Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
3SEP

FAQ 1224 sets Lukoil sale conditions

3 min read
16:40UTC

OFAC amended FAQ 1224 on 24 July, publishing for the first time what any licence to sell Lukoil International GmbH would have to satisfy: a clean break, blocked residual funds, and no up-front value to Lukoil.

← Back to Iran says it re-mined the cleared lanesJump to analysis ↓
ConflictAssessed
Key takeaway

Washington has published what a Lukoil International sale must look like: clean break, blocked funds, nothing up front.

OFAC, the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, amended FAQ 1224 on 24 July alongside general licence 131H, setting out for the first time what any future licence to effectuate a sale of Lukoil International GmbH would have to satisfy 1. Three conditions: complete severance of the sold business from Lukoil, any residual funds owed to Lukoil blocked in a US-jurisdiction account until sanctions lift, and no windfall to Lukoil, which rules out taking value up front through asset or share swaps. Lukoil International GmbH holds the Russian major's downstream assets outside Russia, and it has been unsellable since designation without Washington's permission.

Sanctions bureaus rarely publish licensing criteria in advance, because doing so surrenders discretion. Publishing them here reads as OFAC heading off structures it will not approve, and the no-windfall condition kills the share-swap architecture that has carried other Russian corporate exits. A blocked-funds requirement means a seller collects nothing until sanctions lift, which turns the negotiation from a price argument into a timing-risk argument and narrows the field of buyers who can live with it. Eight rollovers have marked time ; these conditions describe what would have to be true for the clock to stop.

The scope needs stating precisely, because it has been misreported. The GL 131 series authorises negotiation for Lukoil International GmbH and entities it owns 50% or more. It names neither ISAB, Priolo Gargallo nor Italy, and OFAC's GL 131G text was already confirmed to exclude the plant . Litasco sold ISAB to GOI Energy in May 2023, so the Sicilian refinery left the Lukoil perimeter three years ago.

ISAB's live sale runs from GOI Energy to Ludoil, gated by Italian Golden Power clearance, a Milan court seizure order and its own separate OFAC transaction licence, none of which is the GL 131 clock. ISAB Priolo runs 320,000 b/d. The 800kbd figure in circulation covers Lukoil International's entire European portfolio, and the separate Carlyle transaction covers Lukoil's other international assets while excluding ISAB.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Lukoil is one of Russia's biggest oil companies, and it has been under US sanctions since April 2026. It owns a business called Lukoil International GmbH, which holds its assets outside Russia. Because of the sanctions, nobody can buy that business without special permission from OFAC, the US Treasury's sanctions office. Every month since the sanctions began, OFAC has issued a temporary permission slip just to let people talk about a possible sale, without letting any sale actually happen. On 24 July, for the first time, OFAC also published the rules any real sale would eventually have to follow: the business must be fully cut off from Lukoil, any money owed to Lukoil must sit frozen in a US bank account until sanctions end, and Lukoil cannot get any value up front. This is a separate matter from ISAB, an Italian oil refinery some reporting has wrongly linked to these Lukoil rules. ISAB left Lukoil's ownership back in 2023, and its current sale is governed by entirely different Italian and US approvals.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Publishing licensing criteria in advance is unusual for a sanctions bureau because it surrenders case-by-case discretion; OFAC's decision to set out severance, blocked-funds and no-windfall terms in FAQ 1224 reads as heading off specific deal structures, share swaps and asset transfers that deliver value to Lukoil before sanctions lift, structures the bureau has evidently seen proposed or anticipates being proposed.

The blocked-funds condition converts the negotiation from a price question into a timing-risk question: a seller collects nothing until US sanctions on Lukoil itself lift, an event with no published date, which structurally excludes any buyer unwilling to carry that open-ended risk on its own balance sheet.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    Publishing the sale conditions gives future bidders for other sanctioned Russian assets a template for what OFAC will and will not accept, beyond this single transaction.

  • Consequence

    The blocked-funds condition rules out any buyer unwilling to hold Lukoil's residual proceeds in a frozen US account for an unknown period, narrowing the realistic buyer pool to parties with substantial balance-sheet patience.

Sources:US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control·US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control·US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control
Mentions:OFAC →Lukoil →Litasco →Golden Power →Rusal →US Treasury →Russia →Washington →Oleg Deripaska →GOI Energy →ISAB →Italy →Sicily →Ludoil Energy →FAQ 1224 →
First Reported In

Update #21 · Insurers shut Bab el-Mandeb to Saudi hulls

US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control· 31 Jul 2026
Read original →
Causes and effects
Caused by
ISAB is on the wrong sanctions clock
The published sale conditions follow the eighth GL 131 rollover this desk already logged.
Occurred 25 Jul 2026
Read story →
GL 131G's perimeter never included ISAB
The conditions build on GL 131G, already confirmed to exclude the plant from scope.
Occurred 19 Jul 2026
Read story →
This Event
FAQ 1224 sets Lukoil sale conditions
After eight monthly rollovers that told the market only that the clock keeps turning, there is now a published standard a bidder can price against.
Different Perspectives
China's foreign ministry
China's foreign ministry
Spokesman Lin Jian rejected Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's 25 August warning that Iranian oil buyers face an "economic D-Day", saying sanctions do not help and that Beijing would safeguard its own rights and interests. China's Iranian crude imports had already halved for unrelated reasons.
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Erbil authorities said 10 explosive-laden drones were shot down over the city on 1-2 September with no casualties. Iraq's government condemned the attacks without naming Iran as their source, and neither Washington nor Baghdad confirmed the IRGC's claim to have hit US bases there.
Bahrain Defence Force
Bahrain Defence Force
The General Command said air defences intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones on 1-2 September and called the use of such weapons against civilians and private property a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
KUNA reported a hostile Iranian drone struck a residential complex in Kuwait City on 2 September; Fire Force spokesman Brigadier General Mohammad Al-Gharib said losses were confined to property. Kuwait's foreign ministry called the attack a clear breach of its sovereignty.
Jordan's Armed Forces
Jordan's Armed Forces
Petra carried a statement that air defences intercepted eight missiles violating Jordanian airspace early on 31 August and 10 of 13 fired on 1 September. The statement named no target and did not address the IRGC's claim to have struck Camp Titin and killed US personnel.
CENTCOM
CENTCOM
CENTCOM's 1 September target list named IRGC air defence, radar, maritime and mine-laying sites in Iran but no tanker, after Axios reported anonymous officials describing a Trump-approved "tanker for tanker" drone policy. A CENTCOM spokesman declined to confirm the policy and referred questions to policymakers.