What the Graham Act changed

Until September 18, 2026, OFAC SDN List removal was OFAC’s decision. You petitioned under 31 C.F.R. § 501.807, showed that circumstances had changed, and waited. When OFAC stalled, a federal lawsuit often broke the logjam. That is how several former executives of Otkritie and Sberbank came off the list, including Otkritie’s former chairman Mikhail Zadornov. OFAC SDN List removal came down to argument and persistence.

The Act rewrites that logic. Section 102(d) provides that sanctions under any executive order issued to address the national emergency declared in EO 14024, “including with respect to all persons sanctioned under any such Executive Order,” “shall remain in effect.” That reaches EO 14024 and the orders built on it (EO 14066, EO 14068, EO 14071 and EO 14114), which account for most Russia-related designations since February 2022.

The Graham Act sharply limits how the sanctions it codifies can be lifted. Section 117 sets out a special procedure for terminating them: the President submits a statutory report to Congress, and Congress then gets a chance to review the decision. For lifting sanctions with respect to Russia, Section 117 ties this mechanism primarily to a peace settlement with Ukraine. Separately, Section 115 allows a presidential waiver if the statutory conditions are met.

One important question remains open, however: do these limits apply to removing each person previously placed on the SDN List under EO 14024, or does the Act primarily codify the sanctions program itself and the measures it provides for? There are serious arguments for a narrower reading. Sections 114, 115, and 117 speak of sanctions imposed or applied “under this title” or pursuant to the Act, while existing EO 14024 designations were originally made under a presidential executive order. Unless the Act expressly treats each such designation as a sanction imposed under the relevant section of the statute, one can argue that the ordinary procedure for reviewing an individual designation survives.

Against that reading stands the Act’s language preserving sanctions “with respect to all persons sanctioned,” which can be read to reach not only the program as a whole but also the individual persons already on the list.

Neither OFAC practice nor the federal courts have provided a definitive answer yet. In an individual matter, it is therefore prudent to work from the stricter reading as a conservative assumption, while preserving the arguments for the narrower reading for an administrative and, if necessary, judicial challenge. In practice, the first thing to pin down now is the exact legal basis for the designation, and whether the person falls into the categories of persons and sanctions the Graham Act covers.

Who can still seek delisting today

The Act did not reach every SDN. OFAC SDN List removal remains realistic in four situations.

• You are not a Russian person. The Act defines a Russian person as a Russian citizen or national, or an entity organized under Russian law or otherwise subject to the Russian government’s jurisdiction. Under the statute, a company incorporated in the UAE, Türkiye, or Hong Kong generally falls outside that definition, even if a Russian citizen owns it. Such companies and foreign nationals have a separate route, discussed below.
• You were designated under another program. The Ukraine-related sanctions (EO 13660 and its successors), the Belarus program, and cyber-related sanctions fall outside Section 102(d) of the Graham Act, because they rest on other national emergencies.

The sanctions under Ukraine-related EO 13660, EO 13661, EO 13662 and EO 13685 and under cyber-related EO 13694 (as amended by EO 13757) have been codified since August 2, 2017, by Section 222(a) of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). Delisting on those grounds is available under Section 222(b).

The President may terminate sanctions with respect to a specific person, including a Russian person, by notifying Congress of two things: that the person is no longer engaging in the activity that was the basis for the sanctions, or has taken significant, verifiable steps toward stopping it, and that the President has received reliable assurances that the person will not knowingly engage in sanctionable activity in the future. The decision is subject to congressional review under CAATSA Section 216, and Congress can block it. EO 14065 on the so-called DNR and LNR regions was issued in 2022 and is not part of this codification.

Put simply, a Russian citizen tagged [UKRAINE-EO13661] or [UKRAINE-EO13662] has a path to removal written into the statute: a change in his own conduct. For a person tagged [RUSSIA-EO14024], the Graham Act, at least for now, offers no such path: the conduct-based ground in Section 117(a)(1)(B) does not extend to Russian persons, and the remaining mechanisms depend on a peace agreement or a political decision by the administration.

If an entry carries both tags, each has to be removed under its own rules. A CAATSA delisting also does not protect against a new designation under Section 102(b) of the Graham Act if the person remains within its scope.

