SANCTIONS
OFAC compliance risk: Transactions with certain entities designated in the GL are permissible. The GL does not state the individuals are unblocked. As a result, Syria can continue to pose sanctions risks due to the high concentration of Specially Designated Nationals in Syria. Absent OFAC authorization to transact with designated individuals or entities, U. S. persons( including U. S. entities) are prohibited from transacting with them( See FAQ2). 8
BIS compliance risk: The Bureau of Industry and Security( BIS) has oversight of U. S. export controls. GL 25 likely does not supersede the State Sponsor of Terrorism designation applied to Syria in 1979 or the Syrian Accountability Act 9 ban on military and certain dual-use items. In addition, the Caesar Act waiver granted by GL 25 is valid for only 180 days currently. Tracking legislation and prohibitions will be time-consuming for FIs. As a legal interpretation 10 explains: GL 25 does not impact the long-standing export control prohibition on exports or reexports of U. S.-regulated items to Syria. Almost all items( including commodities, software or technology) that are subject to the EAR require licensing to be exported or reexported to Syria, even on a temporary basis( with the exception of a narrow permission for news media found at Section 740.9( a)( 9) of the EAR). This includes basic items( i. e., so-called EAR99 items) as well as EAR-regulated laptops, tablets, cell phones, satellite phones and other common tools of the trade. Currently, U. S. export licensing is not required for exports or reexports to Syria of food items and EAR99 medicines. Unless and until the U. S. Department of Commerce takes steps to ease these export control restrictions, Syria will remain virtually off-limits as a destination for U. S.-regulated items.
Anti-boycott risk: The Bureau of Industry and Security website also contains information on anti-boycott compliance. 11 As of April 2025, Syria was still listed as a country participating in the Arab League boycott of Israel. 12 U. S. anti-boycott laws prohibit or penalize U. S. companies from complying with( or agreeing to comply with) the boycott. The receipt of boycott requests will likely trigger reporting requirements to various U. S. government entities like the Departments of Commerce( BIS) and / or Treasury( OFAC). FIs processing transactions for companies doing business in / with Syria must have anti-boycott controls in place.
FIs must understand what, if any, Syria-related transactions their vendors are willing to process
Vendor risk: FIs must understand what, if any, Syria-related transactions their vendors are willing to process. It is highly unlikely that an FI vendor will have a cohesive or uniform response to the provisions of GL 25. The FI must then determine if customization is available for vendors not willing to process transactions to / with Syria or if onboarding a new vendor is feasible. Ensuring the FI can articulate which transactions may be processed to its business units, its customers and its examiners is paramount to a successful Syria compliance program should the institution decide to transact in / with Syria.
Reputation risk: Even though the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is no longer examining for reputation risk, 13 adverse media remains a risk for FIs. As indicated above, while sanctions against Syria now permit U. S. FIs to process transactions ordinarily incident to travel including living expenses and purchases for personal use, travel advisories remain in effect. Denying transactions involving Syria may become a customer relations nightmare if a transaction is denied under bank policy while permissible under U. S. law. It only takes one customer with a social media following to create a media storm.
Operational risk: FIs using correspondent banks to process international wire transfers will need to consult their contacts to determine whether the correspondent is willing to process transactions involving Syria. As of the writing of this article, two major correspondent banks had not yet determined whether they would be processing transactions involving Syria and one correspondent bank has decided Syria will remain offlimits from a processing perspective. In addition to the policies of the corresponding banks, FIs may want to look into the policies of intermediary banks in the payment flow stream.
Record-keeping risk: Effective March 12, 2025,“ Except as otherwise provided, every person engaging in any transaction subject to the provisions of this chapter shall keep a full and accurate record of each such transaction engaged in, regardless of whether such transaction is effected pursuant to license or otherwise, and such record shall be available for examination for at least 10 years after the date of such transaction.” 14 As interpreted, any transaction under a general license, like GL 25, must now be retained for 10 years. Prior to this interim final rule, retention for OFAC-related activities was five years. Incorporating a 10-year retention may not be an easy undertaking for FIs.
94 acamstoday. org