To implement the embargo, the Treasury Department, in 1963, issued the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR), under the authority of the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917, as amended, which confers broad authority on the President to impose embargoes on foreign countries. The CACRs prohibit U.S. persons from engaging in any financial transactions with Cuban entities, including those related to travel and exports. In recent years, Congress has added other embargo measures—enacting the CDA of 1992 and the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (also known as the Helms-Burton Act). The CDA restricts U.S.-owned or -controlled firms in third countries from exporting to Cuba and authorizes humanitarian and telecommunications exports. The Helms-Burton Act codified the embargo in effect on March 1, 1996, and added other provisions related to the rights of U.S. citizens whose property has been confiscated by the Cuban government. In March 1998, the President announced (1) the restoration of direct charter flights between the United States and Cuba for authorized U.S. travelers, (2) a plan to streamline and expedite licensing procedures for medical exports, and (3) the reinstitution of family remittances up to $300 per quarter from persons in the United States to their families in Cuba. Subsequently, OFAC added the requirement that “fully hosted” travelers must, when requested, supply proof that costs associated with their travel to Cuba were paid for by a non-U.S. entity. We believe that OFAC’s decision to permit U.S.-licensed air carrier service providers to charter foreign aircraft that landed in a third country, changed flight numbers, and then flew on to Cuba independent of the U.S. carrier service provider was consistent with its legal authority. We also believe that the executive branch’s decisions to restore direct U.S. flights to Cuba of both persons and cargo and to further monitor fully hosted travel to Cuba were consistent with the existing law. No U.S. statute currently establishes overall restrictions on travel to Cuba. The restrictions on travel are regulatory and are set forth in the CACRs. These restrictions do not prohibit travel to Cuba itself but do preclude most U.S. persons from spending money on travel to Cuba. The primary purpose of the travel restrictions is to stop the flow of hard currency from the United States to Cuba. The CACRs allow limited categories of U.S. persons to spend money on travel to Cuba without seeking OFAC approval. These include (1) official government travelers; (2) journalists; and (3) once per year, persons traveling to visit close relatives in Cuba under circumstances of extreme humanitarian need. In addition, U.S. persons whose expenses are fully paid by a non-U.S. person, including a Cuban or the Cuban government, may also travel to Cuba without OFAC approval. Additional categories of U.S. persons may travel to Cuba if they obtain a specific license from OFAC to do so. Authorized travelers to Cuba may spend no more than $100 per day in Cuba for items directly related to travel. Travelers may also bring back to the United States a maximum of $100 worth of Cuban merchandise purchased for personal use, but only once every 6 consecutive months. These travelers may also pay for all transportation-related transactions involving travel to and from Cuba, but no more than $500 may be paid to Cuba in any 12-month period for fees imposed by Cuba. Prior to February 1996, the United States permitted authorized carrier service providers to arrange direct flights between the United States and Cuba. Following the shootdown of two “Brothers to the Rescue” aircraft on February 26, 1996, the President suspended all direct flights between the United States and Cuba. OFAC then notified authorized carrier service providers that they could arrange indirect flights provided that U.S. responsibility for such flights ended in the third country. Authorized travelers could travel to Cuba by changing flights in the third country and flying on to Cuba. Under this procedure, responsibility for the second leg of the flight had to be assumed by a non-U.S. tour sponsor using non-U.S. aircraft and flight crews. Moreover, at that time, the requirement to change flights meant a change of aircraft. According to OFAC, several problems arose regarding air carrier service to third countries. First, OFAC became aware that most air service between the third-country destinations and Cuba was provided by a Cuban airline. Since authorized travelers had to pay the airline for tickets, additional U.S. currency was provided to Cuba. Second, authorized travelers’ need to carry currency to meet expenses in third countries significantly complicated Customs’ outbound search in the United States for excess currency going to Cuba. Third, since all travelers to Cuba—both legal and illegal—were going through third countries, Customs had to deal with assertions by some travelers that their final destination was the third country and not Cuba. Thus, Customs could not act with certainty