Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Changes from June 28, 2022 to December 15, 2022

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel
~~June 28~~December 15, 2022 , 2022
and Remittances
Mark P. Sullivan
Restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba have constituted a key and often contentious Restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba have constituted a key and often contentious
Specialist in Latin Specialist in Latin
component in U.S. efforts to isolate Cuba’s communist government since the early 1960s. Over component in U.S. efforts to isolate Cuba’s communist government since the early 1960s. Over
American Affairs American Affairs
the years, there have been divergent views in Congress, and at times congressional action, the years, there have been divergent views in Congress, and at times congressional action,

regarding such restrictions. The restrictions are largely part of the Cuban Assets Control regarding such restrictions. The restrictions are largely part of the Cuban Assets Control
Regulations (CACR), the overall embargo regulations administered by the Department of the Regulations (CACR), the overall embargo regulations administered by the Department of the

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), as well as certain parts of the Export Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), as well as certain parts of the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR), administered by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security. Administration Regulations (EAR), administered by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security.
Various Administrations have eased and tightened these restrictions over the years through amendments as U.S. policy Various Administrations have eased and tightened these restrictions over the years through amendments as U.S. policy
toward Cuba has changed. toward Cuba has changed.
The Obama Administration significantly eased restrictions on travel and remittances. In 2009, the Administration lifted all The Obama Administration significantly eased restrictions on travel and remittances. In 2009, the Administration lifted all
restrictions on familyrestrictions on family travel and remittancestravel and remittances. In 2011, it eased restrictions on other types of travel, including people-to-people In 2011, it eased restrictions on other types of travel, including people-to-people
educational travel, and allowed any U.S. person to send remittances to individuals in Cuba. In 2015 and 2016, the educational travel, and allowed any U.S. person to send remittances to individuals in Cuba. In 2015 and 2016, the
Administration eased restrictions on nonfamily travel and remittances, with the Treasury Department amending the CACR Administration eased restrictions on nonfamily travel and remittances, with the Treasury Department amending the CACR
five times. The Department of Commerce also amended the EAR, issuing license exceptions authorizing temporary sojourn five times. The Department of Commerce also amended the EAR, issuing license exceptions authorizing temporary sojourn
passenger vessels to Cuba; cruise ship travel to Cuba began in 2016. The Administration also negotiated a bilateral passenger vessels to Cuba; cruise ship travel to Cuba began in 2016. The Administration also negotiated a bilateral
arrangement to permit regularly scheduled air flights to Cuba that began in 2016. arrangement to permit regularly scheduled air flights to Cuba that began in 2016.
The Trump Administration significantly increased restrictions on travel and remittances. In 2017, Treasury prohibited direct The Trump Administration significantly increased restrictions on travel and remittances. In 2017, Treasury prohibited direct
transactions with entities on a State Department “Cuba restricted list” that were identified as affiliated with the Cuban transactions with entities on a State Department “Cuba restricted list” that were identified as affiliated with the Cuban
military, intelligence, or security services; such entities include certain Cuban hotels, tourist agencies, marinas, and stores. In military, intelligence, or security services; such entities include certain Cuban hotels, tourist agencies, marinas, and stores. In
2019, the Administration prohibited people-to-people educational travel, terminated cruise ship travel, prohibited air travel to 2019, the Administration prohibited people-to-people educational travel, terminated cruise ship travel, prohibited air travel to
Cuban cities other than Havana, limited the amount and frequency of family remittances, and eliminated donative remittances Cuban cities other than Havana, limited the amount and frequency of family remittances, and eliminated donative remittances
to Cuban nationals. In 2020, Treasury prohibited U.S. travelers from staying at more than 400 accommodations on another to Cuban nationals. In 2020, Treasury prohibited U.S. travelers from staying at more than 400 accommodations on another
list maintained by the State Department and prohibited the processing of remittances through entities on the “Cuba restricted list maintained by the State Department and prohibited the processing of remittances through entities on the “Cuba restricted
list,” which resulted in Western Union ceasing its services to Cuba.list,” which resulted in Western Union ceasing its services to Cuba.
In May 2022, the Biden Administration announced a change of policy toward Cuba that included reversing some restrictions In May 2022, the Biden Administration announced a change of policy toward Cuba that included reversing some restrictions
on travel and remittances imposed by the Trump Administration. The Administration reauthorized scheduled and charter on travel and remittances imposed by the Trump Administration. The Administration reauthorized scheduled and charter
flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana, reinstated an authorization for people-to-people educational travel for groups, and flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana, reinstated an authorization for people-to-people educational travel for groups, and
reauthorized travel, pursuant to a general license, for attending or organizing professional meetings or conferences in Cuba. reauthorized travel, pursuant to a general license, for attending or organizing professional meetings or conferences in Cuba.
With regard to remittances, the Administration eliminated the dollar and frequency limits for family remittances and restored With regard to remittances, the Administration eliminated the dollar and frequency limits for family remittances and restored
the category of donative remittances.the category of donative remittances.
In November 2022, a U.S. company based in Miami announced it had received a Treasury Department license to work with a Cuban company not on the “Cuba restricted list” in the processing of remittances sent to Cuba from the United States. Legislative Initiatives
In the 117th Congress, two introduced bills would In the 117th Congress, two introduced bills would ~~lift~~have lifted economic sanctions on Cuba, including restrictions on travel and economic sanctions on Cuba, including restrictions on travel and
remittances: S. 249, the United States-Cuba Trade Act of 2021, introduced in February 2021, and H.R. 3625, the United remittances: S. 249, the United States-Cuba Trade Act of 2021, introduced in February 2021, and H.R. 3625, the United
States-Cuba Relations Normalization Act, introduced in May 2021. States-Cuba Relations Normalization Act, introduced in May 2021. No legislative action was taken on either measure. The ~~The~~ Biden Administration’s policy changes regarding Biden Administration’s policy changes regarding
travel and remittances drew mixed reaction in Congress, with some Members criticizing the action as supporting the Cuban travel and remittances drew mixed reaction in Congress, with some Members criticizing the action as supporting the Cuban
regime, some viewing it as a tepid step forward, and others welcoming it as a way to undo U.S. policies that harm the Cuban regime, some viewing it as a tepid step forward, and others welcoming it as a way to undo U.S. policies that harm the Cuban
people. Anpeople. An Appendix p~~rovides~~provides a history of legislative action related to the restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba a history of legislative action related to the restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba
from 1999 through 2020. Also see CRS In Focus IF10045, from 1999 through 2020. Also see CRS In Focus IF10045, Cuba: U.S. Policy Overview~~, CRS Insight IN11937,~~ ~~Biden~~
~~Administration’s Cuba Policy Changes, and CRS Report R45657~~ and CRS Report R47246, , Cuba: U.S. Policy in the ~~116th~~117th Congress ~~Congress and Through the~~
~~Trump Administration~~. .
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Introduction
Since the United States imposed comprehensive economic sanctions against Cuba in the early Since the United States imposed comprehensive economic sanctions against Cuba in the early
1960s, there have been numerous policy changes to restrictions on travel and remittances to 1960s, there have been numerous policy changes to restrictions on travel and remittances to
Cuba.1 In 1963, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Cuba.1 In 1963, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
issued the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR), prohibiting most financial transactions issued the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR), prohibiting most financial transactions
unless otherwise authorized; the CACR (found at 31 C.F.R. Part 515) have been amended many unless otherwise authorized; the CACR (found at 31 C.F.R. Part 515) have been amended many
times over years to reflect changes in policy toward Cuba, including restrictions on travel and times over years to reflect changes in policy toward Cuba, including restrictions on travel and
remittances. The CACR also require that all exports to Cuba be licensed by the Department of remittances. The CACR also require that all exports to Cuba be licensed by the Department of
Commerce, where the Bureau of Industry and Security administers the Export Administration Commerce, where the Bureau of Industry and Security administers the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR, found at 15 C.F.R. Sections 730-774); the EAR also include provisions Regulations (EAR, found at 15 C.F.R. Sections 730-774); the EAR also include provisions
regulating the temporary sojourns of aircraft and vessels to Cuba. regulating the temporary sojourns of aircraft and vessels to Cuba.
The CACR do not ban travel itself but place restrictions on any financial transactions related to The CACR do not ban travel itself but place restrictions on any financial transactions related to
travel to Cuba. Accordingly, from 1963 to 1977, travel to Cuba was effectively banned under the travel to Cuba. Accordingly, from 1963 to 1977, travel to Cuba was effectively banned under the
CACR because of such restrictions. In 1977, the Carter Administration made changes to the CACR because of such restrictions. In 1977, the Carter Administration made changes to the
regulations that essentially lifted the restrictions on travel-related transactions. In 1982, the regulations that essentially lifted the restrictions on travel-related transactions. In 1982, the
Reagan Administration made changes to the CACR that once again restricted travel to Cuba but Reagan Administration made changes to the CACR that once again restricted travel to Cuba but
allowed for travel-related transactions by certain categories of travelers. In June 1984, the allowed for travel-related transactions by certain categories of travelers. In June 1984, the
Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision in the case of Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision in the case of Regan v. Wald, rejected a challenge to the , rejected a challenge to the
regulations limiting travel to Cuba and asserted the executive branch’s right to impose travel regulations limiting travel to Cuba and asserted the executive branch’s right to impose travel
restrictions for national security reasons. restrictions for national security reasons.
Under the Clinton Administration, there were several changes to the CACR, with some at first Under the Clinton Administration, there were several changes to the CACR, with some at first
tightening the restrictions and others later loosening the restrictions. In October 2000, Congress tightening the restrictions and others later loosening the restrictions. In October 2000, Congress
prohibited travel to Cuba solely for tourist activities when it enacted the Trade Sanctions Reform prohibited travel to Cuba solely for tourist activities when it enacted the Trade Sanctions Reform
and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX). A provision in the law, and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX). A provision in the law,
Section 910(b), prohibits travel-related transaction for tourist activities, defined as any activity Section 910(b), prohibits travel-related transaction for tourist activities, defined as any activity
not expressly authorized in the 12 categories of travel in the CACR. The provision essentially not expressly authorized in the 12 categories of travel in the CACR. The provision essentially
circumscribes the executive branch’s authority to issue licenses for activities beyond the broad circumscribes the executive branch’s authority to issue licenses for activities beyond the broad
categories of travel allowed and would have to be amended, superseded by new legislation, or categories of travel allowed and would have to be amended, superseded by new legislation, or
repealed to expand categories of travel to Cuba or lift travel restrictions altogether. repealed to expand categories of travel to Cuba or lift travel restrictions altogether.
The George W. Bush Administration tightened the travel regulations significantly, with additional The George W. Bush Administration tightened the travel regulations significantly, with additional
restrictions on family visits, educational travel, and travel for those involved in amateur and restrictions on family visits, educational travel, and travel for those involved in amateur and
semiprofessional international sports federation competitions. In addition, the categories of fully semiprofessional international sports federation competitions. In addition, the categories of fully
hosted travel and people-to-people educational exchanges were eliminated as permissible travel hosted travel and people-to-people educational exchanges were eliminated as permissible travel
to Cuba. The Bush Administration also cracked down on those traveling to Cuba illegally, further to Cuba. The Bush Administration also cracked down on those traveling to Cuba illegally, further
restricted religious travel by changing licensing guidelines for such travel, and suspended the restricted religious travel by changing licensing guidelines for such travel, and suspended the
licenses of several travel service providers in Florida for license violations. licenses of several travel service providers in Florida for license violations.
The Obama Administration significantly eased restrictions on travel and remittances. Congress The Obama Administration significantly eased restrictions on travel and remittances. Congress
initially took legislative action in March 2009 to ease restrictions on family travel and on travel initially took legislative action in March 2009 to ease restrictions on family travel and on travel
related to U.S. agricultural and medical sales to Cuba (P.L. 111-8, §§620 and 621 of Division D). related to U.S. agricultural and medical sales to Cuba (P.L. 111-8, §§620 and 621 of Division D).
In April 2009, the Obama Administration went further and lifted allIn April 2009, the Obama Administration went further and lifted all restrictions on family travel restrictions on family travel

1 President John F. Kennedy proclaimed an embargo on trade between the United States and Cuba in February 1962, 1 President John F. Kennedy proclaimed an embargo on trade between the United States and Cuba in February 1962,
citing Section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which authorizes the President “to establish and maintain a citing Section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which authorizes the President “to establish and maintain a
total embargo upon all trade between the United States and Cuba.” (27 total embargo upon all trade between the United States and Cuba.” (27 Federal Register 1085, February 7, 1962.) The 1085, February 7, 1962.) The
authority for the embargo was later expanded in March 1962 to include the Trading with the Enemy Act (27 authority for the embargo was later expanded in March 1962 to include the Trading with the Enemy Act (27 Federal
Register 2765-2766, March 24, 1962). 2765-2766, March 24, 1962).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1 1

link to page link to page 67 link to page 13 link to page link to page 116 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

and family remittances. In 2011, the Obama Administration further eased travel related to and family remittances. In 2011, the Obama Administration further eased travel related to
religious, journalistic, and educational activities, including people-to-people travel exchanges; religious, journalistic, and educational activities, including people-to-people travel exchanges;
allowed U.S. international airports to become eligible for licensed charter flights to and from allowed U.S. international airports to become eligible for licensed charter flights to and from
Cuba; and issued new general licenses to send remittances to any Cuban national (with certain Cuba; and issued new general licenses to send remittances to any Cuban national (with certain
limitations) and to religious organizations in Cuba.2 As part of President Obama’s policy shift of limitations) and to religious organizations in Cuba.2 As part of President Obama’s policy shift of
engagement with Cuba announced in December 2014, the Administration took further actions to engagement with Cuba announced in December 2014, the Administration took further actions to
ease restrictions on travel and remittances in 2015 and 2016. These actions included authorizing ease restrictions on travel and remittances in 2015 and 2016. These actions included authorizing
travel by general license for all 12 categories of travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR; eliminating travel by general license for all 12 categories of travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR; eliminating
traveler per diem limits; authorizing people-to-people educational travel for individuals; traveler per diem limits; authorizing people-to-people educational travel for individuals;
removing dollar limits on donative remittances; and providing a general license for remittances removing dollar limits on donative remittances; and providing a general license for remittances
for humanitarian projects, support to the Cuban people, and the development of private for humanitarian projects, support to the Cuban people, and the development of private
businesses. Both cruise ship travel and regularly scheduled flights to Cuba began in 2016. (For businesses. Both cruise ship travel and regularly scheduled flights to Cuba began in 2016. (For
details, see details, see “Obama Administration Policy,” below.) below.)
The Trump Administration took significant actions to restrict travel and remittances to Cuba. In The Trump Administration took significant actions to restrict travel and remittances to Cuba. In
2017, the State Department issued a list of restricted Cuban entities (referred to as the “Cuba 2017, the State Department issued a list of restricted Cuban entities (referred to as the “Cuba
restricted list”) affiliated with the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services with which restricted list”) affiliated with the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services with which
direct financial transaction would disproportionately benefit such services at the expense of the direct financial transaction would disproportionately benefit such services at the expense of the
Cuban people or private enterprise in Cuba. The Treasury Department amended the CACR in Cuban people or private enterprise in Cuba. The Treasury Department amended the CACR in
2017 to prohibit those traveling under most categories of permissible travel from engaging in 2017 to prohibit those traveling under most categories of permissible travel from engaging in
direct financial transactions with these entities; such entities include certain hotels, tourist direct financial transactions with these entities; such entities include certain hotels, tourist
agencies, marinas, and stores. In 2019, the Administration eliminated people-to-people agencies, marinas, and stores. In 2019, the Administration eliminated people-to-people
educational travel, ended cruise ship travel to Cuba, and restricted air travel. In 2020, the State educational travel, ended cruise ship travel to Cuba, and restricted air travel. In 2020, the State
Department issued a list of over 400 accommodations for lodging in Cuba, and the Treasury Department issued a list of over 400 accommodations for lodging in Cuba, and the Treasury
Department prohibited U.S. travelers from staying at those properties. Department prohibited U.S. travelers from staying at those properties.
The Trump Administration also restricted remittances in several ways. In 2019, the The Trump Administration also restricted remittances in several ways. In 2019, the
Administration prohibited remittances to close family members of prohibited Cuban government Administration prohibited remittances to close family members of prohibited Cuban government
officials and Cuban communist party officials; capped family remittances to any one Cuban officials and Cuban communist party officials; capped family remittances to any one Cuban
national to $1,000 per quarter; and eliminated the category of donative remittances (sometimes national to $1,000 per quarter; and eliminated the category of donative remittances (sometimes
referred to as referred to as nonfamily remittances) to Cuban nationals. In 2020, the Treasury Department ) to Cuban nationals. In 2020, the Treasury Department
amended the CACR to prohibit, effective November 26, 2020, the processing of remittances amended the CACR to prohibit, effective November 26, 2020, the processing of remittances
through any entities on the “Cuba restricted list,” an action that led Western Union to close its through any entities on the “Cuba restricted list,” an action that led Western Union to close its
operations in Cuba. (For details, see operations in Cuba. (For details, see “Trump Administration Policy,” below.) ” below.)
The Biden Administration announced a change of policy toward Cuba in May 2022 that included The Biden Administration announced a change of policy toward Cuba in May 2022 that included
expanding authorized travel to Cuba and easing some restrictions on remittancesexpanding authorized travel to Cuba and easing some restrictions on remittances~~. The~~ (see Table 1, which examines selected restrictions on travel and remittances in the Obama, Trump, and Biden Administrations). The Administration’s expansion expansion
of travel included reauthorizing scheduled and charter flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana; of travel included reauthorizing scheduled and charter flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana;
reinstating the CACR authorization for people-to-people educational travel for groups under a reinstating the CACR authorization for people-to-people educational travel for groups under a
general license (but not individual or self-directed people-to-people travel); and reauthorizing in general license (but not individual or self-directed people-to-people travel); and reauthorizing in
the CACR travel, pursuant to a general license, for attending or organizing professional meetings the CACR travel, pursuant to a general license, for attending or organizing professional meetings
or conferences in Cuba. With regard to remittances, the Administration eliminated the dollar and or conferences in Cuba. With regard to remittances, the Administration eliminated the dollar and
frequency limits for family remittances in the CACR and restored the category of donative frequency limits for family remittances in the CACR and restored the category of donative
remittances, which had been eliminated in 2019. U.S. officials maintained that the Administration remittances, which had been eliminated in 2019. U.S. officials maintained that the Administration
would not remove Cuban entities from the “Cuba restricted list,” which as noted above, had led would not remove Cuban entities from the “Cuba restricted list,” which as noted above, had led
Western Union to terminate its services in Cuba in late 2020.Western Union to terminate its services in Cuba in late 2020.
Nevertheless, in November 2022, a U.S. company based in Miami announced that it
2 A general license provides the authority to engage in a transaction without the need to apply to the Treasury 2 A general license provides the authority to engage in a transaction without the need to apply to the Treasury
Department for permission. In contrast, a specific license is a written document issued by the Treasury Department to a Department for permission. In contrast, a specific license is a written document issued by the Treasury Department to a
person or entity authorizing a particular transaction in response to a written license application. person or entity authorizing a particular transaction in response to a written license application.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2 2

