S&P Global fined $79K over alleged 2016-17 dealings with sanctioned Rosneft
By 
Kyle Brasseur2022-04-04T11:54:00
Financial analytics provider S&P Global agreed to pay $78,750 as part of a settlement with the Office of Foreign Assets Control regarding alleged dealings with sanctioned Russian state-owned oil company Rosneft in 2016 and 2017.
Related articles
-
News BriefRaiffeisen confirms OFAC probe into Russia, Ukraine business
Raiffeisen Bank International said it received a request for information from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control regarding its business activities related to Russia and Ukraine.
-
ArticleS&P Global fined $2.5M over conflict of interest lapses
Credit rating agency S&P Global Ratings agreed to pay $2.5 million and improve its compliance practices to settle allegations by the SEC that its marketing team pressured the ratings team concerning the rating of a particular mortgage-backed security transaction.
-
ArticleAdvice for navigating ‘fast and furious’ Russian sanctions landscape
To help sort through the gray area of evolving sanctions and export control restrictions against Russia, chief compliance officers should consider a handful of key best practices.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
ArticleFormer U.S. clothing business CEO faces 25 years for bribery in Honduras
The former CEO of a Georgia clothing business faces 25 years in prison for bribing Honduran officials to win $10 million in uniform contracts in Honduras, after being caught up in a Department of Justice Anticorruption Task Force.
-
News BriefDOJ sues Uber over alleged discrimination against disabled riders
The DOJ sued Uber Thursday, alleging it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by denying people with disabilities equal access to its services.
-
ArticleEU targets crypto, fintech firms in push to tackle money laundering
Europe’s banking regulator warns that weak compliance at fintech, regtech, and crypto firms may let money laundering and terrorist financing risks slip through. The EBA also found EU regulators’ approaches are often inconsistent and unclear.