JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A, New York, NY ("JPMC") has agreed to remit
$88,300,000 to settle potential civil liability for apparent violations
of: the Cuban Assets Control Regulations ("CACR"), 31 C.F.R. part 515;
the Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferators Sanctions Regulations
("WMDPSR"), 31 C.F.R. part 544; Executive Order 13382, "Blocking
Property of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferators and Their
Supporters;" the Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations ("GTSR"), 31
C.F.R. part 594; the Iranian Transactions Regulations ("ITR"), 31 C.F.R.
part 560; the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations ("SSR"), 31 C.F.R. part
538; the Former Liberian Regime of Charles Taylor Sanctions Regulations
("FLRCTSR"), 31 C.F.R. part 593; and the Reporting, Procedures, and
Penalties Regulations ("RPPR"), 31 C.F.R. part 501, that occurred
between December 15, 2005, and March 1, 2011.
This settlement covers the following apparent violations of the
CACR, WMDPSR, and RPPR, which OFAC has determined were egregious:
JPMC processed 1,711 wire transfers totaling approximately $178.5
million between December 12, 2005, and March 31, 2006, involving Cuban
persons in apparent violation of the CACR. In November 2005, another
U.S. financial institution alerted JPMC that JPMC might be processing
wire transfers involving a Cuban national through one of its
correspondent accounts. After such notification, JPMC conducted an
investigation into the wire transfers it had processed through the
correspondent account. The results of this investigation were reported
to JPMC management and supervisory personnel, confirming that transfers
of funds in which Cuba or a Cuban national had an interest were being
made through the correspondent account at JPMC. Nevertheless, the bank
failed to take adequate steps to prevent further transfers. JPMC did
not voluntarily self-disclose these apparent violations of the CACR to
OFAC. As a result of these apparent violations, considerable economic
benefit was conferred to sanctioned persons. The base penalty for this
set of apparent violations was $111,215,000.
On December 22, 2009, in apparent violation of the WMDPSR, JPMC
made a trade loan valued at approximately $2.9 million to the bank
issuer of a letter of credit in which the underlying transaction
involved a vessel that had been identified as blocked pursuant to the
WMDPSR due to its affiliation with the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping
Lines ("IRISL"). Although JPMC supervisors and managers determined
that this trade loan was likely an apparent violation of the WMDPSR and,
in late December 2009, decided to submit a voluntary self-disclosure to
OFAC, JPMC did not mail its voluntary self-disclosure until March 2010,
three days prior to the date on which JPMC received repayment for the
loan without OFAC guidance or authorization. JPMC also failed to
respond promptly and completely to an OFAC administrative subpoena
seeking information on this transaction. OFAC determined that JPMC made
a voluntary self-disclosure of this apparent violation. The base
penalty for this apparent violation was $2,941,838.
The apparent violation of the RPPR occurred between November 8,
2010, and March 1, 2011. On October 13, 2010, OFAC issued JPMC an
administrative subpoena pursuant to section 501.602 of the RPPR
directing JPMC to provide certain specified documents related to a
specific wire transfer referencing "Khartoum." In response to this
subpoena and a subsequent communication, JPMC compliance management
failed to produce several responsive documents in JPMC's possession, and
repeatedly stated that JPMC had no additional responsive documents.
OFAC ultimately provided JPMC with a list of multiple responsive
documents that OFAC had reason to believe were in JPMC's possession
based on communications with a third-party financial institution. This
prompted JPMC to correct its prior statements that the bank possessed no
additional responsive documents and to produce more than 20 responsive
documents. JPMC did not voluntarily self-disclose the apparent
violation of the RPPR to OFAC. The base penalty for this apparent
violation was $250,000.
In reaching its determination that the above-referenced apparent
violations were egregious because of reckless acts or omissions by JPMC,
OFAC considered all of the information in its possession related to
these apparent violations, as well as the General Factors Affecting
Administrative Action set forth in OFAC's Economic Sanctions Enforcement
Guidelines. OFAC determined that JPMC is a very large, commercially
sophisticated financial institution, and that JPMC managers and
supervisors acted with knowledge of the conduct constituting the
apparent violations and recklessly failed to exercise a minimal degree
of caution or care with respect to JPMC's U.S. sanctions obligations.
This settlement also covers the following apparent violations, which OFAC determined were not egregious:
Apparent violations of the ITR, GTSR, SSR, FLRCTSR, WMDPSR, and
Executive Order 13382 arising out of its failure to appropriately block
or reject nine wire transfers between April 27, 2006 and November 28,
2008, which totaled $609,308. JPMC voluntarily self-disclosed five of
these apparent violations to OFAC.
Apparent violations of the WMDPSR and SSR in which JPMC advised and
confirmed a $2,707,432 letter of credit on April 24, 2009, in which the
underlying transaction involved a vessel identified by OFAC as blocked
due to its affiliation with IRISL, and a $79,308 letter of credit on
January 29, 2008, involving goods destined for Sudan. JPMC voluntarily
self-disclosed these apparent violations to OFAC.
An apparent violation of the ITR consisting of a May 24, 2006
transfer of 32,000 ounces of gold bullion valued at approximately
$20,560,000 to the benefit of a bank in Iran. JPMC did not voluntarily
self-disclose this matter to OFAC.
OFAC mitigated the total potential penalty based on JPMC's
substantial cooperation, including conducting an historical transaction
review at OFAC's request and entering into tolling agreements with OFAC,
and the fact that OFAC had not issued a Penalty Notice or Finding of
Violation against JPMC in the five years preceding the transactions at
issue. Mitigation was also extended because JPMC agreed to settle these
apparent violations.
Please visit the following
link for a PDF copy of this announcement.