Photo of Thad McBride

Thad McBride

Thad McBride advises public and private companies on the legal considerations essential to successful business operations in a global marketplace. He focuses his practice on counseling clients on compliance with U.S. export regulations (ITAR and EAR), economic sanctions and embargoes, import controls (CBP), and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). He also advises clients on anti-boycott controls, and assists companies with matters involving the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Thad supports international companies across a range of industries, including aviation, automotive, defense, energy, financial services, manufacturing, medical devices, oilfield services, professional services, research and development, retail, and technology. Beyond advising on day-to-day compliance matters, Thad regularly assists clients in investigations and enforcement actions brought by government agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the U.S. State Department Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the U.S. Commerce Department Bureau of Industry & Security (BIS), and the Securities & Exchange Commission.

Contact:Read more about Thad McBride
  • California company accused of sanctions violations challenges U.S. Treasury Department
  • Appeals court generally sides with government but remands because of arbitrary and capricious decision related to five alleged violations
  • Traditional interpretation of “inventory exception” is considered by Court

It is rare for companies to go to court to fight penalties imposed by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) for violations of U.S. sanctions. It is even more rare for a court to make any sort of finding against the agency.  Yet that is exactly what happened when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) recently considered OFAC’s imposition of penalties against Epsilon Electronics (Epsilon) for alleged violations of U.S. sanctions against Iran.Continue Reading Rare Court Case Sheds Light on U.S. Sanctions Enforcement

  • American Honda Finance Corporation pays for alleged violations of U.S. sanctions on Cuba
  • Violation committed by American Honda’s subsidiary in Canada
  • Penalty underscores breadth of U.S. jurisdiction, importance of compliance reviews

On June 8, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced a monetary penalty against American Honda Finance Corporation (American Honda) for alleged violations of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR), the primary regulations by which the United States imposes economic sanctions on Cuba.  A copy of the OFAC press release announcing the penalty is available here.Continue Reading The Long Arm of U.S. Sanctions: Penalty Imposed Against Canadian Subsidiary of U.S. Subsidiary of Japanese Company

  • Proposed legislation targets current gaps in U.S. financial crime law and enforcement
  • Bi-partisan Senate legislation would likely expand compliance obligations for banks and others in financial services industry
  • Proposed legislation is in line with U.S. and international efforts to fight terrorism and trafficking through economic sanctions and anti-money laundering (AML) rules

On May 25, 2017, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) introduced the “Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and Counterfeiting Act of 2017” (the “Act”).  The full text of the bill is available here.Continue Reading Proposed Legislation Would Combat Terrorist Financing, Money Laundering

I commented on an article published by PaymentsCompliance, a global leader in supporting the payments industry, on new legislation proposed in the U.S. Senate to target terrorism financing and money laundering. In the article, I point out that the proposed bill could create a greater compliance burden for banks and other financial entities and service providers. I also note that it is “nice to see a bipartisan effort to come up with something which most people would agree is a good measure.”
Continue Reading U.S. Bill Proposes Major AML Updates

I co-authored an article with Heather Smith, Associate General Counsel and Secretary at Lydall, Inc., outlining best practices for companies to undertake to ensure successful export transactions. The article also discusses the relevant regulations and agencies governing and enforcing export activities, such as the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). As we point out in the article, “U.S. export and sanctions laws have a broad reach and can cover conduct occurring entirely outside the United States and actions undertaken by non-US parties.” It is therefore important that any company involved in export transactions be aware of and establish “a robust culture of compliance, including tone from the top and clear policies and procedures, [as] an essential part of effective compliance.”
Continue Reading Export Compliance: Challenges and Best Practices

In an article published in the May/June 2017 issue of ABA Bank Compliance (a publication of the American Bankers Association), I provided insight on how banks can mitigate violations with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). In January 2017, OFAC announced a settlement in which a large Canadian bank agreed to pay more than…

  • Boeing announces deal to sell aircraft to Iran Aseman
  • The deal was apparently authorized by the U.S. Treasury Department, but Congressional foes fight to block it
  • If the deal goes through, further loosening of sanctions could follow

This story begins in July 2015, when the United States and its allies entered into a now-famous nuclear agreement with Iran which, among other things, paved the way for the United States to scale back economic sanctions on Iran – including those relating to commercial aircraft.  Executing that deal, in January 2016, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a new, favorable licensing policy for many transactions relating to the sale of commercial passenger aircraft and related parts and services to Iran.Continue Reading The Long Road: Boeing Continues the March into Iran

  • One of largest export and sanctions penalties ever imposed
  • Reminder of U.S. government’s broad jurisdiction over export and sanctions matters
  • Cooperation could have helped ease the penalty significantly

On March 7, 2017, Chinese telecommunications company, Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corp. (ZTE), signed on to three separate settlement agreements with the United States, agreeing to pay $892 million for violations of U.S. sanctions and export controls. Even more could be due if ZTE strays from the commitments it has made under the settlement agreements.  This is one of the largest penalties ever imposed by the U.S. government for export and sanctions violations.

It is impossible in the space of this blog article to provide a detailed summary of this matter.  In addition, while the details of the matter would make good copy, we think (hope!) that this is something of an isolated incident.  At the same time, we think several lessons can be derived from this action.Continue Reading Lessons from the Historic ZTE Enforcement Action

  • Canadian bank pays penalties for U.S. dollar transactions involving Cuba and Iran
  • Bank receives Finding of Violation – but no penalty – for violations by European subsidiaries
  • Disclosure and cooperation with OFAC mitigated penalties

Earlier this month, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced a $516,000 settlement with a large Canadian bank for allegedly violating U.S. sanctions against Iran and Cuba 167 times. OFAC also issued a separate finding of 3,491 additional violations by two of the bank’s European subsidiaries – an investment services company and another small bank.  Yet OFAC imposed no penalty for the subsidiaries’ alleged violations.Continue Reading OFAC Sanctions: No Entity Too Small or Too Far for Enforcement

  • Virtually all U.S. sanctions on Sudan lifted effective January 17, 2017
  • Sanctions could be permanently lifted in six months
  • There continue to be practical challenges to doing business in Sudan

In an unexpected development, on Friday, January 13, 2017, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced changes to lift U.S. sanctions on Sudan and thereby pave the way for trade with the North African country. The U.S. government is authorizing virtually “all prohibited transactions [involving Sudan], including transactions involving property in which the Government of Sudan has an interest.” Moreover, the United States is dangling the possibility that sanctions could be permanently lifted after six months. The amendments, announced by Executive Order, became effective on Tuesday, January 17.Continue Reading Freaky Friday – U.S. Unexpectedly Eases Sanctions on Sudan

From the Bass, Berry & Sims Blog Network
From the Bass, Berry & Sims Blog Network

Thought Leadership by our Attorneys.