• Your designation was a mistake. If OFAC listed the wrong person or confused identifying data, the remedy is correcting an error, not terminating a sanction. In this situation, the Act does not stand in the way.
• The Act expires. Under Section 203, the Act terminates on September 18, 2031, five years after enactment, unless Congress extends it. The executive orders will remain, but OFAC will regain its discretion over them.

In every other case, for most Russians on the SDN List, the candid answer is that OFAC cannot remove you today even if it wanted to. What you can do is be ready when removal becomes available again.

Non-Russian companies and individuals: the presidential report route

For foreign companies and individuals who are not Russian persons, Section 117 sets two conditions. You are no longer engaged in the activity that led to the designation, and the President has received reliable assurances that you will not knowingly engage in sanctionable activity in the future. The President then reports to Congress.

Then comes the review. The termination cannot take effect for 30 days, or 60 days if the report goes to Congress between July 10 and September 7. During that window, Congress may enact a joint resolution of disapproval. However, the bar is high: only the majority or minority leaders may introduce one, and the Senate needs a three-fifths vote to take it up and to pass it.

In practice, OFAC SDN List removal for a non-Russian company is still achievable, but OFAC no longer has the last word. The petition to OFAC becomes the first step, because OFAC builds the record behind the President’s report. That petition now has to withstand congressional scrutiny. Proof that the company exited certain deals is not enough. What persuades is evidence that it changed how it operates: counterparty screening, supply-chain controls, ownership and management.

The assurances should be specific and verifiable, not general promises. And one more very important point: the report should state whether the termination is intended to bring about a significant change in US policy toward Russia. Therefore, the petition should look like an individual case, not a change of course.

Tell us about your company. We will assess whether your record can survive review under the new rules.

Russian persons: what to do before peace

For a Russian citizen or a Russian company, the Act leaves two exits. The first is a peace agreement with Ukraine, after which the President may submit a Section 117 report. The second is a national-interest waiver under Section 115, which requires a written presidential certification and a report to Congress. A waiver is a political decision, and an ordinary case should not be planned around one.

Still, sitting and waiting would be a mistake. When OFAC SDN List removal reopens for Russian persons, we expect those with a complete record to move first. That record is worth building now.

• Exits from positions and assets. The Act mandates sanctions on current leaders, board members and controlling shareholders of state-owned banks, and of companies in the defense, energy, and transportation sectors that support Russia’s armed forces. Stepping down matters for removal, and it also protects against being designated.
• Cutting ties with the state. The Act targets oligarchs who continue to benefit from an association with the Russian government. Terminated state contracts and divested stakes should be documented while the documents are still within reach.
• A position on the war. The Act also targets oligarchs who have “not demonstrated opposition” to the war. Whether to speak publicly is each person’s own decision, weighed against their safety and their family’s. We help assess the consequences. We do not push anyone toward that choice.

A record assembled three years from now will be weaker than one assembled today. Documents go missing, witnesses move away, companies change hands.

Protecting your time and your right to sue

Even when OFAC cannot remove you, a delisting petition is worth filing, for the following reasons:

• The limitations period. A suit against OFAC must be filed within six years. For persons designated in 2022, that window closes in 2028, while the Act runs until 2031. A denial of a petition by OFAC starts a new six-year limitations period.
• The fight over the statute. Litigation touching on Section 102(d) can be expected soon. Once the first rulings come down, it will be possible to evaluate the odds in a specific case. A denial of your petition by OFAC gives you the opportunity to protect your interests in court.
• Your place in line. A petition already on file, with the evidence in place, is likely to be reviewed before a new one.

Think separately about family members and partners. Section 102(b)(7) requires sanctions on anyone to whom a designated person transferred property after designation, or before it if the transfer was an attempt to evade sanctions. Moving assets into a relative’s name can now put that relative on the SDN list.

If your funds are blocked because of sanctions on a financial institution or on your counterparties, and you are not listed yourself, the path is different: an OFAC license or unblocking assets through litigation. And with a new designation round every 180 days, a preventive strategy of how to stay out of the sanctions list has to be developed and implemented in advance.

After the Graham Act, OFAC SDN List removal takes more than one filing. First, you work out why you were listed and build the record, then you keep your right to sue alive until the route opens.