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~
link to page 16 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances had received a Treasury Department license to work with a Cuban company to process remittances from the United States to Cuba, a Cuban company not on the State Department’s list and not affiliated with the Cuban military. (See “Biden Administration Policy,” below.) Table 1. Cuba: Status of Selected U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances Under the Obama, Trump, and Biden Administrations Obama Trump Biden Cruise Ship Travel Authorized, September Prohibited, June 2019. 2015. Flights Authorized regularly Prohibited regularly Reauthorized regularly scheduled flights to scheduled flights and scheduled and charter Havana and other Cuban charter flights to Cuban flights to Cuban cities cities, February 2016. cities other than Havana, other than Havana, June December 2019 & January 2022. (Flights to Havana 2020. were already permitted and remain authorized.) Group People-to- Authorized via a specific Eliminated authorization, Reinstated authorization People Educational license, January 2011, and June 2019. via a general license, June Travel via a general license, 2022. January 2015. Individual People-to- Authorized via a general Eliminated authorization, People Educational license, March 2016. November 2017. Travel Travel for Attending Authorized travel, via a Removed general license Reinstated general license or Organizing general license, for the authorization for for attending or Professional Meetings organization of attending or organizing organizing professional and Conferences professional meetings or professional meetings or meetings and conferences conferences, January conferences, September in Cuba, June 2022. 2016. (Authorization for 2020. (Specific license attending professional remained available for meetings and conferences attending conferences.) via a general license dates to 1999.) “Cuba Restricted List” Prohibited direct transactions with entities on the “Cuba restricted list (first issued in November 2017, and last updated in January 2021). Among its 231 entities, the list includes 111 Cuban hotels, 2 tourist agencies, 5 marinas, and 10 stores in Old Havana. Effective November 2020, prohibited the processing of remittances through any entities on the list. Congressional Research Service 3 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances Obama Trump Biden “Cuba Prohibited Prohibited lodging, paying Accommodations for lodging, or making any List” reservation for or on behalf of a third party to lodge at any property on the list, which currently includes over 400 hotels and privately owned residences for rent. The State Department issued the list in September 2020. Family Remittances, Removed limitations on Capped family Removed limitations on Dol ar and Frequency the amount and frequency remittances to any one the amount and frequency Limitation of family remittances, Cuban national to $1,000 of family remittances, June April 2009. per quarter, September 2022. 2019. Donative Remittances Authorized donative Eliminated the Reauthorized donative (Prior to 2015, referred remittances to Cuban authorization for donative remittances to Cuban to as “periodic nationals without remittances, September nationals without remittances.”) limitations on the amount 2019. limitations on the amount and frequency, September and frequency, June 2022. 2015. Sources: CRS Report R47246, Cuba: U.S. Policy in the 117th Congress; CRS Report R45657, Cuba: U.S. Policy in the 116th Congress and Through the Trump Administration; and CRS Report R44822, Cuba: U.S. Policy in the 115th Congress. Notes: A general Treasury Department license provides the authority to engage in a transaction without the need to apply to the Treasury Department for permission. In contrast, a specific Treasury Department license is a written document issued by the Treasury Department to a person or entity authorizing a particular transaction in response to a written license application.
Obama Administration Policy
Easing of Restrictions in 2009
The tightening of family travel restrictions in 2004 became an issue during the 2008 presidential The tightening of family travel restrictions in 2004 became an issue during the 2008 presidential
campaign, with candidate Barack Obama pledging to lift restrictions for family travel and campaign, with candidate Barack Obama pledging to lift restrictions for family travel and
remittances to Cuba. With the election of Obama, the 111th Congress moved to ease family travel remittances to Cuba. With the election of Obama, the 111th Congress moved to ease family travel
restrictions in March 2009 by approving two provisions that eased sanctions on travel to Cuba in restrictions in March 2009 by approving two provisions that eased sanctions on travel to Cuba in
FY2009 omnibus appropriations legislation (P.L. 111-8). Unlike the Bush Administration, the FY2009 omnibus appropriations legislation (P.L. 111-8). Unlike the Bush Administration, the
Obama Administration did not threaten to veto such legislation easing Cuba sanctions. This Obama Administration did not threaten to veto such legislation easing Cuba sanctions. This
marked the first congressional action easing Cuba sanctions in almost a decade. marked the first congressional action easing Cuba sanctions in almost a decade.
In the first provision, as implemented by the Treasury Department, family travel was again In the first provision, as implemented by the Treasury Department, family travel was again
allowed once every 12 months under a general license to visit a close relative for an unlimited allowed once every 12 months under a general license to visit a close relative for an unlimited
length of stay, and the limit for daily expenditure allowed by family travelers became the same as length of stay, and the limit for daily expenditure allowed by family travelers became the same as
for other authorized travelers to Cuba (the State Department maximum per diem rate for Havana). for other authorized travelers to Cuba (the State Department maximum per diem rate for Havana).
The definition of “close relative” was expanded to mean any individual related to the traveler by The definition of “close relative” was expanded to mean any individual related to the traveler by
blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three generations removed from that person. blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three generations removed from that person.
The second provision in the omnibus measure required a general license for travel related to the The second provision in the omnibus measure required a general license for travel related to the
marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods to Cuba. The Treasury Department’s Office marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods to Cuba. The Treasury Department’s Office
Congressional Research Service 4 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances of Foreign Assets Control ultimately issued regulations implementing this omnibus provision on of Foreign Assets Control ultimately issued regulations implementing this omnibus provision on
September 3, 2009. The regulations required a written report at least 14 days before departure September 3, 2009. The regulations required a written report at least 14 days before departure
identifying both the traveler and the producer or distributor and describing the purpose and scope identifying both the traveler and the producer or distributor and describing the purpose and scope
of such travel. Another written report was required within 14 days of return from Cuba describing of such travel. Another written report was required within 14 days of return from Cuba describing
the activities conducted, the persons met, and the expenses incurred. The regulations also required the activities conducted, the persons met, and the expenses incurred. The regulations also required
that such travelers under this provision be regularly employed by a producer or distributor of the that such travelers under this provision be regularly employed by a producer or distributor of the
agricultural commodities or medical products or an entity duly appointed to represent such a agricultural commodities or medical products or an entity duly appointed to represent such a
producer or distributor. producer or distributor.
Going even further, the Obama Administration announced several significant measures to ease Going even further, the Obama Administration announced several significant measures to ease
U.S. sanctions on Cuba in April 2009. Fulfilling a campaign pledge, President Obama announced U.S. sanctions on Cuba in April 2009. Fulfilling a campaign pledge, President Obama announced
that all restrictions on family travel and on remittances to family members in Cuba would be that all restrictions on family travel and on remittances to family members in Cuba would be
lifted. This significantly superseded the action taken by Congress in March that had essentially lifted. This significantly superseded the action taken by Congress in March that had essentially
reverted family travel restrictions to as they had been before they were tightened in 2004. Under reverted family travel restrictions to as they had been before they were tightened in 2004. Under
the new policy announced by the Administration in April, there were no limitations on the the new policy announced by the Administration in April, there were no limitations on the
frequency or duration of family visits (which would still be covered under a general license), and frequency or duration of family visits (which would still be covered under a general license), and
the 44-pound limitation on accompanied baggage was removed. Family travelers were allowed to the 44-pound limitation on accompanied baggage was removed. Family travelers were allowed to
spend the same as allowed for other travelers, up to the State Department’s maximum per diem spend the same as allowed for other travelers, up to the State Department’s maximum per diem
rate for Havana. With regard to family remittances, the previous limitation of no more than $300 rate for Havana. With regard to family remittances, the previous limitation of no more than $300
per quarter was removed with no restriction on the amount or frequency of the remittances. per quarter was removed with no restriction on the amount or frequency of the remittances.
Authorized travelers were again authorized to carry up to $3,000 in remittances.3 Regulations for Authorized travelers were again authorized to carry up to $3,000 in remittances.3 Regulations for
the above policy changes were issued by the Treasury and Commerce Departments on September the above policy changes were issued by the Treasury and Commerce Departments on September
3, 2009. 3, 2009.
Easing of Restrictions in 2011
On January 14, 2011, the Obama Administration announced a series of policy changes further On January 14, 2011, the Obama Administration announced a series of policy changes further
easing restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba that had been rumored in the second half of easing restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba that had been rumored in the second half of

~~3 White House, “Fact Sheet: Reaching Out to the Cuban People,” April 13, 2009.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
3

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

2010. The changes were designed to make it easier to engage in educational, religious, and other 2010. The changes were designed to make it easier to engage in educational, religious, and other
types of people-to-people travel and allow all Americans to send remittances to Cuba. The types of people-to-people travel and allow all Americans to send remittances to Cuba. The
changes were similar to policy that was in place from 1999 under the Clinton Administration changes were similar to policy that was in place from 1999 under the Clinton Administration
through mid-2004 under the Bush Administration. President Obama directed the Secretaries of through mid-2004 under the Bush Administration. President Obama directed the Secretaries of
State, the Treasury, and Homeland Security to amend regulations and policies “in order to State, the Treasury, and Homeland Security to amend regulations and policies “in order to
continue efforts to reach out to the Cuban people in support of their desire to freely determine continue efforts to reach out to the Cuban people in support of their desire to freely determine
their country’s future.”4 The Administration maintained that the policy changes would increase their country’s future.”4 The Administration maintained that the policy changes would increase
people-to-people contact, help strengthen Cuban civil society, and make Cuban people less people-to-people contact, help strengthen Cuban civil society, and make Cuban people less
dependent on the Cuban state.5 The changes occurred at the same time that the Cuban government dependent on the Cuban state.5 The changes occurred at the same time that the Cuban government
began laying off thousands of state workers and increasing private enterprise through an began laying off thousands of state workers and increasing private enterprise through an
expansion of the authorized categories for self-employment. expansion of the authorized categories for self-employment.
The measures (1) increased purposeful travel to Cuba related to religious, educational, and The measures (1) increased purposeful travel to Cuba related to religious, educational, and
journalistic activities (general licenses were authorized for certain types of educational and journalistic activities (general licenses were authorized for certain types of educational and
religious travel; people-to-people travel exchanges were authorized via a specific license); (2) religious travel; people-to-people travel exchanges were authorized via a specific license); (2)
allowed any U.S. person to send remittances (up to $500 per quarter) to nonfamily members in allowed any U.S. person to send remittances (up to $500 per quarter) to nonfamily members in
Cuba and made it easier for religious institutions to send remittances for religious activities Cuba and made it easier for religious institutions to send remittances for religious activities
(general licenses are now authorized for both); and (3) allowed all U.S. international airports to (general licenses are now authorized for both); and (3) allowed all U.S. international airports to
3 White House, “Fact Sheet: Reaching Out to the Cuban People,” April 13, 2009. 4 White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Reaching Out to the Cuban People,” January 14, 2011, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/14/reaching-out-cuban-people. 5 Mary Beth Sheridan, “Obama Loosens Travel Restrictions to Cuba,” Washington Post, January 15, 2011. Congressional Research Service 5 link to page 26 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances apply to provide services to licensed charter flights to and from Cuba. In most respects, these new apply to provide services to licensed charter flights to and from Cuba. In most respects, these new
measures appeared to be similar to policies that were undertaken by the Clinton Administration in measures appeared to be similar to policies that were undertaken by the Clinton Administration in
1999 but subsequently curtailed by the Bush Administration in 2003 and 2004. 1999 but subsequently curtailed by the Bush Administration in 2003 and 2004.
An exception was the expansion of airports to service licensed flights to and from Cuba. The An exception was the expansion of airports to service licensed flights to and from Cuba. The
Clinton Administration had expanded airports eligible to service licensed charter flights beyond Clinton Administration had expanded airports eligible to service licensed charter flights beyond
that of Miami International Airport to international airports in Los Angeles and New York (JFK) that of Miami International Airport to international airports in Los Angeles and New York (JFK)
in 1999, but the January 2011 policy change allowed all U.S. international airports to apply to in 1999, but the January 2011 policy change allowed all U.S. international airports to apply to
provide services for chartered flights to and from Cuba under certain conditions. provide services for chartered flights to and from Cuba under certain conditions.
By early July 2011, OFAC confirmed that it had approved the first licenses for U.S. people-to- By early July 2011, OFAC confirmed that it had approved the first licenses for U.S. people-to-
people organizations to bring U.S. visitors to Cuba, and the first such trips began in August 2011.6 people organizations to bring U.S. visitors to Cuba, and the first such trips began in August 2011.6
On July 25, 2011, however, prior to the trips’ beginning, OFAC issued an advisory maintaining On July 25, 2011, however, prior to the trips’ beginning, OFAC issued an advisory maintaining
that misstatements in the media had suggested that U.S. policy allowed for virtually unrestricted that misstatements in the media had suggested that U.S. policy allowed for virtually unrestricted
group travel to Cuba, and reaffirmed that travel conducted by people-to-people travel groups group travel to Cuba, and reaffirmed that travel conducted by people-to-people travel groups
licensed for travel to Cuba must “certify that all participants will have a full-time schedule of licensed for travel to Cuba must “certify that all participants will have a full-time schedule of
educational exchange activities that will result in meaningful interaction between the travelers educational exchange activities that will result in meaningful interaction between the travelers
and individuals in Cuba.” The advisory stated that authorized activities by people-to-people and individuals in Cuba.” The advisory stated that authorized activities by people-to-people
groups are not “tourist activities,” and pointed out that the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export groups are not “tourist activities,” and pointed out that the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export
Enhancement Act of 2000 prohibits OFAC from licensing transactions for tourist activities.7 Enhancement Act of 2000 prohibits OFAC from licensing transactions for tourist activities.7
In the first session of the 112th Congress, there were several attempts aimed at rolling back the In the first session of the 112th Congress, there were several attempts aimed at rolling back the
Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on travel and remittances, including a Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on travel and remittances, including a
provision originating in the House Appropriation Committee’s version of the FY2012 Financial provision originating in the House Appropriation Committee’s version of the FY2012 Financial
Services and General Government appropriations measure, H.R. 2434. The White House had Services and General Government appropriations measure, H.R. 2434. The White House had

