Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/96850867/OFAC-ING
Timestamp: 2015-06-03 12:26:15
Document Index: 148110932

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 501', 'art 501', 'art 515', 'art 537', 'art 538', 'art 550', 'art 560']

P. 1OFAC INGOFAC INGRatings: (0)|Views: 14,321|Likes: 0Published by corruptioncurrentsMore info:Categories:Types, Government & Politics, Public NoticesPublished by: corruptioncurrents on Jun 12, 2012Copyright:Attribution Non-commercialAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttps://www.scribd.com/doc/96850867/OFAC-ING06/12/2012pdftextoriginal ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION FOR JUNE 12, 2012Information concerning the civil penalties process is discussed in OFAC regulations governingthe various sanctions programs and in 31 CFR part 501. On November 9, 2009, OFACpublished as Appendix A to part 501 new Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines.
74Fed. Reg. 57,593 (Nov. 9, 2009). The Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines, as well asrecent final civil penalties and enforcement information, can be found on OFAC’s Web site athttp://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/CivPen/Pages/civpen-index2.aspx.ENTITIES – 31 CFR 501.805(d)(1)(i)
ING Bank N.V. Settles Potential Liability for Apparent Violations of Multiple SanctionsPrograms:
ING Bank N.V. (“ING”) has agreed to settle potential civil liability for apparentviolations of: the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (“CACR”), 31 C.F.R. part 515; the BurmeseSanctions Regulations (“BSR”), 31 C.F.R. part 537; the Sudanese Sanctions Regulations(“SSR”), 31 C.F.R. part 538; the now-repealed Libyan Sanctions Regulations (“LSR”), 31 C.F.R.part 550; and the Iranian Transactions Regulations (“ITR”), 31 C.F.R. part 560. ING’ssettlement with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) is part of a global settlementamong ING, OFAC, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the New York County DistrictAttorney’s Office. The bank agreed to settle with OFAC the apparent violations of OFACregulations, which OFAC determined were egregious, for $619,000,000, with the obligationdeemed satisfied by a payment of $619,000,000 to the Department of Justice and the New York County District Attorney’s Office.
ING processed 20,452 wire transfers, trade finance transactions, or travelers checks totalingapproximately $1,654,657,318 between October 22, 2002, and July 6, 2007, involving Cuba inapparent violation of the CACR. The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was$636,450,000. ING processed 41 wire transfers and trade finance transactions totalingapproximately $15,469,938 between December 26, 2003, and September 6, 2007, in apparentviolation of the BSR. The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $19,919,545.ING processed 44 wire transfers and trade finance transactions totaling approximately$1,976,483 between January 14, 2004, and December 11, 2006, in apparent violation of the SSR.The total base penalty for this set of apparent violations was $6,531,899. ING processed threewire transfers totaling approximately $26,803 between January 13, 2004, and April 27, 2004,involving the Government of Libya or Libyan persons in apparent violation of the now-repealedLSR. The total base penalty for these apparent violations was $375,000. On or about Februaryto March, 2004 and on October 27, 2004, ING processed two trade finance transactions in theaggregate amount of $1,358,000, in apparent violation of the ITR. The total base penalty forthese apparent violations was $2,716,000.The above-referenced apparent violations involved ING’s commercial banking offices in TheNetherlands, Belgium, France, Curacao, and Cuba, and did not involve ING’s insurance orbanking operations in the United States. ING voluntarily self-disclosed all of these apparentviolations under the terms of OFAC’s Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines (“theGuidelines”) except for the February to March, 2004, apparent violation of the ITR, which INGdid not voluntarily self-disclose. The statutory maximum penalty in this case was
Similar to OFAC INGTreasury INGcorruptioncurrentsFiled Court DocumentscorruptioncurrentsSecond Amended Complaint 6 11 12corruptioncurrentsAssurance Frameworkcorruptioncurrents
RecommendedTreasury INGcorruptioncurrentsFiled Court DocumentscorruptioncurrentsSecond Amended Complaint 6 11 12corruptioncurrentsAssurance Frameworkcorruptioncurrents