about how much U.S. currency each passenger could legitimately take. And finally, travelers’ need to change aircraft in the third country often resulted in substantial delays or overnight stays for passengers awaiting connecting flights, thereby necessitating the possession of additional funds. To address these problems, OFAC informed all carrier service providers by letter dated July 9, 1996, that they could permit authorized travelers to remain on board the non-U.S. aircraft for a continuing flight to Cuba from a third country, provided that the flight number was changed and the U.S. service provider’s responsibility for the second leg of the flight ended in the third country. We find OFAC’s July 9 change in procedure to be consistent with its authority under section 5(b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act, which conferred broad authority on the President and, by delegation to OFAC, to implement comprehensive embargoes against foreign countries. This change is consistent with section 102(h) of the Helms-Burton Act. Section 102(h) states that “the economic embargo of Cuba, as in effect on March 1, 1996, including all restrictions under part 515 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations, shall be in effect upon the enactment of this Act, and shall remain in effect, subject to section 204 of this Act.” Under 31 C.F.R. § 515.201, financial transactions with Cuba, which include travel expenses, are generally prohibited except as specifically authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury by regulations, licenses or otherwise. Section 204 requires a presidential determination that a transition government in Cuba is in power before the economic sanctions can be either suspended or terminated. The conference report accompanying the act explains that section 102(h) was not intended to prohibit executive branch agencies from amending existing regulations to tighten economic sanctions on Cuba or to otherwise implement Helms-Burton. According to OFAC, two of the principal purposes of the July 9 procedure were to afford greater U.S. control over flights and passengers, and to reduce currency transfers to Cuba resulting from authorized travelers flying from third countries to Cuba on a Cuban airline. In May 1998, the executive branch released its regulations for the resumption of direct passenger charter flights between Miami, Florida, and Havana, Cuba, effective June 15, 1998. Under the revised procedures, U.S.-licensed carrier service providers can arrange direct flights to Cuba, using either U.S. or non-U.S. aircraft and flight crews. The executive branch also restored direct humanitarian cargo flights between the United States and Cuba and imposed additional monitoring procedures on fully hosted travel to Cuba. Regarding the latter, it established a presumption that U.S. persons who travel to Cuba without authorization have engaged in prohibited travel-related transactions. Fully hosted travelers can rebut this presumption by giving federal enforcement agencies, upon request, relevant supporting documentation showing that they have not engaged in prohibited transactions. According to OFAC, restoration of direct flights between the United States and Cuba is likely to give U.S. enforcement agencies—primarily Customs and OFAC—greater control over U.S. persons and humanitarian cargo than they had on flights routed through third countries. Enhanced control also appears to reduce, to some extent, the potential for illegal transfers of currency into Cuba. We concur with OFAC’s position regarding the executive branch’s authority to restore direct flights. We also believe that it is within OFAC’s authority to strengthen the monitoring procedures on fully hosted travel to Cuba. Among other things, this restriction is intended to make it more difficult for travelers to spend money in Cuba. Since all these changes will assist Customs and OFAC in enforcing the embargo by providing greater control over travel to Cuba, they are consistent with the embargo as codified by Helms-Burton. A number of provisions in the 1996 Helms-Burton Act relate to U.S. property confiscated by the Cuban government. Title III of the Helms-Burton Act establishes a private right of action for U.S. persons or entities against others who knowingly and intentionally have trafficked in property confiscated by the Cuban government on or after January 1, 1959. Under title III, the term “traffics” includes a broad range of activities undertaken without the authorization of the U.S. national who holds a claim to the property. Title IV of the act authorizes the Secretary of State to deny a visa to, and the Attorney General to exclude from the United States, an alien that the Secretary determines has confiscated or trafficked in property owned by a U.S. national. For title IV sanctions to apply, the trafficking had to occur on or after March 12, 1996. After enactment of Helms-Burton, the State Department began an investigation of STET International, an Italian firm, which benefits from the use of ITT property confiscated in Cuba.