without end-customer screening, routing sales through distributors does not help.

Relevance to training and awareness

Export controls for EAR99 goods and deliveries via distributors

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods
Legal basis
Export Administration Regulations, 15 C.F.R. § 764.2(a), § 744.11
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Payment suspended owing to demonstrated limited ability to pay; deliveries stopped after notification by BIS (Bureau of Industry and Security).
Published
14 Apr 2026

Original amount 1,700,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

19 Mar 2026 Apple Distribution International LimitedOFSI: GBP 390,000 settlement penalty for Apple Distribution International over payments to an app developer United KingdomBreaches of sanctions and embargoes €451,452

On 19 March 2026 OFSI imposed a monetary penalty of GBP 390,000 on Ireland-based Apple Distribution International Limited by way of settlement. According to OFSI's findings, the company, which pays out revenues to software developers on an app marketplace, instructed two payments totalling GBP 635,618.75 in June and July 2022 from a UK bank account to a Russian app developer owned by a designated entity, and did not cancel the instructions. OFSI identified reliance on developers' self-declarations and on third-party data, among other things, as causes. The company had voluntarily disclosed the payments on 4 October 2022. The settlement followed a notice of intent of 11 November 2025 and was reached under the settlement process introduced in February 2026; OFSI made no findings against the parent company. Source: Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), HM Treasury, "Imposition of monetary penalty: Apple Distribution International Limited", 30 March 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/imposition-of-monetary-penalty-apple-distribution-international-limited. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 (https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/).

Authority / court
HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)
Area of law
Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
Legal basis
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, reg. 12; Geldbuße nach s. 146 Policing and Crime Act 2017 (Settlement)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Published
30 Mar 2026

Original amount 390,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Load 20 more of 83

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial