Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
Iran Conflict 2026
1JUN

MOFCOM names five Chinese refineries under Blocking Rules

4 min read
08:32UTC

China's Ministry of Commerce identified the five refineries shielded from OFAC compliance under its 2 May Blocking Rules order: Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian), Shandong Shouguang Luqing, Shandong Jincheng, Hebei Xinhai Chemical, and Shandong Shengxing.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

The OFAC enforcement counterparty is now named at entity level; each new US designation lands in a clearer Chinese counter-frame.

MOFCOM, China's Ministry of Commerce, published on 2 May 2026 the five Chinese refineries protected under its Blocking Rules order: Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian), Shandong Shouguang Luqing, Shandong Jincheng, Hebei Xinhai Chemical, and Shandong Shengxing. 1 The activation of the 2021 Blocking Rules was already documented ; the public identification of the five protected entities is the new beat.

The Blocking Rules are China's 2021 statutory instrument allowing Chinese parties to defy extraterritorial foreign sanctions and recover damages through Chinese courts. The order forbids the named refineries from complying with OFAC's Iran sanctions regime, which had previously designated Hengli Petrochemical under sanction package SB0472 with a General Licence V wind-down . Hengli alone runs 400,000 barrels per day at Dalian, making it China's second-largest independent refinery; it is also the most exposed of the five to OFAC secondary-sanction action, which is why MOFCOM placed it at the top of the list.

The named list creates two operational facts. First, the protected refineries can now legally process Iranian crude under Chinese law without exposure to civil liability inside China for the same activity that creates US sanctions exposure. Second, the OFAC enforcement counterparty is now identified; any further US designations under the GL-W toll alert will hit named entities the Chinese state has explicitly placed under protection, raising the diplomatic cost of each new designation. The four other refineries, all Shandong or Hebei independents, sit further down the OFAC priority list and were probably named to spread the political cost of the carve-out beyond a single flagship plant.

The sequencing matters. MOFCOM published the names on the same Sunday Trump announced Project Freedom and Pakistan delivered the first US written reply . The Chinese counter-sanctions architecture is now visible at the entity level for the first time since the war began; the next OFAC tier of designations against named recipients, charity rails, embassies, or FX houses, will land in a clearer Chinese counter-frame than any previous round.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

China published the names of five oil refineries it is legally shielding from US sanctions. The refineries are among those the US Treasury has tried to penalise for buying Iranian oil, which is under US sanctions because of the Iran war. China's 2021 Blocking Rules bar Chinese companies from following US sanctions that Beijing has declared illegal. MOFCOM's published list names the five refineries specifically shielded, creating a direct conflict between Chinese law and OFAC's existing Hengli designation. It also creates a new legal right: any Chinese company that loses business because someone else obeyed US sanctions can now sue in Chinese courts for compensation.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

China's publication of the five named refineries reflects a structural dependency the Blocking Rules are designed to protect: Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) alone processes 400,000 bpd, a capacity that cannot be easily replaced with non-Iranian crude at current OPEC output levels. The four smaller Shandong refineries collectively represent approximately 200,000 bpd of additional Iranian crude processing capacity. Together they account for a meaningful share of China's independent refining sector.

The Blocking Rules activation also reflects a domestic political calculation. Chinese industrial ministries have lobbied for MOFCOM to protect refineries facing direct OFAC designation since the Hengli SB0472 action in April. Publishing the five names converts a regulatory dispute into a national-interest protection framing, giving MOFCOM cover to escalate if OFAC responds with additional designations.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    A publicly named Chinese Blocking Rules list creates a direct conflict of law that OFAC must address. If OFAC designates the five named refineries as blocked persons, it forces third-country banks and insurers to choose between US and Chinese legal obligations, fragmenting the dollar-based sanctions architecture.

    Medium term · 0.73
  • Risk

    Article 9's private right of action in Chinese courts creates litigation exposure for any Western shipping, banking, or insurance firm that has complied with OFAC designations against Hengli, even if that compliance occurred before the Blocking Rules were activated.

    Short term · 0.66
  • Consequence

    The five-refinery list is a floor, not a ceiling. If OFAC adds additional Chinese refinery designations, MOFCOM has the legal architecture to expand the named list without passing new legislation.

    Medium term · 0.79
First Reported In

Update #88 · 15,000 troops unsigned; Pakistan carries first reply

Geopolitechs / Business Today Malaysia· 4 May 2026
Read original
Causes and effects
This Event
MOFCOM names five Chinese refineries under Blocking Rules
The named-refinery list is the operational substance of an order whose activation was already known; the public identification of beneficiaries crystallises the China carve-out from US Iran sanctions.
Different Perspectives
Human rights monitors (Hengaw, Amnesty International, Iran HRM)
Human rights monitors (Hengaw, Amnesty International, Iran HRM)
Monitors documented a second death sentence for Zahra Tabari, 68, reported cemetery record deletions at Behesht-e Zahra, and a poll showing 81.5% of medical residents want to emigrate, against a background of 200+ confirmed executions since February. Iran's security courts operate at uninterrupted wartime tempo regardless of the diplomatic track.
Pakistan (mediator)
Pakistan (mediator)
Islamabad carried Trump's revised MOU demanding HEU destruction to Iranian negotiators, formally inheriting the role of sole active mediator after Oman's forced withdrawal. Pakistan lacks Oman's banking infrastructure for frozen-asset routing and carries its own regional stakes, making it a less structurally neutral broker.
Kuwait
Kuwait
Kuwait intercepted Iranian missiles and drones for a second time in days on 1 June, with air-raid sirens sounding nationwide, after invoking Article 51 self-defence on 28 May following the Ali Al Salem ballistic-missile strike. The repeated interceptions test whether Kuwait's domestic politics can sustain hosting US forces as a de facto co-belligerent.
China (PRC)
China (PRC)
Beijing sent scholars to Shangri-La rather than its defence minister and addressed Taiwan without mentioning Iran, maintaining bilateral energy corridor protection with Tehran while refusing diplomatic exposure at multilateral forums. Trump barred China as an HEU custodian on 27 May, removing Beijing from the deal architecture while China continues supplying DPI hardware that caps Iran's internet.
Lloyd's of London / war-risk underwriters
Lloyd's of London / war-risk underwriters
Lloyd's held its Hormuz war-risk designation at $10-14 million per voyage while Brent recovered to $93.91, maintaining the structural divergence from futures pricing that has persisted since late May. Underwriters require a UN Security Council resolution or government certification letter, not diplomatic optimism.
Gulf Cooperation Council states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar)
Gulf Cooperation Council states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar)
Five Gulf states wrote to the IMO on 21 May rejecting Iran's PGSA transit authority over international waters; Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not confirmed participation in the European Hormuz mission. The GCC is navigating between US security guarantees and exposure to Iranian fire, with no Gulf state formally co-belligerent except Kuwait.