~~4 White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Reaching Out to the Cuban People,” January 14, 2011, at~~
~~http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/14/reaching-out-cuban-people.~~
~~5 Mary Beth Sheridan, “Obama Loosens Travel Restrictions to Cuba,” Washington Post, January 15, 2011.~~
~~6 Peter Orsi, “U.S. Licensing Travel Operators to Start Up Legal Cuba Trips, Treasury Department Says,” Associated~~
~~Press, July 1, 2011; Mimi Whitefield, “People-to-People Tours to Cuba Take Off Thursday,” Miami Herald, August~~
~~10, 2011; and Jeff Franks, “Purposeful Cuba Trips Resume,” Chicago Tribune, August 18, 2011. Also see the~~
~~following online resource: Organizations Sponsoring People-to-People Travel to Cuba, Latin America Working Group~~
~~Education Fund, at http://www.lawg.org/storage/documents/people2people.pdf.~~
~~7 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Cuba Travel Advisory,” July 25, 2011.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
4

~~link to page 24~~ ~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

threatened to veto the bill if it contained the provision and stood firm when congressional leaders threatened to veto the bill if it contained the provision and stood firm when congressional leaders
were considering including the provision in a “megabus” FY2012 appropriations bill, H.R. 2055. were considering including the provision in a “megabus” FY2012 appropriations bill, H.R. 2055.
Ultimately congressional leaders agreed not to include the provision in the appropriations Ultimately congressional leaders agreed not to include the provision in the appropriations
measure (P.L. 112-74). (Seemeasure (P.L. 112-74). (See Appendix, below.) ow.)
Developments in 2012 and 2013
In 2012, some Members of Congress expressed concerns about people-to-people travel that In 2012, some Members of Congress expressed concerns about people-to-people travel that
appeared to be focusing on tourist activities rather than on purposeful travel. In response, the appeared to be focusing on tourist activities rather than on purposeful travel. In response, the
Treasury Department issued an announcement in March 2012 warning about misleading Treasury Department issued an announcement in March 2012 warning about misleading
advertising regarding some people-to-people trips that could lead to OFAC investigating the advertising regarding some people-to-people trips that could lead to OFAC investigating the
organization conducting the trips. The announcement maintained that licenses could be revoked organization conducting the trips. The announcement maintained that licenses could be revoked
and that organizations may be issued a civil penalty up to $65,000 per violation.8 OFAC followed and that organizations may be issued a civil penalty up to $65,000 per violation.8 OFAC followed
up this announcement in May 2012 by revising its people-to-people license guidelines. The up this announcement in May 2012 by revising its people-to-people license guidelines. The
revised guidelines reflected similar language to the March announcement and also required an revised guidelines reflected similar language to the March announcement and also required an
organization applying for a people-to-people license to describe how the travel “would enhance organization applying for a people-to-people license to describe how the travel “would enhance
6 Peter Orsi, “U.S. Licensing Travel Operators to Start Up Legal Cuba Trips, Treasury Department Says,” Associated Press, July 1, 2011; Mimi Whitefield, “People-to-People Tours to Cuba Take Off Thursday,” Miami Herald, August 10, 2011; and Jeff Franks, “Purposeful Cuba Trips Resume,” Chicago Tribune, August 18, 2011. Also see the following online resource: Organizations Sponsoring People-to-People Travel to Cuba, Latin America Working Group Education Fund, at http://www.lawg.org/storage/documents/people2people.pdf. 7 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Cuba Travel Advisory,” July 25, 2011. 8 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Advertising Educational Exchange Travel to Cuba for People-to-People Contact,” March 9, 2012, at http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/cuba_ppl_notice.aspx. Congressional Research Service 6 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances contact with the Cuban people, and/or support civil society in Cuba, and/or promote the Cuban contact with the Cuban people, and/or support civil society in Cuba, and/or promote the Cuban
people’s independence from Cuban authorities.”9 people’s independence from Cuban authorities.”9
In June 7, 2012, congressional testimony, then-Assistant Secretary of State for Western In June 7, 2012, congressional testimony, then-Assistant Secretary of State for Western
Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson set forth a clear-cut description of U.S. policy toward Cuba Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson set forth a clear-cut description of U.S. policy toward Cuba
in which she expressed strong U.S. support for democracy and human rights activists in Cuba and in which she expressed strong U.S. support for democracy and human rights activists in Cuba and
defended the Obama’s Administration policy on travel and remittances. The Assistant Secretary defended the Obama’s Administration policy on travel and remittances. The Assistant Secretary
asserted that “the Obama Administration’s priority is to empower Cubans to freely determine asserted that “the Obama Administration’s priority is to empower Cubans to freely determine
their own future.” She maintained that “the most effective tool we have for doing that is building their own future.” She maintained that “the most effective tool we have for doing that is building
connections between the Cuban and American people, in order to give Cubans the support and connections between the Cuban and American people, in order to give Cubans the support and
tools they need to move forward independent of their government.” The Assistant Secretary tools they need to move forward independent of their government.” The Assistant Secretary
maintained that “the Administration’s travel, remittance and people-to-people policies are helping maintained that “the Administration’s travel, remittance and people-to-people policies are helping
Cubans by providing alternative sources of information, taking advantage of emerging Cubans by providing alternative sources of information, taking advantage of emerging
opportunities for self-employment and private property, and strengthening civil society.”10 opportunities for self-employment and private property, and strengthening civil society.”10
In September 2012, various press reports cited a slowdown in the Treasury Department’s In September 2012, various press reports cited a slowdown in the Treasury Department’s
approval or reapproval of licenses for people-to-people travel since the agency had issued new approval or reapproval of licenses for people-to-people travel since the agency had issued new
guidelines in May (described above). Companies conducting such programs complained that the guidelines in May (described above). Companies conducting such programs complained that the
delay in the licenses was forcing them to cancel trips and even to lay off staff.11 By early October delay in the licenses was forcing them to cancel trips and even to lay off staff.11 By early October
2012, however, companies conducting the people-to-people travel maintained that they were once 2012, however, companies conducting the people-to-people travel maintained that they were once
again receiving license approvals. again receiving license approvals.
In April 2013, some Members of Congress strongly criticized singers Beyoncé Knowles-Carter In April 2013, some Members of Congress strongly criticized singers Beyoncé Knowles-Carter
and her husband Shawn Carter, better known as Jay-Z, for traveling to Cuba. Members were and her husband Shawn Carter, better known as Jay-Z, for traveling to Cuba. Members were
concerned that the trip, as described in the press, was primarily for tourism, which would be concerned that the trip, as described in the press, was primarily for tourism, which would be

~~8 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Advertising Educational Exchange Travel to Cuba for People-to-People~~
~~Contact,” March 9, 2012, at http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Pages/cuba_ppl_notice.aspx.~~
contrary to U.S. law and regulations. The Treasury Department stated that the two singers were participating in an authorized people-to-people exchange trip organized by a group licensed by OFAC to conduct such trips. (In August 2014, the Treasury Department’s Office of the Inspector General issued a report concluding that no U.S. sanctions were violated and that OFAC’s decision not to pursue a formal investigation was reasonable.12) Easing of Restrictions in 2015 and 2016 Just after the adjournment of the 113th Congress in December 2014, President Obama announced a major shift in U.S. policy toward Cuba, moving away from a sanctions-based policy toward one of engagement and a normalization of relations. The policy shift included changes in U.S. restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, which were implemented by the Treasury Department’s OFAC as amendments to the CACR that went into effect on January 16, 2015.13 9 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Comprehensive Guidelines for License Applications to Engage in Travel-9 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Comprehensive Guidelines for License Applications to Engage in Travel-
Related Transactions Involving Cuba,” Revised May 10, 2012. Related Transactions Involving Cuba,” Revised May 10, 2012.
10 Testimony of Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Senate Foreign 10 Testimony of Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Global Narcotics, at a hearing entitled Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Global Narcotics, at a hearing entitled
“The Path to Freedom: Countering Repression and Strengthening Civil Society,” June 7, 2012. “The Path to Freedom: Countering Repression and Strengthening Civil Society,” June 7, 2012.
11 Damien Cave, “Licensing Rules Slow Tours to Cuba,” 11 Damien Cave, “Licensing Rules Slow Tours to Cuba,” New York Times, September 16, 2012; Paul Haven, “U.S. , September 16, 2012; Paul Haven, “U.S.
Travel Outfits Say Rules for Legal Travel to Cuba Getting Tighter,” Associated Press, September 13, 2012. Travel Outfits Say Rules for Legal Travel to Cuba Getting Tighter,” Associated Press, September 13, 2012.
~~Congressional Research Service~~
5

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

~~contrary to U.S. law and regulations. The Treasury Department stated that the two singers were~~
~~participating in an authorized people-to-people exchange trip organized by a group licensed by~~
~~OFAC to conduct such trips. (In August 2014, the Treasury Department’s Office of the Inspector~~
~~General issued a report concluding that no U.S. sanctions were violated and that OFAC’s decision~~
~~not to pursue a formal investigation was reasonable.)12~~
~~Easing of Restrictions in 2015 and 2016~~
~~Just after the adjournment of the 113th Congress in December 2014, President Obama announced~~
~~a major shift in U.S. policy toward Cuba, moving away from a sanctions-based policy toward one~~
~~of engagement and a normalization of relations. The policy shift included changes in U.S.~~
~~restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, which were implemented by the Treasury~~
~~Department’s OFAC as amendments to the CACR that went into effect on January 16, 2015.13~~12 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Inspector General, “Terrorist Financing/Money Laundering: Review of Travel to Cuba by Shawn Carter and Beyoncé Knowles-Carter,” Memorandum Report OIG-CA-14-014, August 20, 2014. 13 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Regulatory Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions,” January 15, 2016. Congressional Research Service 7 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances
Changes to the Travel Restrictions. With regard to travel, the changes included authorization With regard to travel, the changes included authorization
for general licenses for the 12 existing categories of travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR related for general licenses for the 12 existing categories of travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR related
to the following activities: (1) family visits; (2) official business of the U.S. government, foreign to the following activities: (1) family visits; (2) official business of the U.S. government, foreign
governments, and certain intergovernmental organizations; (3) journalistic activity; (4) governments, and certain intergovernmental organizations; (3) journalistic activity; (4)
professional research and professional meetings; (5) educational activities; (6) religious activities; professional research and professional meetings; (5) educational activities; (6) religious activities;
(7) public performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and exhibitions; (8) (7) public performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and exhibitions; (8)
support for the Cuban people; (9) humanitarian projects; (10) activities of private foundations or support for the Cuban people; (9) humanitarian projects; (10) activities of private foundations or
research or educational institutes; (11) exportation, importation, or transmission of information or research or educational institutes; (11) exportation, importation, or transmission of information or
information materials; and (12) certain export transactions that may be considered for information materials; and (12) certain export transactions that may be considered for
authorization under existing regulations and guidelines. authorization under existing regulations and guidelines.
Before the policy change, travelers under several of these categories had to apply for a specific Before the policy change, travelers under several of these categories had to apply for a specific
license from the Treasury Department before traveling. Under the new regulations, both travel license from the Treasury Department before traveling. Under the new regulations, both travel
agents and airlines were able to provide services for travel to Cuba without the need to obtain a agents and airlines were able to provide services for travel to Cuba without the need to obtain a
specific license. Under the January 2015 changes to the CACR, travelers also were authorized to specific license. Under the January 2015 changes to the CACR, travelers also were authorized to
bring back up to $400 worth of goods from Cuba as accompanied baggage for personal use, with bring back up to $400 worth of goods from Cuba as accompanied baggage for personal use, with
no more than $100 worth of tobacco products and alcohol combined (as noted below, these value no more than $100 worth of tobacco products and alcohol combined (as noted below, these value
limits were subsequently removed altogether in October 2016). limits were subsequently removed altogether in October 2016).
OFAC issued four additional rounds of regulatory changes to the CACR in September 2015 and OFAC issued four additional rounds of regulatory changes to the CACR in September 2015 and
January, March, and October 2016 that further eased the travel restrictions. Among the changes January, March, and October 2016 that further eased the travel restrictions. Among the changes
were the following: were the following:
  September 2015. OFAC amended the regulations to allow close relatives to visit OFAC amended the regulations to allow close relatives to visit
or accompany authorized travelers to Cuba for additional activities. The January or accompany authorized travelers to Cuba for additional activities. The January
2015 changes had permitted close relatives to visit a person located in Cuba on 2015 changes had permitted close relatives to visit a person located in Cuba on
official government business or there for certain educational activities. The official government business or there for certain educational activities. The
September 2015 changes authorized close relatives to visit or accompany September 2015 changes authorized close relatives to visit or accompany
authorized travelers for additional educational activities, journalistic activity, authorized travelers for additional educational activities, journalistic activity,
professional research, religious activities, activities related to humanitarian professional research, religious activities, activities related to humanitarian
projects, and activities of private foundations or certain research or educational projects, and activities of private foundations or certain research or educational

~~12 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Inspector General, “Terrorist Financing/Money Laundering: Review of~~
~~Travel to Cuba by Shawn Carter and Beyoncé Knowles-Carter,” Memorandum Report OIG-CA-14-014, August 20,~~
~~2014.~~
~~13 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Regulatory Amendments to the Cuba~~
~~Sanctions,” January 15, 2016.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
6

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

institutes. The changes also allowed all authorized travelers to open and maintain institutes. The changes also allowed all authorized travelers to open and maintain
bank accounts in Cuba to access funds for authorized transactions. Transportation bank accounts in Cuba to access funds for authorized transactions. Transportation
by vessel of authorized travelers between the United States and Cuba was also by vessel of authorized travelers between the United States and Cuba was also
authorized by general license, and certain related lodging aboard vessels used for authorized by general license, and certain related lodging aboard vessels used for
such travel was authorized (related to ferry and cruise ship travel). At the same such travel was authorized (related to ferry and cruise ship travel). At the same
time, the Commerce Department amended the EAR, issuing license exceptions time, the Commerce Department amended the EAR, issuing license exceptions
authorizing temporary sojourns for cargo and passenger vessels to Cuba.14 authorizing temporary sojourns for cargo and passenger vessels to Cuba.14
  January 2016. OFAC amended the CACR to authorize travel-related OFAC amended the CACR to authorize travel-related
transactions related to professional media or artistic productions of information transactions related to professional media or artistic productions of information
or informational materials for exportation, importation, or transmission. These or informational materials for exportation, importation, or transmission. These
activities included the filming or production of media programs, the recording of activities included the filming or production of media programs, the recording of
music, and the creation of artworks in Cuba. OFAC also amended the regulations music, and the creation of artworks in Cuba. OFAC also amended the regulations
to allow travel for the organization of professional meetings and public to allow travel for the organization of professional meetings and public
performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and
exhibitions. Previously, the general license was only for attending or participating exhibitions. Previously, the general license was only for attending or participating
in such events. OFAC also removed requirements that U.S. profits from public in such events. OFAC also removed requirements that U.S. profits from public
14 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions Regulations,” September 18, 2015. Congressional Research Service 8 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and performances, clinics, workshops, athletic and other competitions, and
exhibitions be donated to an independent nongovernmental organization (NGO) exhibitions be donated to an independent nongovernmental organization (NGO)
in Cuba or a U.S.-based charity. Travel for humanitarian projects was also in Cuba or a U.S.-based charity. Travel for humanitarian projects was also
expanded to include disaster preparedness and response.15 expanded to include disaster preparedness and response.15
  March 2016. OFAC amended the CACR to allow individuals to travel to Cuba OFAC amended the CACR to allow individuals to travel to Cuba
for individual people-to-people educational travel. Previously, such educational for individual people-to-people educational travel. Previously, such educational
travel required trips to take place under the auspices of an organization that travel required trips to take place under the auspices of an organization that
conducted such travel and required travelers to be accompanied by a conducted such travel and required travelers to be accompanied by a
representative of the sponsoring organization. According to the Treasury representative of the sponsoring organization. According to the Treasury
Department, the change is intended to make such travel to Cuba more accessible Department, the change is intended to make such travel to Cuba more accessible
and less expensive for U.S. citizens and will increase opportunities for direct and less expensive for U.S. citizens and will increase opportunities for direct
engagement between Cubans and Americans.16engagement between Cubans and Americans.16
  October 2016. OFAC amended the CACR, removing the value limit for Cuban OFAC amended the CACR, removing the value limit for Cuban
products that U.S. travelers to Cuba (as well as U.S. travelers to third countries) products that U.S. travelers to Cuba (as well as U.S. travelers to third countries)
can import into the United States as accompanied luggage for personal use. can import into the United States as accompanied luggage for personal use.
Normal limits on duty and tax exemption apply.17Normal limits on duty and tax exemption apply.17
As part of the change in bilateral relations, U.S. and Cuban officials signed a bilateral As part of the change in bilateral relations, U.S. and Cuban officials signed a bilateral
arrangement in February 2016 to permit regularly scheduled air flights to Cuba, and by August arrangement in February 2016 to permit regularly scheduled air flights to Cuba, and by August
2016 the first flights began. Cruise ship service to Cuba from the United States also began in May 2016 the first flights began. Cruise ship service to Cuba from the United States also began in May
2016.18 2016.18
Changes to the Regulations on Remittances. With the Obama Administration’s change in Cuba With the Obama Administration’s change in Cuba
policy, OFAC significantly eased restrictions on remittances to Cuba. In January 2015, OFAC policy, OFAC significantly eased restrictions on remittances to Cuba. In January 2015, OFAC

~~14 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions~~
~~Regulations,” September 18, 2015.~~
~~15 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions~~
~~Regulations,” January 26, 2016.~~
~~16 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Significant Amendments to the Cuba~~
~~Sanctions Regulations Ahead of President Obama’s Historic Trip to Cuba,” March 15, 2016.~~
~~17 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to Cuba Sanctions~~
~~Regulations,” October 14, 2016.~~
~~18 For more details, see “Restrictions on Travel and Remittances” in CRS Report R43926,~~ ~~Cuba: Issues and Actions in~~
~~the 114th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
7

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

increased the amount of money that could be sent by any U.S. person to nonfamily members in increased the amount of money that could be sent by any U.S. person to nonfamily members in
Cuba (referred to as remittances to a Cuban national) to $2,000 per quarter (up from the previous Cuba (referred to as remittances to a Cuban national) to $2,000 per quarter (up from the previous
limit of $500 per quarter). Authorized travelers were permitted to carry up to $10,000 in limit of $500 per quarter). Authorized travelers were permitted to carry up to $10,000 in
remittances to Cuba, up from the previous limit of $3,000. In September 2015, however, OFAC remittances to Cuba, up from the previous limit of $3,000. In September 2015, however, OFAC
amended the regulations that lifted the dollar limits altogether on nonfamily remittances (referring amended the regulations that lifted the dollar limits altogether on nonfamily remittances (referring
to them as “donative remittances to Cuban nationals”) and on amounts that licensed travelers may to them as “donative remittances to Cuban nationals”) and on amounts that licensed travelers may
carry to Cuba. carry to Cuba.
In addition, the CACR were amended in January 2015 to authorize by general license remittances In addition, the CACR were amended in January 2015 to authorize by general license remittances
to individuals and independent NGOs in Cuba without limit for humanitarian projects; activities to individuals and independent NGOs in Cuba without limit for humanitarian projects; activities
of recognized human rights organizations, independent organizations designed to promote a rapid of recognized human rights organizations, independent organizations designed to promote a rapid
peaceful transition to democracy, and individuals and NGOs that promote independent activity to peaceful transition to democracy, and individuals and NGOs that promote independent activity to
strengthen civil society; and the development of private businesses, including small farms. strengthen civil society; and the development of private businesses, including small farms.
Under the Obama Administration, OFAC also amended the CACR in October 2016 to more Under the Obama Administration, OFAC also amended the CACR in October 2016 to more
narrowly define the terms “prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba” and “prohibited narrowly define the terms “prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba” and “prohibited
members of the Cuban Communist Party.” The definition of these terms was significant because members of the Cuban Communist Party.” The definition of these terms was significant because
of the prohibition in the CACR against providing remittances to these individuals. of the prohibition in the CACR against providing remittances to these individuals.
15 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions Regulations,” January 26, 2016. 16 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Significant Amendments to the Cuba Sanctions Regulations Ahead of President Obama’s Historic Trip to Cuba,” March 15, 2016. 17 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury and Commerce Announce Further Amendments to Cuba Sanctions Regulations,” October 14, 2016. 18 For more details, see “Restrictions on Travel and Remittances” in CRS Report R43926, Cuba: Issues and Actions in the 114th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. Congressional Research Service 9 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances Prior to the October 2016 change (and since 2004), prohibited government officials included all Prior to the October 2016 change (and since 2004), prohibited government officials included all
ministers and vice ministers; members of the Council of State and the Council of Ministers; ministers and vice ministers; members of the Council of State and the Council of Ministers;
members and employees of the National Assembly of People’s Power; members of any provincial members and employees of the National Assembly of People’s Power; members of any provincial
assembly; local sector chiefs of the Committees of the Defense for the Revolution; director assembly; local sector chiefs of the Committees of the Defense for the Revolution; director
generals and subdirector generals of all ministries and state agencies; employees of the Ministry generals and subdirector generals of all ministries and state agencies; employees of the Ministry
of the Interior and Ministry of Defense; secretaries and first secretaries of the Confederation of of the Interior and Ministry of Defense; secretaries and first secretaries of the Confederation of
Labor of Cuba and its component unions; chief editors, editors, and deputy editors of Cuban Labor of Cuba and its component unions; chief editors, editors, and deputy editors of Cuban
state-run media organizations and programs, including newspapers, television, and radio; and state-run media organizations and programs, including newspapers, television, and radio; and
members and employees of the Supreme Court. With the October 2016 change, prohibited members and employees of the Supreme Court. With the October 2016 change, prohibited
government officials were defined as including members of the Council of Ministers and flag government officials were defined as including members of the Council of Ministers and flag
officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces. officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces.
Similarly, prior to the October 2016 CACR change (and since 2004), the definition of members of Similarly, prior to the October 2016 CACR change (and since 2004), the definition of members of
the Cuban Communist Party included members of the Politburo, the Central Committee, the Cuban Communist Party included members of the Politburo, the Central Committee,
department heads and employees of the Central Committee, and secretaries and first secretaries of department heads and employees of the Central Committee, and secretaries and first secretaries of
the provincial central committees. With the October 2016 change, the definition of the term was the provincial central committees. With the October 2016 change, the definition of the term was
narrowed to include members of the Politburo.narrowed to include members of the Politburo.
Trump Administration Policy
In contrast to the Obama Administration’s actions, the Trump Administration tightened In contrast to the Obama Administration’s actions, the Trump Administration tightened
restrictions on travel to and from Cuba and on the transfer of private remittances to Cuba. restrictions on travel to and from Cuba and on the transfer of private remittances to Cuba.
Tightening of Travel Restrictions
The Trump Administration made several significant changes to the CACR’s travel provisions. The Trump Administration made several significant changes to the CACR’s travel provisions.
  Restricting Financial Transactions with Certain Cuban Entities: Cuba
Restricted List. In November 2017, OFAC added a new section (31 C.F.R. In November 2017, OFAC added a new section (31 C.F.R.
515.209) to the CACR setting forth restrictions, with some exceptions, on direct 515.209) to the CACR setting forth restrictions, with some exceptions, on direct
financial transactions with any person that the Secretary of State has identified as financial transactions with any person that the Secretary of State has identified as
an entity or subentity under the control of, or acting for or on behalf of, the an entity or subentity under the control of, or acting for or on behalf of, the
Cuban military, intelligence, or security services or personnel, and with which Cuban military, intelligence, or security services or personnel, and with which
~~Congressional Research Service~~
8

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

direct financial transactions would disproportionately benefit such services or direct financial transactions would disproportionately benefit such services or
personnel at the expense of the Cuban people or private enterprise in Cuba.19 The personnel at the expense of the Cuban people or private enterprise in Cuba.19 The
State Department issued a list of restricted Cuban entities and subentities in State Department issued a list of restricted Cuban entities and subentities in
November 2017, commonly referred to as the “Cuba restricted list,” which was November 2017, commonly referred to as the “Cuba restricted list,” which was
updated several times, most recently in January 2021. The list currently includes updated several times, most recently in January 2021. The list currently includes
231 Cuban entities, including 111 hotels, 2 tourist agencies, 5 marinas, and 10 231 Cuban entities, including 111 hotels, 2 tourist agencies, 5 marinas, and 10
stores in Old Havana.20 Most categories of permissible travel (discussed below) stores in Old Havana.20 Most categories of permissible travel (discussed below)
authorized by general license, with the exception of travel for official authorized by general license, with the exception of travel for official
government business, journalistic activities, humanitarian projects, and export government business, journalistic activities, humanitarian projects, and export
transactions, have provisions prohibiting direct financial transactions with transactions, have provisions prohibiting direct financial transactions with
entities on the State Department’s restricted list. entities on the State Department’s restricted list.
19 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017. 20 U.S. Department of State, “List of Restricted Entities and Subentities Associated with Cuba Effective January 8, 2021,” at https://www.state.gov/cuba-restricted-list/list-of-restricted-entities-and-subentities-associated-with-cuba-effective-january-8-2021/. Congressional Research Service 10 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances   People-to-People Educational Travel. OFAC amended the CACR in November OFAC amended the CACR in November
2017 to eliminate people-to-people educational travel for individuals but still 2017 to eliminate people-to-people educational travel for individuals but still
allowed such travel in groups.21 In June 2019, however, OFAC further amended allowed such travel in groups.21 In June 2019, however, OFAC further amended
the CACR to remove the authorization altogether for people-to-people the CACR to remove the authorization altogether for people-to-people
educational travel.22 educational travel.22
  Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List. Effective September 24, 2020, OFAC Effective September 24, 2020, OFAC
amended the CACR, adding a new section (31 C.F.R. 515.210) that prohibits any amended the CACR, adding a new section (31 C.F.R. 515.210) that prohibits any
person subject to U.S. jurisdiction from lodging, paying for lodging, or making person subject to U.S. jurisdiction from lodging, paying for lodging, or making
any reservation for or on behalf of a third party to lodge at any property in Cuba any reservation for or on behalf of a third party to lodge at any property in Cuba
that the Secretary of State has identified as a property owned or controlled by the that the Secretary of State has identified as a property owned or controlled by the
Cuban government, a prohibited Cuban government official, a prohibited Cuban government, a prohibited Cuban government official, a prohibited
member of the Communist Party, or a close relative of either.23 Several days later, member of the Communist Party, or a close relative of either.23 Several days later,
the State Department issued a “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations list” that the State Department issued a “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations list” that
included over 400 hotels (all Cuban hotels), as well as privately owned included over 400 hotels (all Cuban hotels), as well as privately owned
residences for rent (residences for rent (casas particulares) if they are controlled by a prohibited ) if they are controlled by a prohibited
government official or Communist Party member or close relative of either.24 government official or Communist Party member or close relative of either.24
Most categories of permissible travel authorized by general license, with the Most categories of permissible travel authorized by general license, with the
exception of travel for official government business, have provisions that prohibit exception of travel for official government business, have provisions that prohibit
lodging, paying for lodging, or making any reservation for or on behalf of a third lodging, paying for lodging, or making any reservation for or on behalf of a third
party to lodge at any property on the “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List.” party to lodge at any property on the “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List.”
  Removal of General License Authorizations for Professional Meetings or
Conferences and Public Performances, Clinics, Workshops, Competitions,
and Exhibitions. Effective September 24, 2020, OFAC amended the CACR to Effective September 24, 2020, OFAC amended the CACR to
eliminate general licenses for attending or organizing professional meetings or eliminate general licenses for attending or organizing professional meetings or
conferences in Cuba and for participating in public performances, clinics, conferences in Cuba and for participating in public performances, clinics,

~~19 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017.~~
~~20 U.S. Department of State, “List of Restricted Entities and Subentities Associated with Cuba Effective January 8,~~
~~2021,” at https://www.state.gov/cuba-restricted-list/list-of-restricted-entities-and-subentities-associated-with-cuba-~~
~~effective-january-8-2021/.~~
~~21 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017.~~
~~22 84 Federal Register 25992-25993, June 5, 2019.~~
~~23 85 Federal Register 60068-60072, September 24, 2020.~~
~~24 U.S. Department of State, “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List Initial Publication,” September 28, 2020, at~~
~~https://www.state.gov/cuba-sanctions/cuba-prohibited-accommodations-list/cuba-prohibited-accommodations-list-~~
~~initial-publication/.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
9

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

workshops, certain athletic or nonathletic competitions, and exhibitions.25 (A workshops, certain athletic or nonathletic competitions, and exhibitions.25 (A
general license remained, however, for amateur and semiprofessional general license remained, however, for amateur and semiprofessional
international sports federation competitions.) Although specific licenses could be international sports federation competitions.) Although specific licenses could be
issued on a case-by-case basis for transactions related to the above activities, the issued on a case-by-case basis for transactions related to the above activities, the
amended CACR did not refer to organizing professional meetings. amended CACR did not refer to organizing professional meetings.
  Prohibition of Cruise Ships and Flight Limitations. The Trump Administration The Trump Administration
took actions to reduce transportation between the United States and Cuba. In took actions to reduce transportation between the United States and Cuba. In
June 2019, the Department of Commerce (whose Bureau of Industry and Security June 2019, the Department of Commerce (whose Bureau of Industry and Security
regulates temporary sojourns to Cuba of both vessels and aircraft) amended the regulates temporary sojourns to Cuba of both vessels and aircraft) amended the
EAR to generally prohibit passenger and recreational vessels, including cruise EAR to generally prohibit passenger and recreational vessels, including cruise
ships, sailboats, yachts, fishing boats, and other similar vessels, from sailing to ships, sailboats, yachts, fishing boats, and other similar vessels, from sailing to
Cuba.26 The prohibition on cruise ships, in particular, had a significant effect on Cuba.26 The prohibition on cruise ships, in particular, had a significant effect on
21 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017. 22 84 Federal Register 25992-25993, June 5, 2019. 23 85 Federal Register 60068-60072, September 24, 2020. 24 U.S. Department of State, “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List Initial Publication,” September 28, 2020, at https://www.state.gov/cuba-sanctions/cuba-prohibited-accommodations-list/cuba-prohibited-accommodations-list-initial-publication/. 25 85 Federal Register 60068-60072, September 24, 2020. 26 U.S. Department of Commerce, “Restricting the Temporary Sojourn of Aircraft and Vessels to Cuba,” 84 Federal Register 25986-25989, June 5, 2019. Congressional Research Service 11 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances fledging private business that had sprung up catering to cruise ship passengers.27 fledging private business that had sprung up catering to cruise ship passengers.27

The Administration also took multiple actions to restrict air travel to Cuba. In The Administration also took multiple actions to restrict air travel to Cuba. In
June 2019, the Department of Commerce prohibited private and corporate June 2019, the Department of Commerce prohibited private and corporate
aircraft ineligible for a license exception to fly to Cuba.28 In December 2019, the aircraft ineligible for a license exception to fly to Cuba.28 In December 2019, the
Department of Transportation, at the request of the Department of State, Department of Transportation, at the request of the Department of State,
suspended commercial flights by U.S. carriers between the United States and suspended commercial flights by U.S. carriers between the United States and
Cuban cities other than Havana; this prohibition was extended to public charter Cuban cities other than Havana; this prohibition was extended to public charter
flights (to cities other than Havana) in January 2020, which were subsequently flights (to cities other than Havana) in January 2020, which were subsequently
capped to 3,600 round-trip flights for the year beginning June 1, 2020.29 In capped to 3,600 round-trip flights for the year beginning June 1, 2020.29 In
August 2020, the Department of Transportation, at the request of the Department August 2020, the Department of Transportation, at the request of the Department
of State, suspended private charter flights to Cuba, effective October 13, 2020, to of State, suspended private charter flights to Cuba, effective October 13, 2020, to
all Cuban cities, including Havana.30 all Cuban cities, including Havana.30
Tightening of Restrictions on Remittances
The Trump Administration tightened restrictions on remittances to Cuba through amendments to The Trump Administration tightened restrictions on remittances to Cuba through amendments to
the CACR. the CACR.
In November 2017, OFAC changed the definition of Cuban government officials to what it had In November 2017, OFAC changed the definition of Cuban government officials to what it had
been before the Obama Administration changed it in October 2016. The change was significant, been before the Obama Administration changed it in October 2016. The change was significant,
because the CACR prohibits sending remittances to such government officials. Instead of being because the CACR prohibits sending remittances to such government officials. Instead of being

~~25 85 Federal Register 60068-60072, September 24, 2020.~~
~~26 U.S. Department of Commerce, “Restricting the Temporary Sojourn of Aircraft and Vessels to Cuba,” 84~~ ~~Federal~~
~~Register~~ ~~25986-25989, June 5, 2019.~~
limited to “members of the Council of Ministers and flag officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces,” the definition of prohibited Cuban government officials was expanded to include all ministers and vice ministers; members of the Council of State and the Council of Ministers; members and employees of the National Assembly of People’s Power; members of any provincial assembly; local sector chiefs of the Committees of the Defense for the Revolution; director generals and subdirector generals of all ministries and state agencies; employees of the Ministry of the Interior and Ministry of Defense; secretaries and first secretaries of the Confederation of Labor of Cuba and its component unions; chief editors, editors, and deputy editors of Cuban state-run media organizations and programs, including newspapers, television, and radio; and members and employees of the Supreme Court.31 (31 C.F.R. 515.337) In September 2019, OFAC made several amendments to the CACR further restricting remittances to Cuba. 27 Mimi Whitefield, “U.S. Cruise Ships Brought a Boom to Cuba. Now, Some Small Businesses Are Struggling,” 27 Mimi Whitefield, “U.S. Cruise Ships Brought a Boom to Cuba. Now, Some Small Businesses Are Struggling,”
Miami Herald, December 20, 2019. , December 20, 2019.
28 Ibid. 28 Ibid.
29 U.S. Department of Transportation, “Notice (Suspending U.S.-Cuba Scheduled Services via Non-Havana Points,” 29 U.S. Department of Transportation, “Notice (Suspending U.S.-Cuba Scheduled Services via Non-Havana Points,”
October 25, 2019, Dockets DOT-OST-2016-0021, DOT-OST-2016-0226, DOT-OST-1998-20; U.S. Department of October 25, 2019, Dockets DOT-OST-2016-0021, DOT-OST-2016-0226, DOT-OST-1998-20; U.S. Department of
Transportation, and “Final Order, U.S.-Havana Public Charter Authorizations, Docket DOT-OST-2020-0011, May 28, Transportation, and “Final Order, U.S.-Havana Public Charter Authorizations, Docket DOT-OST-2020-0011, May 28,
2020; U.S. Department of State, “United States Restricts Scheduled Air Service to Cuba,” media note, October 25, 2020; U.S. Department of State, “United States Restricts Scheduled Air Service to Cuba,” media note, October 25,
2019; and U.S. Department of State, Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo, “United States Further Restricts Air Travel 2019; and U.S. Department of State, Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo, “United States Further Restricts Air Travel
to Cuba,” press statement, January 10, 2020. to Cuba,” press statement, January 10, 2020.
30 U.S. Department of State, Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo, “Suspension of Private Charter Flights between the 30 U.S. Department of State, Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo, “Suspension of Private Charter Flights between the
United States and Cuba,” press statement, August 13, 2020; and U.S. Department of Transportation, “Order, United States and Cuba,” press statement, August 13, 2020; and U.S. Department of Transportation, “Order,
Suspension of U.S.-Cuba Charter Authorizations, Docket DOT-OST-2020-0129,” August 13, 2020. Suspension of U.S.-Cuba Charter Authorizations, Docket DOT-OST-2020-0129,” August 13, 2020.
~~Congressional Research Service~~
10

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

~~limited to “members of the Council of Ministers and flag officers of the Revolutionary Armed~~
~~Forces,” the definition of prohibited Cuban government officials was expanded to include all~~
~~ministers and vice ministers; members of the Council of State and the Council of Ministers;~~
~~members and employees of the National Assembly of People’s Power; members of any provincial~~
~~assembly; local sector chiefs of the Committees of the Defense for the Revolution; director~~
~~generals and subdirector generals of all ministries and state agencies; employees of the Ministry~~
~~of the Interior and Ministry of Defense; secretaries and first secretaries of the Confederation of~~
~~Labor of Cuba and its component unions; chief editors, editors, and deputy editors of Cuban~~
~~state-run media organizations and programs, including newspapers, television, and radio; and~~
~~members and employees of the Supreme Court.31 (31 C.F.R. 515.337)~~
~~In September 2019, OFAC made several amendments to the CACR further restricting remittances~~
~~to Cuba.~~
31 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury, Commerce, and State Implement Changes to the Cuba Sanctions Rules,” fact sheet, November 8, 2017; and 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017. Congressional Research Service 12 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances  OFAC capped family remittances to any one Cuban national to $1,000 per  OFAC capped family remittances to any one Cuban national to $1,000 per
quarter; such family remittances had not been capped since 2009. quarter; such family remittances had not been capped since 2009.
 In a new provision, OFAC prohibited sending remittances to close family  In a new provision, OFAC prohibited sending remittances to close family
members of prohibited officials of the Cuban government or close family members of prohibited officials of the Cuban government or close family
members of prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party. members of prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party.
 OFAC eliminated the category of donative remittances that had been established  OFAC eliminated the category of donative remittances that had been established
in 2015 but authorized remittances to support the operation of economic activity in 2015 but authorized remittances to support the operation of economic activity
in the non-state sector by self-employed individuals.32 in the non-state sector by self-employed individuals.32
In June and September 2020, respectively, the State Department added to its “Cuba restricted list” In June and September 2020, respectively, the State Department added to its “Cuba restricted list”
two Cuban financial services companies—two Cuban financial services companies—Financiera Cimex (FINCIMEX) and American (FINCIMEX) and American
International Services (AIS)—involved in facilitating the processing of foreign remittances to International Services (AIS)—involved in facilitating the processing of foreign remittances to
Cuba.33 When FINCIMEX was added to the list in June, concerns were raised that remittances Cuba.33 When FINCIMEX was added to the list in June, concerns were raised that remittances
sent to Cuba via Western Union could be jeopardized, although Western Union at the time sent to Cuba via Western Union could be jeopardized, although Western Union at the time
indicated that its remittance services would continue.34 Notably, President Trump’s 2017 national indicated that its remittance services would continue.34 Notably, President Trump’s 2017 national
security presidential memorandum on Cuba had said that forthcoming regulatory changes related security presidential memorandum on Cuba had said that forthcoming regulatory changes related
to the Administration’s policy shift on Cuba would not prohibit transactions related “to sending, to the Administration’s policy shift on Cuba would not prohibit transactions related “to sending,
processing, or receiving authorized remittances.”35 processing, or receiving authorized remittances.”35
On October 27, 2020, however, OFAC amended the CACR to prohibit, effective November 26, On October 27, 2020, however, OFAC amended the CACR to prohibit, effective November 26,
2020, the processing of remittances through any entities on the “Cuba restricted list,” which 2020, the processing of remittances through any entities on the “Cuba restricted list,” which
included AIS and FINCIMEX.36 The new regulations resulted in Western Union ceasing its included AIS and FINCIMEX.36 The new regulations resulted in Western Union ceasing its
operations in Cuba on November 22, 2020.37 With more than 400 offices in Cuba, Western Union, operations in Cuba on November 22, 2020.37 With more than 400 offices in Cuba, Western Union,

~~31 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury, Commerce, and State Implement Changes to the Cuba Sanctions~~
~~Rules,” fact sheet, November 8, 2017; and 82 Federal Register 51998-5200, November 9, 2017.~~
which had partnered with FINCIMEX since 2016, had been the major financial services company used for transmitting remittances to Cuba. Biden Administration Policy In its initial months in office in 2021, the Biden Administration announced it was conducting a review of policy toward Cuba, would make human rights a core pillar of policy, and would examine policy decisions made in the prior Administration.38 In the aftermath of the Cuban government’s response to countrywide protests on July 11, 2021, which included more than 1,000 detentions and hundreds of convictions, the Biden Administration imposed several rounds of economic sanctions and visa restrictions targeting officials implicated in the government’s 32 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Issues Changes to Strengthen Cuba Sanctions Rules,” fact sheet, 32 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Issues Changes to Strengthen Cuba Sanctions Rules,” fact sheet,
September 6, 2019; and 84 September 6, 2019; and 84 Federal Register 47121-47123, September 9, 2019. 47121-47123, September 9, 2019.
33 U.S. Department of State, “List of Restricted Entities and Subentities Associated with Cuba Effective September 29, 33 U.S. Department of State, “List of Restricted Entities and Subentities Associated with Cuba Effective September 29,
2020.” 2020.”
34 Nora Gámez Torres, “Remittances to Cuba Could Be in Peril after New Announcement by the Trump 34 Nora Gámez Torres, “Remittances to Cuba Could Be in Peril after New Announcement by the Trump
Administration,” Administration,” Miami Herald, June 3, 2020. , June 3, 2020.
35 82 35 82 Federal Register 488875-48878, October 20, 2017. 488875-48878, October 20, 2017.
36 85 36 85 Federal Register 67988-67989, October 27, 2020. 67988-67989, October 27, 2020.
37 Western Union, “Cuba: A Letter to Our Customers,” November 13, 2020, at https://www.westernunion.com/blog/en/37 Western Union, “Cuba: A Letter to Our Customers,” November 13, 2020, at https://www.westernunion.com/blog/en/
a-letter-to-our-cuba-customers /. Also see Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Cuba, “Measures Imposed by the a-letter-to-our-cuba-customers /. Also see Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Cuba, “Measures Imposed by the
U.S. Government Against FINCIMEX Harm the Cuban People,” October 27, 2020; and Kirk Semple, “Cuba Says U.S. U.S. Government Against FINCIMEX Harm the Cuban People,” October 27, 2020; and Kirk Semple, “Cuba Says U.S.
~~Congressional Research Service~~
11

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

~~which had partnered with FINCIMEX since 2016, had been the major financial services company~~
~~used for transmitting remittances to Cuba.~~
~~Biden Administration Policy~~
~~In its initial months in office in 2021, the Biden Administration announced it was conducting a~~
~~review of policy toward Cuba, would make human rights a core pillar of policy, and would~~
~~examine policy decisions made in the prior Administration.38 In the aftermath of the Cuban~~
~~government’s response to countrywide protests on July 11, 2021, which included more than 1,000~~
~~detentions and hundreds of convictions, the Biden Administration imposed several rounds of~~
~~economic sanctions and visa restrictions targeting officials implicated in the government’s~~
Restriction Imperils Its Economy,” New York Times,” October 29, 2020. 38 U.S. Department of State, “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Bharat Ramamurti,” March 9, 2021. Also see CRS In Focus IF10045, Cuba: U.S. Policy Overview, by Mark P. Sullivan. Congressional Research Service 13 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances repression. On May 16, 2022, the Administration announced several forthcoming changes to U.S. repression. On May 16, 2022, the Administration announced several forthcoming changes to U.S.
policy toward Cuba, with the overarching goal of increasing support for the Cuban people, who policy toward Cuba, with the overarching goal of increasing support for the Cuban people, who
are facing “an unprecedented humanitarian crisis.” 39 These changes included expanding are facing “an unprecedented humanitarian crisis.” 39 These changes included expanding
authorized travel to Cuba and easing some restrictions on remittances.40 authorized travel to Cuba and easing some restrictions on remittances.40
Partial Easing of Travel Restrictions
The Biden Administration’s May 2022 announcement to expand authorized travel included three The Biden Administration’s May 2022 announcement to expand authorized travel included three
components. components.
  Reauthorized Scheduled and Charter Flights to Cuban Cities Other than
Havana. The Administration announced it would reauthorize scheduled and The Administration announced it would reauthorize scheduled and
charter flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana, which had been suspended by charter flights to Cuban locations beyond Havana, which had been suspended by
the Trump Administration in 2019 and 2020. In a May 31, 2022, letter to the Trump Administration in 2019 and 2020. In a May 31, 2022, letter to
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of State Antony Blinken Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of State Antony Blinken
requested that the Department of Transportation terminate all civil aviation requested that the Department of Transportation terminate all civil aviation
restrictions on flights between the United States and Cuba that had been restrictions on flights between the United States and Cuba that had been
implemented at the State Department’s request in 2019 and 2020. As described implemented at the State Department’s request in 2019 and 2020. As described
above, these restrictions included suspending scheduled and charter flights to above, these restrictions included suspending scheduled and charter flights to
cities other than Havana and limiting the number of authorized flights. The cities other than Havana and limiting the number of authorized flights. The
Transportation Department followed through with an order on June 1, 2022, and Transportation Department followed through with an order on June 1, 2022, and
revoked the restrictions imposed in 2019 and 2020.41 revoked the restrictions imposed in 2019 and 2020.41
  Educational Travel: Reinstatement of Group People-to-People Travel. The . The
Biden Administration announced it would reinstate group, but not individual, Biden Administration announced it would reinstate group, but not individual,
people-to-people educational travel, which the Trump Administration had people-to-people educational travel, which the Trump Administration had
eliminated in 2019. Treasury’s OFAC amended the CACR (31 C.F.R. eliminated in 2019. Treasury’s OFAC amended the CACR (31 C.F.R.
515.565(b)) effective June 9, 2022, to permit such travel under certain conditions, 515.565(b)) effective June 9, 2022, to permit such travel under certain conditions,
including that the educational exchanges involve activities to enhance contact including that the educational exchanges involve activities to enhance contact
with the Cuban people, support civil society, or promote the Cuban people’s with the Cuban people, support civil society, or promote the Cuban people’s

~~Restriction Imperils Its Economy,” New York Times,” October 29, 2020.~~
~~38 U.S. Department of State, “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki and Deputy Director of the National~~
~~Economic Council Bharat Ramamurti,” March 9, 2021. Also see CRS In Focus IF10045, Cuba: U.S. Policy Overview,~~
~~by Mark P. Sullivan.~~
~~39 U.S. Department of State, “Biden Administration Measures to Support the Cuban People,” Fact Sheet, May 16, 2022.~~
~~40 Other policy changes included facilitating family reunification and increasing support for Cuba’s private sector. See~~
~~CRS Insight IN11937, Biden Administration’s Cuba Policy Changes, by Mark P. Sullivan.~~
~~41 U.S. Department of Transportation, Order 2022-6-1, June 1, 2022.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
12

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

independence from Cuban authorities.42 OFAC also amended the CACR to independence from Cuban authorities.42 OFAC also amended the CACR to
remove certain restrictions on authorized academic activities, including removal remove certain restrictions on authorized academic activities, including removal
of the 10-week requirement for certain educational activities (31 C.F.R. of the 10-week requirement for certain educational activities (31 C.F.R.
515.565(a)). 515.565(a)).
  Reinstatement of a General License for Professional Meetings or
Conferences. OFAC amended the CACR (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(2)), effective OFAC amended the CACR (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(2)), effective
June 9, 2022, to reinstate a general license authorizing attendance at, or June 9, 2022, to reinstate a general license authorizing attendance at, or
organization of, professional meetings or conferences in Cuba.43 OFAC also organization of, professional meetings or conferences in Cuba.43 OFAC also
provided for a specific license, issued on a case-by-case basis, for attending or provided for a specific license, issued on a case-by-case basis, for attending or
organizing conferences that do not qualify under terms of the general license. The organizing conferences that do not qualify under terms of the general license. The
Trump Administration had removed the general license for attending or Trump Administration had removed the general license for attending or
organizing any meetings or conferences in September 2020 and had eliminated a organizing any meetings or conferences in September 2020 and had eliminated a
39 U.S. Department of State, “Biden Administration Measures to Support the Cuban People,” Fact Sheet, May 16, 2022. 40 Other policy changes included facilitating family reunification and increasing support for Cuba’s private sector. See CRS Insight IN11937, Biden Administration’s Cuba Policy Changes, by Mark P. Sullivan. 41 U.S. Department of Transportation, Order 2022-6-1, June 1, 2022. 42 87 Federal Register 35088-35091, June 9, 2022. 43 Ibid. Congressional Research Service 14 link to page 19 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances provision permitting a specific license for organizing professional meetings or provision permitting a specific license for organizing professional meetings or
conferences. conferences.
Partial Easing of Restrictions on Remittances
The Biden Administration’s May 2022 announced policy changes included partially easing The Biden Administration’s May 2022 announced policy changes included partially easing
restrictions on remittances. OFAC subsequently amended the CACR, at 31 C.F.R. 515.570, restrictions on remittances. OFAC subsequently amended the CACR, at 31 C.F.R. 515.570,
effective June 9, 2022, making two significant changes.44 First, OFAC removed the Trump effective June 9, 2022, making two significant changes.44 First, OFAC removed the Trump
Administration’s $1,000 quarterly limit (imposed in 2019) on family remittances to Cuban Administration’s $1,000 quarterly limit (imposed in 2019) on family remittances to Cuban
nationals who are close relatives. Second, it restored the category of donative remittances, adding nationals who are close relatives. Second, it restored the category of donative remittances, adding
a general license for such remittances to Cuban nationals who are not prohibited officials of the a general license for such remittances to Cuban nationals who are not prohibited officials of the
Cuban government or prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party. U.S. officials maintain Cuban government or prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party. U.S. officials maintain
that donative remittances will be crucial in supporting the Afro-Cuban community on the island that donative remittances will be crucial in supporting the Afro-Cuban community on the island
and that “only one of six Afro-Cubans receives family remittances.”45 and that “only one of six Afro-Cubans receives family remittances.”45
When the Biden Administration announced its changed policy When the Biden Administration announced its changed policy in May 2022, U.S. officials maintained that , U.S. officials maintained that
remittances processed through FINCIMEX would remain prohibited, as the Administration does remittances processed through FINCIMEX would remain prohibited, as the Administration does
not plan to remove entities from the “Cuba restricted list.” FINCIMEX, a financial investment not plan to remove entities from the “Cuba restricted list.” FINCIMEX, a financial investment
and remittance company incorporated in Panama, is owned by a Cuban military-controlled and remittance company incorporated in Panama, is owned by a Cuban military-controlled
umbrella enterprise (umbrella enterprise (Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A., or GAESA), according to the , or GAESA), according to the
Treasury Department.46 Western Union had partnered with FINCIMEX beginning in 2016 and Treasury Department.46 Western Union had partnered with FINCIMEX beginning in 2016 and
was the major U.S. financial services company used for transmitting remittances to Cuba; the was the major U.S. financial services company used for transmitting remittances to Cuba; the
company ceased its operations in November 2020 when FINCIMEX was added to the “Cuba company ceased its operations in November 2020 when FINCIMEX was added to the “Cuba
restricted list.” State Department officials maintain that processing remittances through a Cuban restricted list.” State Department officials maintain that processing remittances through a Cuban
~~civilian entity would be acceptable.47~~

~~42 87 Federal Register 35088-35091, June 9, 2022.~~
~~43 Ibid.~~
~~44 Ibid.~~
~~45 White House, “Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on New Cuba Policy,” May 16, 2022.~~
~~46 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Identifies Cuban State-Owned Businesses for Sanctions Evasion,”~~
~~December 21, 2020.~~
~~47 White House, “Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on New Cuba Policy,” May 16, 2022.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~
13

~~link to page 17~~ ~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~
civilian entity would be acceptable.47 In mid-November 2022, a U.S. company based in Miami, VaCuba, announced that it had received a Treasury Department license to work with a Cuban company, Orbit S.A., to send remittances to Cuba. Orbit is not affiliated with the Cuban military and is not on the State Department’s restricted list. In February 2022, the Cuban government had authorized Orbit to manage and process international transfers from abroad. The Biden Administration’s action could make it easier for those subject to U.S. jurisdiction to send remittances to Cuba.48
Current Permissible Travel to Cuba
According to Cuban government statistics, the number of travelers from the United States to According to Cuban government statistics, the number of travelers from the United States to
Cuba reached almost 1.2 million in 2018 but fell slightly to 1.1 million in 2019. Travel declined Cuba reached almost 1.2 million in 2018 but fell slightly to 1.1 million in 2019. Travel declined
significantly in 2020 and 2021, to around 188,000 and 36,000 travelers, respectively, largely due significantly in 2020 and 2021, to around 188,000 and 36,000 travelers, respectively, largely due
to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related travel restrictions but also because of U.S. to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related travel restrictions but also because of U.S.
travel restrictions imposed in 2019 and 2020 (seetravel restrictions imposed in 2019 and 2020 (see Table 12). In the first . In the first ~~three~~nine months of 2022, as 44 Ibid. 45 White House, “Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on New Cuba Policy,” May 16, 2022. 46 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Identifies Cuban State-Owned Businesses for Sanctions Evasion,” December 21, 2020. 47 White House, “Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on New Cuba Policy,” May 16, 2022. 48 “Sending Remittances to Cuba Made More Flexible,” OnCuba, November 17, 2022; “VaCuba consigue licencia y anuncia una reducción de la comisión sobre remesas,” 14ymedio, November 16, 2022; and Mario J. Pentón, “Exclusiva: Administración Biden flexibiliza requisitos para el envío de remesas a Cuba desde Miami,” Américatevé, November 15, 2022. Congressional Research Service 15 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances ~~months of 2022, as~~
pandemic-related travel restrictions eased, travel to Cuba from the United States began to pick up, pandemic-related travel restrictions eased, travel to Cuba from the United States began to pick up,
with over with over 69272,000 travelers, ,000 travelers, ~~almost double~~which is almost eight times the number for all of 2021 the number for all of 2021~~.48~~
~~Table 1~~ but far below the pre-pandemic total of almost 1.1 million.49 Table 2. Travel to Cuba from the United States, 2018-2021

2018
2019
2020
2021
U.S. Visitors U.S. Visitors
638,365 638,365
498,538 498,538
58,147 58,147
7,039 7,039
Cubans Living Cubans Living
Abroad Embarking Abroad Embarking
from the United from the United
521,134 521,134
552,895 552,895
129,865 129,865
29,451 29,451
States States
Total Total
1,159,499 1,159,499
1,051,433 1,051,433
188,012 188,012
36,490 36,490
Sources: República de Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadísticas e Información (ONEI), Anuario Estadístico de República de Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadísticas e Información (ONEI), Anuario Estadístico de
Cuba 2020, Capítulo 15: Turismo (Edición 2021); and ONEI, Turismo Internacional Indicadores Seleccionados, Cuba 2020, Capítulo 15: Turismo (Edición 2021); and ONEI, Turismo Internacional Indicadores Seleccionados,
Enero- Diciembre 2019 (Edición Marzo 2020), Enero-Diciembre 2020 (Edición May 2021), and Enero-Diciembre Enero- Diciembre 2019 (Edición Marzo 2020), Enero-Diciembre 2020 (Edición May 2021), and Enero-Diciembre
2021 (Edición Marzo 2022). 2021 (Edición Marzo 2022).
At present, travel-related transactions for 12 categories of travel set forth in the CACR are At present, travel-related transactions for 12 categories of travel set forth in the CACR are
authorized under a general license, meaning there is no need to obtain special permission from authorized under a general license, meaning there is no need to obtain special permission from
OFAC, although certain types of travel (public performances, clinics, workshops, and certain OFAC, although certain types of travel (public performances, clinics, workshops, and certain
athletic competitions) require a specific license (issued by OFAC on a case-by-case basis). The athletic competitions) require a specific license (issued by OFAC on a case-by-case basis). The
travel regulations can be found at 31 C.F.R. 515.560, which references other sections of the travel regulations can be found at 31 C.F.R. 515.560, which references other sections of the
CACR for travel-related transaction licensing criteria. In addition, for each of the 12 categories of CACR for travel-related transaction licensing criteria. In addition, for each of the 12 categories of
travel set forth in the CACR, specific licenses may be issued by OFAC for persons engaging in travel set forth in the CACR, specific licenses may be issued by OFAC for persons engaging in
activities related to the specific category that do not qualify for the general license set forth for activities related to the specific category that do not qualify for the general license set forth for
each category. As noted, applications for specific licenses are reviewed and granted by OFAC on each category. As noted, applications for specific licenses are reviewed and granted by OFAC on
a case-by-case basis. Applicants for specific licenses have to wait for OFAC to issue the license a case-by-case basis. Applicants for specific licenses have to wait for OFAC to issue the license
prior to engaging in travel-related transactions. Those individuals traveling to Cuba under either a prior to engaging in travel-related transactions. Those individuals traveling to Cuba under either a
general or specific license are responsible for keeping records of their Cuba-related transactions general or specific license are responsible for keeping records of their Cuba-related transactions
for at least five years. for at least five years.
OFAC maintains on its website a document of frequently asked questions on the Cuba sanctions OFAC maintains on its website a document of frequently asked questions on the Cuba sanctions
program that provides information on the travel restrictions, including the various categories of program that provides information on the travel restrictions, including the various categories of
travel. This document, along with the travel regulations themselves, provides guidance for travel. This document, along with the travel regulations themselves, provides guidance for
potential travelers to Cuba.potential travelers to Cuba.4950
As noted previously, most categories of permissible travel set forth in the CACR and discussed As noted previously, most categories of permissible travel set forth in the CACR and discussed
below—with the exception of travel for official government business, journalistic activities, below—with the exception of travel for official government business, journalistic activities,
humanitarian projects, and export transactions—have provisions prohibiting direct financial humanitarian projects, and export transactions—have provisions prohibiting direct financial
transactions with entities on the State Department’s “Cuba restricted list” last updated in January 2021. In addition, most categories of travel set forth in the CACR, with the exception of travel for official government business, have provisions prohibiting any person subject to U.S. jurisdiction from lodging at Cuban hotels and other properties on the State Department’s “Cuba Prohibited Accommodations List” issued in September 2020. 49
48 República de Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadísticas e Información, Turismo República de Cuba, Oficina Nacional de Estadísticas e Información, Turismo ~~Internacional~~, Indicadores , Indicadores
Seleccionados, Enero-Seleccionados, Enero-~~Marzo~~Septiembre 2022 (Edición 2022 (Edición ~~Mayo~~Diciembre 2022). 2022).
4950 U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Frequently Asked Questions on Changes to the Cuba Sanctions Program,” U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, “Frequently Asked Questions on Changes to the Cuba Sanctions Program,”
updated as of June 8, 2022, at https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/topic/1541. updated as of June 8, 2022, at https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/topic/1541.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1416

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

~~transactions with entities on the State Department’s “Cuba restricted list” last updated in January~~
~~2021. In addition, most categories of travel set forth in the CACR, with the exception of travel for~~
~~official government business, have provisions prohibiting any person subject to U.S. jurisdiction~~
~~from lodging at Cuban hotels and other properties on the State Department’s “Cuba Prohibited~~
~~Accommodations List” issued in September 2020.~~
The 12 categories of U.S. travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR are the following:The 12 categories of U.S. travel to Cuba set forth in the CACR are the following:5051
  Family Visits. Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and
persons traveling with them who share a common dwelling as a family visiting a persons traveling with them who share a common dwelling as a family visiting a
close relative who is a national of Cuba or a person ordinarily resident in Cuba, close relative who is a national of Cuba or a person ordinarily resident in Cuba,
or visiting a close relative in Cuba or accompanying a close relative traveling to or visiting a close relative in Cuba or accompanying a close relative traveling to
Cuba pursuant to authorizations for such travel as official government business, Cuba pursuant to authorizations for such travel as official government business,
journalistic activity, professional research, certain educational activities, religious journalistic activity, professional research, certain educational activities, religious
activities, humanitarian projects, or activities of private foundations or research activities, humanitarian projects, or activities of private foundations or research
or educational institutes (31 C.F.R. 515.561(a)). A close relative is defined as any or educational institutes (31 C.F.R. 515.561(a)). A close relative is defined as any
individual related to the traveler by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more individual related to the traveler by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more
than three generations removed from the traveler or from a common ancestor than three generations removed from the traveler or from a common ancestor
with the traveler (31 C.F.R. 515.339). with the traveler (31 C.F.R. 515.339).
  Official Government Business. Employees, contractors, or grantees of the U.S. Employees, contractors, or grantees of the U.S.
government, any foreign government, or any intergovernmental organization of government, any foreign government, or any intergovernmental organization of
which the United States is a member or holds observer status, who are on official which the United States is a member or holds observer status, who are on official
business (31 C.F.R. 515.562). business (31 C.F.R. 515.562).
  Journalistic Activities. A person involved in journalistic activities and is at least A person involved in journalistic activities and is at least
one of the following: regularly employed as a journalist by a news reporting one of the following: regularly employed as a journalist by a news reporting
organization; regularly employed as supporting broadcast or technical personnel; organization; regularly employed as supporting broadcast or technical personnel;
a freelance journalist with a record of previous journalistic experience working a freelance journalist with a record of previous journalistic experience working
on a freelance journalistic project; or broadcast or technical personnel with a on a freelance journalistic project; or broadcast or technical personnel with a
record of previous broadcast or technical experience who are supporting a record of previous broadcast or technical experience who are supporting a
freelance journalist working on a freelance project (31 C.F.R. 515.563). freelance journalist working on a freelance project (31 C.F.R. 515.563).
 Professional Research and Professional Meetings. Professional research, Professional research, ~~provided~~
provided that the purpose of the research directly relates to the traveler’s profession, that the purpose of the research directly relates to the traveler’s profession,
professional background, or area of expertise, including area of graduate-level professional background, or area of expertise, including area of graduate-level
full-time study; and the traveler’s schedule does not include free time or full-time study; and the traveler’s schedule does not include free time or
recreation in excess of that consistent with a full-time schedule of professional recreation in excess of that consistent with a full-time schedule of professional
research (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(1)). research (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(1)).

Attendance at a professional meeting or conference, provided the purpose Attendance at a professional meeting or conference, provided the purpose
directly relates to the traveler’s profession, professional background, or area of directly relates to the traveler’s profession, professional background, or area of
expertise, including area of graduate-level full-time study. Organization of a expertise, including area of graduate-level full-time study. Organization of a
professional meeting or conference on behalf of an entity, provided the traveler’s professional meeting or conference on behalf of an entity, provided the traveler’s
profession is related to the organization of professional meetings or conferences profession is related to the organization of professional meetings or conferences
or the traveler is an employee or contractor of an entity that is organizing the or the traveler is an employee or contractor of an entity that is organizing the
meeting or conference. For both attendance at and organization of such meetings meeting or conference. For both attendance at and organization of such meetings
or conferences, the traveler’s schedule of activities is not to include free time or or conferences, the traveler’s schedule of activities is not to include free time or
recreation in excess of that consistent with a full-time schedule of attendance at, recreation in excess of that consistent with a full-time schedule of attendance at,
or organization of, such meetings or conferences (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(2)). Specific licenses may be issued related to professional research in Cuba or professional meetings in Cuba that do not qualify for a general license under the general license authorizations described above. (31 C.F.R. 515.564(e)).
5051 The descriptions of the 12 travel categories are drawn from, but not a substitute for, the actual CACR provisions The descriptions of the 12 travel categories are drawn from, but not a substitute for, the actual CACR provisions
available at 31 C.F.Ravailable at 31 C.F.R. Part 515. Unless indicated, the descriptions are for travel authorized pursuant to a general license. Part 515. Unless indicated, the descriptions are for travel authorized pursuant to a general license.
For each travel category, the CACR provides for specific licenses to be issued on a case-by-case basis for travel that For each travel category, the CACR provides for specific licenses to be issued on a case-by-case basis for travel that
does not qualify for the general license. does not qualify for the general license.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1517

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

~~or organization of, such meetings or conferences (31 C.F.R. 515.564(a)(2)).~~

~~Specific licenses may be issued related to professional research in Cuba or~~
~~professional meetings in Cuba that do not qualify for a general license under the~~
~~general license authorizations described above. (31 C.F.R. 515.564(e)).~~
  Educational Activities. U.S. academic institutions and their faculty, staff, and U.S. academic institutions and their faculty, staff, and
students involved in the following activities: (1) participation in a structured students involved in the following activities: (1) participation in a structured
educational program in Cuba as part of a course offered at a U.S. graduate or educational program in Cuba as part of a course offered at a U.S. graduate or
undergraduate degree-making institution; (2) noncommercial academic research undergraduate degree-making institution; (2) noncommercial academic research
in Cuba specifically related to Cuba for the purpose of obtaining an in Cuba specifically related to Cuba for the purpose of obtaining an
undergraduate or graduate degree; (3) participation in a formal course of study at undergraduate or graduate degree; (3) participation in a formal course of study at
a Cuban academic institution, provided the formal course of study in Cuba will a Cuban academic institution, provided the formal course of study in Cuba will
be accepted for credit toward the student’s graduate or undergraduate degree; (4) be accepted for credit toward the student’s graduate or undergraduate degree; (4)
teaching at a Cuban academic institution related to an academic program, teaching at a Cuban academic institution related to an academic program,
provided that the individual is regularly employed in a teaching capacity by a provided that the individual is regularly employed in a teaching capacity by a
U.S. or other non-Cuban academic institution; (5) sponsorship of a Cuban scholar U.S. or other non-Cuban academic institution; (5) sponsorship of a Cuban scholar
to teach or engage in other scholarly activity at the sponsoring U.S. academic to teach or engage in other scholarly activity at the sponsoring U.S. academic
institution; (6) educational exchanges sponsored by Cuban or U.S. secondary institution; (6) educational exchanges sponsored by Cuban or U.S. secondary
schools involving student participation in a formal course of study or in a schools involving student participation in a formal course of study or in a
structured educational program offered by a secondary school or other academic structured educational program offered by a secondary school or other academic
institution and led by a teacher or other secondary school official (including institution and led by a teacher or other secondary school official (including
participation by a reasonable number of adult chaperones); (7) sponsorship or co-participation by a reasonable number of adult chaperones); (7) sponsorship or co-
sponsorship of noncommercial academic seminars, conferences, symposia, and sponsorship of noncommercial academic seminars, conferences, symposia, and
workshops related to Cuba or global issues involving Cuba and attendance at workshops related to Cuba or global issues involving Cuba and attendance at
such events by faculty, staff, and students of a participating U.S. academic such events by faculty, staff, and students of a participating U.S. academic
institution; (8) establishment of academic exchanges and joint noncommercial institution; (8) establishment of academic exchanges and joint noncommercial
academic research projects with universities or academic institutions in Cuba; (9) academic research projects with universities or academic institutions in Cuba; (9)
provision of standardized testing services to Cuban nationals; (10) provision of provision of standardized testing services to Cuban nationals; (10) provision of
internet-based courses to Cuban nationals, provided that the course content is at internet-based courses to Cuban nationals, provided that the course content is at
the undergraduate level or below; (11) the organization of, and preparation for, the undergraduate level or below; (11) the organization of, and preparation for,
the ten activities described above, by employees or contractors of the sponsoring the ten activities described above, by employees or contractors of the sponsoring
organization subject to U.S. jurisdiction; and (12) the facilitation by a U.S. organization subject to U.S. jurisdiction; and (12) the facilitation by a U.S.
organization, or by a staff member of that organization, of licensed educational organization, or by a staff member of that organization, of licensed educational
activities in Cuba on behalf of U.S. academic institutions or secondary schools activities in Cuba on behalf of U.S. academic institutions or secondary schools
with certain provisions for the U.S. organization (31 C.F.R. 515.565(a)). with certain provisions for the U.S. organization (31 C.F.R. 515.565(a)).
 People-to-People Travel. Travel directly incident to educational exchanges not Travel directly incident to educational exchanges not
involving academic study pursuant to a degree program. Travel-related involving academic study pursuant to a degree program. Travel-related
transactions pursuant to this authorization must be for the purpose of engaging, transactions pursuant to this authorization must be for the purpose of engaging,
while in Cuba, in a full-time schedule of activities intended to enhance contact while in Cuba, in a full-time schedule of activities intended to enhance contact
with the Cuban people, support civil society in Cuba, or promote the Cuban with the Cuban people, support civil society in Cuba, or promote the Cuban
people’s independence from Cuban authorities. The exchanges are to take place people’s independence from Cuban authorities. The exchanges are to take place
under the auspices of an organization that sponsors such exchanges to promote under the auspices of an organization that sponsors such exchanges to promote
people-to-people contact, and an employee, paid consultant, or agent of the people-to-people contact, and an employee, paid consultant, or agent of the
organization is to accompany each group traveling to Cuba to ensure each organization is to accompany each group traveling to Cuba to ensure each
traveler has a full-time schedule of educational exchange activities. The traveler has a full-time schedule of educational exchange activities. The
predominant portion of the activities is not to be with a prohibited official of the predominant portion of the activities is not to be with a prohibited official of the
Cuban government (as defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337) or a prohibited member of Cuban government (as defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337) or a prohibited member of
the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.338). the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.338).
~~Congressional Research Service~~
16

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

  Religious Activities. Religious organizations located in the United States and Religious organizations located in the United States and
members and staff of such organizations engaged in a full-time program of members and staff of such organizations engaged in a full-time program of
religious activities (31 C.F.R. 515.566). religious activities (31 C.F.R. 515.566).
  Public Performances, Clinics, Workshops, Athletic and Other Competitions,
and Exhibitions. Participation in amateur and semiprofessional international Participation in amateur and semiprofessional international
sports federation competitions, provided that the athletic competition is held sports federation competitions, provided that the athletic competition is held
Congressional Research Service 18 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances under the auspices of the international sports federation for the relevant sport; the under the auspices of the international sports federation for the relevant sport; the
U.S. participants are selected by the U.S. federation for the relevant sport; and U.S. participants are selected by the U.S. federation for the relevant sport; and
the competition is open for attendance, and in relevant situations, participation, the competition is open for attendance, and in relevant situations, participation,
by the Cuban public. (31 C.F.R. 515.567(a)). by the Cuban public. (31 C.F.R. 515.567(a)).

Specific licenses may be issued on a case-by-case basis for participation in, or Specific licenses may be issued on a case-by-case basis for participation in, or
organization of, public performances, clinics, workshops, other athletic or organization of, public performances, clinics, workshops, other athletic or
nonathletic competitions, or exhibitions in Cuba, and conditional on the event nonathletic competitions, or exhibitions in Cuba, and conditional on the event
being open for attendance, and in relevant situations, participation, by the Cuban being open for attendance, and in relevant situations, participation, by the Cuban
public (31 C.F.R. 515.567 (b)). (Prior to OFAC changes to the CACR in public (31 C.F.R. 515.567 (b)). (Prior to OFAC changes to the CACR in
September 2020, these activities were covered by a general license.) September 2020, these activities were covered by a general license.)
  Support for the Cuban People. Those traveling for activities in support of the Those traveling for activities in support of the
Cuban people, provided that the activities are of recognized human rights Cuban people, provided that the activities are of recognized human rights
organizations; independent organizations designed to promote a rapid, peaceful organizations; independent organizations designed to promote a rapid, peaceful
transition to democracy; or individuals and nongovernmental organizations that transition to democracy; or individuals and nongovernmental organizations that
promote independent activity intended to strengthen civil society in Cuba. Each promote independent activity intended to strengthen civil society in Cuba. Each
traveler is to engage in a full-time schedule of activities that enhance contact with traveler is to engage in a full-time schedule of activities that enhance contact with
the Cuban people, support civil society in Cuba, or promote the Cuban people’s the Cuban people, support civil society in Cuba, or promote the Cuban people’s
independence from Cuba authorities; the activities are also to result in independence from Cuba authorities; the activities are also to result in
meaningful interaction with individuals in Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.574).meaningful interaction with individuals in Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.574).
  Humanitarian Projects. Those involved in the following humanitarian projects Those involved in the following humanitarian projects
in Cuba that are designed to directly benefit the Cuban people: medical and in Cuba that are designed to directly benefit the Cuban people: medical and
health-related projects; construction projects intended to benefit legitimately health-related projects; construction projects intended to benefit legitimately
independent civil society groups; disaster preparedness, relief, and response; independent civil society groups; disaster preparedness, relief, and response;
historical preservation; environmental projects; projects involving formal or non-historical preservation; environmental projects; projects involving formal or non-
formal educational training, within Cuba or off-island, on entrepreneurship and formal educational training, within Cuba or off-island, on entrepreneurship and
business, civil education, journalism, advocacy and organizing, adult literacy, or business, civil education, journalism, advocacy and organizing, adult literacy, or
vocational skills; community-based grassroots projects; projects suitable to the vocational skills; community-based grassroots projects; projects suitable to the
development of small-scale private enterprise; projects that are related to development of small-scale private enterprise; projects that are related to
agricultural and rural development that promote independent activity; agricultural and rural development that promote independent activity;
microfinancing projects; and projects to meet basic human needs (31 C.F.R. microfinancing projects; and projects to meet basic human needs (31 C.F.R.
515.575). 515.575).
  Activities of Private Foundations or Research or Educational Institutes.
Those involved in activities by private foundations or research or education Those involved in activities by private foundations or research or education
institutes with an established interest in international relations to collect institutes with an established interest in international relations to collect
information related to Cuba for noncommercial purposes (31 C.F.R. 515.576). information related to Cuba for noncommercial purposes (31 C.F.R. 515.576).
  Exportation, Importation, or Transmission of Information or Informational
Materials. Those involved in the exportation, importation, or transmission of Those involved in the exportation, importation, or transmission of
informational materials, defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.332 as publications, films, informational materials, defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.332 as publications, films,
posters, phonograph records, photographs, microfilms, microfiche, tapes, posters, phonograph records, photographs, microfilms, microfiche, tapes,
compact disks, CD-ROMs, artworks, news wire feeds, and other informational compact disks, CD-ROMs, artworks, news wire feeds, and other informational
and informational articles. Those involved in professional media or artistic and informational articles. Those involved in professional media or artistic
~~Congressional Research Service~~
17

~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

productions of information or informational materials for exportation, productions of information or informational materials for exportation,
importation, or transmission, including the filming or production of media importation, or transmission, including the filming or production of media
programs (such as movies and television programs), the recording of music, and programs (such as movies and television programs), the recording of music, and
the creation of artworks in Cuba, provided that the traveler is regularly employed the creation of artworks in Cuba, provided that the traveler is regularly employed
in or has demonstrated professional experience in a field relevant to such in or has demonstrated professional experience in a field relevant to such
professional media or artistic productions (31 C.F.R. 515.545). professional media or artistic productions (31 C.F.R. 515.545).
Congressional Research Service 19 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances   Export Transactions. Those involved in activities directly incident to the Those involved in activities directly incident to the
conduct of market research, commercial marketing, sales or contract negotiation, conduct of market research, commercial marketing, sales or contract negotiation,
accompanied delivery, installation, leasing, servicing, or repair in Cuba of items accompanied delivery, installation, leasing, servicing, or repair in Cuba of items
consistent with the export or re-export licensing policy of the Department of consistent with the export or re-export licensing policy of the Department of
Commerce (31 C.F.R. 515.533 and 31 C.F.R. 515.559). Commerce (31 C.F.R. 515.533 and 31 C.F.R. 515.559).
Current Policy on Remittances
U.S. restrictions on remittances to Cuba are defined under the CACR. Similar to restrictions on U.S. restrictions on remittances to Cuba are defined under the CACR. Similar to restrictions on
travel, restrictions on remittances have changed over time, with the Obama Administration travel, restrictions on remittances have changed over time, with the Obama Administration
significantly easing restrictions, the Trump Administration imposing new restrictions, particularly significantly easing restrictions, the Trump Administration imposing new restrictions, particularly
in late 2020, and the Biden Administration partially reversing the Trump-era restrictions. Cash in late 2020, and the Biden Administration partially reversing the Trump-era restrictions. Cash
remittances to Cuba reportedly increased from almost $1.7 billion in 2009 to $3.7 billion in 2019, remittances to Cuba reportedly increased from almost $1.7 billion in 2009 to $3.7 billion in 2019,
before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a Miami-based consulting group.before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a Miami-based consulting group.5152 In 2019, some In 2019, some
45% of remittances to Cuba reportedly were carried by individuals; the remainder went through 45% of remittances to Cuba reportedly were carried by individuals; the remainder went through
remittance-forwarding companies, with the largest being Western Union.remittance-forwarding companies, with the largest being Western Union.5253 As noted above, As noted above,
Western Union ceased its operations in Cuba in November 2020 because of new OFAC Western Union ceased its operations in Cuba in November 2020 because of new OFAC
regulations prohibiting the processing of remittances through any entities on the “Cuba restricted regulations prohibiting the processing of remittances through any entities on the “Cuba restricted
list.” list.”
The termination of Western Union’s services to Cuba, other restrictions on remittances and travel The termination of Western Union’s services to Cuba, other restrictions on remittances and travel
imposed during the Trump Administration, and the imposition of COVID-19-related travel imposed during the Trump Administration, and the imposition of COVID-19-related travel
restrictions led to a drop in remittances sent to Cuba in 2020 and 2021. A Canadian-based restrictions led to a drop in remittances sent to Cuba in 2020 and 2021. A Canadian-based
remittance-forwarding company estimates that cash remittances to Cuba fell to $3 billion in 2020 remittance-forwarding company estimates that cash remittances to Cuba fell to $3 billion in 2020
and $1.9 billion in 2021.and $1.9 billion in 2021.53 54 As noted, in November 2022, a U.S. company, VaCuba, announced that it had received a Treasury Department license to work with a Cuban company that is not on the “Cuba restricted list” and not affiliated with the Cuban military to send remittances to Cuba. The extent to which the Biden Administration’s easing of some The extent to which the Biden Administration’s easing of some
restrictions on remittances and travel (including flights to cities other than Havana) may lead to restrictions on remittances and travel (including flights to cities other than Havana) may lead to
an increase in cash remittances to Cuba is uncertain. an increase in cash remittances to Cuba is uncertain.
  Family Remittances. Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States who Persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States who
are 18 years of age or older are authorized to send remittances to close relatives are 18 years of age or older are authorized to send remittances to close relatives
in Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.570(a)). A close relative is defined as any individual in Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.570(a)). A close relative is defined as any individual
related to the remitter by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three related to the remitter by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three
generations removed from the remitter or from a common ancestor with the generations removed from the remitter or from a common ancestor with the
remitter (31 C.F.R. 515.339). The recipient of the remittances cannot be a remitter (31 C.F.R. 515.339). The recipient of the remittances cannot be a
prohibited official of the Cuban government (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337), a prohibited official of the Cuban government (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337), a
prohibited member of the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R. prohibited member of the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R.
515.338), or a close relative of a prohibited official of the Cuban government or 515.338), or a close relative of a prohibited official of the Cuban government or
of a prohibited member of the Cuban Communist party. (Restrictions on the amount or frequency of family remittances were eliminated on June 9, 2022.)  Donative Remittances. Persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction are authorized to send donative remittances to Cuban nationals, provided the recipient is not a
5152 Emilio Morales, The Havana Consulting Group and Tech, “Remittances, An Investment Route for Cubans,” Emilio Morales, The Havana Consulting Group and Tech, “Remittances, An Investment Route for Cubans,”
September 27, 2019, and “COVID-19 Hits the Remittance Market Hard in Latin America,” March 31, 2020. September 27, 2019, and “COVID-19 Hits the Remittance Market Hard in Latin America,” March 31, 2020.
5253 Emilio Morales, “COVID-19 Crushes the ‘Mule’ Business,” Havana Consulting Group and Tech, May 28, 2020. Emilio Morales, “COVID-19 Crushes the ‘Mule’ Business,” Havana Consulting Group and Tech, May 28, 2020.
5354 RevoluGROUP Canada Inc. “RevoluSEND Remittances Adds Cuba and Morocco Topping 116 Countries,” news RevoluGROUP Canada Inc. “RevoluSEND Remittances Adds Cuba and Morocco Topping 116 Countries,” news
release, February 18, 2022. release, February 18, 2022.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1820

link to page 26 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

~~of a prohibited member of the Cuban Communist party. (Restrictions on the~~
~~amount or frequency of family remittances were eliminated on June 9, 2022.)~~
~~ Donative Remittances. Persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction are authorized to~~
~~send donative remittances to Cuban nationals, provided the recipient is not a~~
prohibited official of the Cuban government (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337), a prohibited official of the Cuban government (defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.337), a
prohibited member of the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R. prohibited member of the Cuban Communist Party (defined in 31 C.F.R.
515.338), or a close relative (as defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.539) of a prohibited 515.338), or a close relative (as defined in 31 C.F.R. 515.539) of a prohibited
official of the Cuban government or of a prohibited member of the Cuban official of the Cuban government or of a prohibited member of the Cuban
Communist party (31 C.F.R. 515.570(b)). (This category of remittances was Communist party (31 C.F.R. 515.570(b)). (This category of remittances was
established in 2015, eliminated in 2019, and reestablished on June 9, 2022.)established in 2015, eliminated in 2019, and reestablished on June 9, 2022.)
  Remittances to Religious Organizations. Persons subject to the jurisdiction of Persons subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States are authorized to send remittances to religious organizations in the United States are authorized to send remittances to religious organizations in
Cuba in support of religious activities (31 C.F.R. 515.570(c)). Cuba in support of religious activities (31 C.F.R. 515.570(c)).
  Remittances to U.S. Students in Cuba. Remittances are authorized to send to Remittances are authorized to send to
close relatives in Cuba who are students involved in licensed educational close relatives in Cuba who are students involved in licensed educational
activities (31 C.F.R. 515.570(d)). activities (31 C.F.R. 515.570(d)).
  Emigration-Related Remittances. Two one-time $1,000 emigration-related Two one-time $1,000 emigration-related
remittances are authorized (31 C.F.R. 515.570(e)). remittances are authorized (31 C.F.R. 515.570(e)).
  Remittances to Certain Individuals and Independent Nongovernmental
Organizations in Cuba. Persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction may send Persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction may send
remittances to certain individuals and independent nongovernmental entities in remittances to certain individuals and independent nongovernmental entities in
Cuba, including prodemocracy groups and civil society groups, and to members Cuba, including prodemocracy groups and civil society groups, and to members
of such organizations, to support humanitarian projects designed to directly of such organizations, to support humanitarian projects designed to directly
benefit the Cuban people; activities of recognized human rights organizations, benefit the Cuban people; activities of recognized human rights organizations,
independent organizations designed to promote a rapid, peaceful transition to independent organizations designed to promote a rapid, peaceful transition to
democracy, and individuals and NGOs that promote independent activity democracy, and individuals and NGOs that promote independent activity
intended to strengthen civil society in Cuba; and the development of private intended to strengthen civil society in Cuba; and the development of private
businesses and economic activity in the non-state sector by self-employed businesses and economic activity in the non-state sector by self-employed
individuals (31 C.F.R. 515.570(g)). individuals (31 C.F.R. 515.570(g)). Self-employed individuals means an owner of means an owner of
a small private business or a sole proprietorship, including restaurants a small private business or a sole proprietorship, including restaurants
((paladares), taxis, and bed-and-breakfasts (), taxis, and bed-and-breakfasts (casas particulares); an independent ); an independent
contractor or consultant; a small farmer who owns his or her own land; or a small contractor or consultant; a small farmer who owns his or her own land; or a small
usufruct farmer who cultivates state-owned land to sell products on the open usufruct farmer who cultivates state-owned land to sell products on the open
market (31 C.F.R. 515.340). market (31 C.F.R. 515.340).
  Carrying of Remittances to Cuba. Authorized travelers to Cuba may carry Authorized travelers to Cuba may carry
authorized remittances to Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.560(c)(4)). Emigration-related authorized remittances to Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.560(c)(4)). Emigration-related
remittances may not be carried to Cuba unless a U.S. immigration visa has been remittances may not be carried to Cuba unless a U.S. immigration visa has been
issued for the recipient and the licensed traveler can produce certain information issued for the recipient and the licensed traveler can produce certain information
regarding the recipient. regarding the recipient.
Legislative Initiatives in the 117th Congress
There have been divergent views in Congress over the years regarding U.S. restrictions on travel There have been divergent views in Congress over the years regarding U.S. restrictions on travel
and remittances to Cuba. As noted, Congress approved legislation in 2000, the Trade Sanctions and remittances to Cuba. As noted, Congress approved legislation in 2000, the Trade Sanctions
Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX), with a provision Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX), with a provision
prohibiting travel to Cuba for tourist activities. In 2009, Congress enacted an omnibus prohibiting travel to Cuba for tourist activities. In 2009, Congress enacted an omnibus
appropriations measure (P.L. 111-8, Division D, Sections 620 and 621) with two provisions appropriations measure (P.L. 111-8, Division D, Sections 620 and 621) with two provisions
easing restrictions on family travel to Cuba and on travel for the marketing and sale of easing restrictions on family travel to Cuba and on travel for the marketing and sale of
~~Congressional Research Service~~
19

~~link to page 24~~ ~~Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances~~

agricultural and medical goods to Cuba. Numerous other legislative initiatives, including agricultural and medical goods to Cuba. Numerous other legislative initiatives, including
provisions in appropriations measures, have been introduced over the years to further ease or lift provisions in appropriations measures, have been introduced over the years to further ease or lift
restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, while other initiatives were introduced to tighten restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, while other initiatives were introduced to tighten
restrictions on travel and remittances; none of these measures were enacted. (See trestrictions on travel and remittances; none of these measures were enacted. (See the Appendix
Congressional Research Service 21 Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances for background on legislative action and initiatives from the 106th through the 116th Congress, for background on legislative action and initiatives from the 106th through the 116th Congress,
1999-2020.) 1999-2020.)
In the 117th Congress, two bills In the 117th Congress, two bills ~~have been~~were introduced that would introduced that would ~~lift~~have lifted economic sanctions on Cuba, economic sanctions on Cuba,
including restrictions on travel and remittances: S. 249 (Wyden), the United States-Cuba Trade including restrictions on travel and remittances: S. 249 (Wyden), the United States-Cuba Trade
Act of 2021, introduced in February 2021; and H.R. 3625 (Rush), the United States-Cuba Act of 2021, introduced in February 2021; and H.R. 3625 (Rush), the United States-Cuba
Relations Normalization Act, introduced in May 2021Relations Normalization Act, introduced in May 2021; no legislative action was taken on either bill. In March 2021, 79 Members of Congress . In March 2021, 79 Members of Congress
wrote a letter to President Biden urging him to reverse restrictions on remittances and travel wrote a letter to President Biden urging him to reverse restrictions on remittances and travel
imposed during the Trump Administration.imposed during the Trump Administration.5455
In the aftermath of the Biden Administration’s Cuba policy changes announced in May 2022, In the aftermath of the Biden Administration’s Cuba policy changes announced in May 2022,
reaction among Members of Congress was mixed. Some Members who support maximum reaction among Members of Congress was mixed. Some Members who support maximum
sanctions pressure criticized the changes as “providing concessions to the brutal Cuban sanctions pressure criticized the changes as “providing concessions to the brutal Cuban
dictatorship.”dictatorship.”5556 Some Members specifically opposed authorizing group travel to Cuba, Some Members specifically opposed authorizing group travel to Cuba,
characterizing it as “akin to tourism,” or saying they “remain[ed] unconvinced”characterizing it as “akin to tourism,” or saying they “remain[ed] unconvinced”5657 that it would that it would
weaken Cuba’s oppressive policies. Among those advocating for engagement, some characterized weaken Cuba’s oppressive policies. Among those advocating for engagement, some characterized
the changes as “a timid but very welcome step,”the changes as “a timid but very welcome step,”5758 some maintained the policy shift was “a some maintained the policy shift was “a
significant step” in returning toward engagement and reversing policies that harm the Cuban significant step” in returning toward engagement and reversing policies that harm the Cuban
people,people,5859 and some emphasized support for the Administration’s “measures to support the Cuban and some emphasized support for the Administration’s “measures to support the Cuban
people.”people.”5960

5455 Letter from Representative Bobby L. Rush and 78 other Members of Congress to President Joe Biden, March 2, Letter from Representative Bobby L. Rush and 78 other Members of Congress to President Joe Biden, March 2,
2021, at https://rush.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rush-cohen-lee-moore-75-democratic-colleagues-urge-2021, at https://rush.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rush-cohen-lee-moore-75-democratic-colleagues-urge-
president-biden; and Sarah Marsh, “Exclusive: U.S. House Democrats Urge Biden to Revert to Obama-Era Cuba president-biden; and Sarah Marsh, “Exclusive: U.S. House Democrats Urge Biden to Revert to Obama-Era Cuba
Détente,” Reuters News, March 3, 2021. Détente,” Reuters News, March 3, 2021.
5556 Senator Marco Rubio, “Rubio, Colleagues Slam Biden Admin’s Appeasement to Cuban Dictatorship,” press release, Senator Marco Rubio, “Rubio, Colleagues Slam Biden Admin’s Appeasement to Cuban Dictatorship,” press release,
May 16, 2022. May 16, 2022.
5657 Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, “Wasserman Schultz Statement on President Biden’s Cuba Policy Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, “Wasserman Schultz Statement on President Biden’s Cuba Policy
Announcement,” press release, May 17, 2022. Announcement,” press release, May 17, 2022.
5758 Senator Patrick Leahy, “Statement on U.S. Policy Toward Cuba,” press release, May 17, 2022. Senator Patrick Leahy, “Statement on U.S. Policy Toward Cuba,” press release, May 17, 2022.
5859 House Foreign Affairs Committee, “Chair Meeks Issues Statement Regarding Administration Reversal of Certain House Foreign Affairs Committee, “Chair Meeks Issues Statement Regarding Administration Reversal of Certain
Trump-Era Cuba Policies,” press release, May 17, 2022. Trump-Era Cuba Policies,” press release, May 17, 2022.
5960 Senator Amy Klobuchar, “Klobuchar Statement on New Biden Administration Measures to Expand U.S.-Cuba Senator Amy Klobuchar, “Klobuchar Statement on New Biden Administration Measures to Expand U.S.-Cuba
Relations, May 17, 2022. Relations, May 17, 2022.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2022

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Appendix. Legislative Action from the 106th to the
116th Congress, 1999-2020
Legislative Initiatives in the 106th Congress, 1999-2000
Action completed by the 106th Congress relating to Cuba travel involved a tightening of travel Action completed by the 106th Congress relating to Cuba travel involved a tightening of travel
restrictions. The final version of the FY2001 agriculture appropriations measure (P.L. 106-387, restrictions. The final version of the FY2001 agriculture appropriations measure (P.L. 106-387,
Title IX, Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000) included a provision that Title IX, Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000) included a provision that
restricts travel to Cuba to those categories of nontourist travel already allowed by the Treasury restricts travel to Cuba to those categories of nontourist travel already allowed by the Treasury
Department regulations. Section 910 of the law provides that neither general nor specific licenses Department regulations. Section 910 of the law provides that neither general nor specific licenses
for travel to Cuba can be provided for activities that do not fit into the 12 categories expressly for travel to Cuba can be provided for activities that do not fit into the 12 categories expressly
authorized in the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, Section 515.560 (a) of Title 31, C.F.R., authorized in the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, Section 515.560 (a) of Title 31, C.F.R.,
paragraphs (1) through (12)). paragraphs (1) through (12)).
As noted in the law, the Secretary of the Treasury may not authorize travel-related transactions As noted in the law, the Secretary of the Treasury may not authorize travel-related transactions
“for travel to, from, or within Cuba for tourist activities,” which are defined as any activity that is “for travel to, from, or within Cuba for tourist activities,” which are defined as any activity that is
not expressly authorized in the 12 categories of the regulations. The provision prevents the not expressly authorized in the 12 categories of the regulations. The provision prevents the
Administration from loosening the travel restrictions to allow tourist travel. This, in effect, Administration from loosening the travel restrictions to allow tourist travel. This, in effect,
strengthens restrictions on travel to Cuba and somewhat circumscribes the authority of OFAC to strengthens restrictions on travel to Cuba and somewhat circumscribes the authority of OFAC to
issue specific travel licenses on a case-by-case basis. Regulations implementing the provision of issue specific travel licenses on a case-by-case basis. Regulations implementing the provision of
the law were issued by OFAC on July 12, 2001. the law were issued by OFAC on July 12, 2001.
In other legislative action, the Senate considered the issue of travel to Cuba in June 30, 1999, In other legislative action, the Senate considered the issue of travel to Cuba in June 30, 1999,
floor action on the FY2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, S. 1234. An amendment was floor action on the FY2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, S. 1234. An amendment was
introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd that would have terminated regulations or prohibitions introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd that would have terminated regulations or prohibitions
on travel to Cuba and on transactions related to such travel in most instances.on travel to Cuba and on transactions related to such travel in most instances.6061 The Senate The Senate
defeated the amendment by tabling it in a 55-43 vote on June 30, 1999. On November 10, 1999, defeated the amendment by tabling it in a 55-43 vote on June 30, 1999. On November 10, 1999,
Senator Dodd introduced identical language as S. 1919, the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of Senator Dodd introduced identical language as S. 1919, the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of
2000; no action was taken on the bill. 2000; no action was taken on the bill.
The House took up the issue of travel to Cuba when it considered H.R. 4871, the Treasury The House took up the issue of travel to Cuba when it considered H.R. 4871, the Treasury
Department appropriations bill, on July 20, 2000. A Sanford amendment was approved (232-186) Department appropriations bill, on July 20, 2000. A Sanford amendment was approved (232-186)
to prohibit funds in the bill from being used to administer or enforce the Cuban Assets Control to prohibit funds in the bill from being used to administer or enforce the Cuban Assets Control
Regulations with respect to any travel or travel-related transaction. Subsequently, the language of Regulations with respect to any travel or travel-related transaction. Subsequently, the language of
the amendment was dropped from a new version of the FY2001 Treasury Department the amendment was dropped from a new version of the FY2001 Treasury Department
appropriations bill, H.R. 4985, introduced on July 26. H.R. 4985 was appended to the conference appropriations bill, H.R. 4985, introduced on July 26. H.R. 4985 was appended to the conference
report on the legislative branch appropriations bill—H.R. 4516, H.Rept. 106-796—in an attempt report on the legislative branch appropriations bill—H.R. 4516, H.Rept. 106-796—in an attempt
to bypass Senate debate on its version of the Treasury appropriations bill, S. 2900. The Senate to bypass Senate debate on its version of the Treasury appropriations bill, S. 2900. The Senate
initially rejected this conference report on September 20, 2000, by a vote of 28-69, but later initially rejected this conference report on September 20, 2000, by a vote of 28-69, but later
agreed to the report, 58-37, on October 12. The House had agreed to the conference report earlier, agreed to the report, 58-37, on October 12. The House had agreed to the conference report earlier,
on September 14, 2000, by a vote of 212-209. on September 14, 2000, by a vote of 212-209.

6061 The Dodd amendment allowed for travel restrictions to be imposed if the United States is at war with Cuba, if armed The Dodd amendment allowed for travel restrictions to be imposed if the United States is at war with Cuba, if armed
hostilities are in progress, or when threats to physical safety or public health exist. Under current law, the Secretary of hostilities are in progress, or when threats to physical safety or public health exist. Under current law, the Secretary of
State has the same authority to restrict travel (22 U.S.C. 211a). State has the same authority to restrict travel (22 U.S.C. 211a).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2123

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Legislative Initiatives in the 107th Congress, 2001-~~200261~~200262
In the 107th Congress, although various measures were introduced that would have eliminated or In the 107th Congress, although various measures were introduced that would have eliminated or
eased restrictions on travel to Cuba and the House voted in both the first and second sessions to eased restrictions on travel to Cuba and the House voted in both the first and second sessions to
prohibit spending to administer the travel regulations, no legislative action was completed by the prohibit spending to administer the travel regulations, no legislative action was completed by the
end of the second session. end of the second session.
First Session Action
During July 25, 2001, floor action on H.R. 2590, the FY2002 Treasury Department During July 25, 2001, floor action on H.R. 2590, the FY2002 Treasury Department
appropriations bill, the House approved an amendment that would prohibit spending for appropriations bill, the House approved an amendment that would prohibit spending for
administering Treasury Department regulations restricting travel to Cuba. H.Amdt. 241, offered administering Treasury Department regulations restricting travel to Cuba. H.Amdt. 241, offered
by Representative Flake (which amended H.Amdt. 240 offered by Representative Smith (NJ)), by Representative Flake (which amended H.Amdt. 240 offered by Representative Smith (NJ)),
would prohibit funding to administer the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (administered by would prohibit funding to administer the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (administered by
OFAC) with respect to any travel or travel-related transaction. The amendment was approved by a OFAC) with respect to any travel or travel-related transaction. The amendment was approved by a
vote of 240 to 186, compared to a vote of 232-186 for a similar amendment in last year’s vote of 240 to 186, compared to a vote of 232-186 for a similar amendment in last year’s
Treasury Department appropriations bill. Treasury Department appropriations bill.
The Senate version of H.R. 2590, approved September 19, 2001, did not include any provision The Senate version of H.R. 2590, approved September 19, 2001, did not include any provision
regarding U.S. restrictions on travel to Cuba, and the House provision was not included in the regarding U.S. restrictions on travel to Cuba, and the House provision was not included in the
House-Senate conference on the bill (H.Rept. 107-253). During Senate floor debate, Senator House-Senate conference on the bill (H.Rept. 107-253). During Senate floor debate, Senator
Byron Dorgan noted that he had intended to offer an amendment on the issue, but that he decided Byron Dorgan noted that he had intended to offer an amendment on the issue, but that he decided
not to because he did not want to slow passage of the bill. He indicated that he would support the not to because he did not want to slow passage of the bill. He indicated that he would support the
House provision during conference, but ultimately the House-Senate conference report on the bill House provision during conference, but ultimately the House-Senate conference report on the bill
did not include the Cuba provision. In light of changed congressional priorities in the aftermath of did not include the Cuba provision. In light of changed congressional priorities in the aftermath of
the September 11 attacks on New York and Washingtonthe September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, DC, conference negotiators reportedly DC, conference negotiators reportedly
did not want to slow passage of the bill with any controversial provisions. The George W. Bush did not want to slow passage of the bill with any controversial provisions. The George W. Bush
Administration had threatened to veto the Treasury bill if it included the Cuba travel provision. Administration had threatened to veto the Treasury bill if it included the Cuba travel provision.
Second Session Action
The Cuba travel issue received further consideration in the second session of the 107th Congress. The Cuba travel issue received further consideration in the second session of the 107th Congress.
A bipartisan House Cuba working group of 40 Representatives vowed as one of its goals to work A bipartisan House Cuba working group of 40 Representatives vowed as one of its goals to work
for a lifting of travel restrictions. On February 11, 2002, the Senate Appropriations Committee’s for a lifting of travel restrictions. On February 11, 2002, the Senate Appropriations Committee’s
Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government held a hearing on the issue, featuring Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government held a hearing on the issue, featuring
Administration and outside witnesses. Administration and outside witnesses.
The travel issue was part of debate during consideration of the FY2003 Treasury Department The travel issue was part of debate during consideration of the FY2003 Treasury Department
appropriations bill (H.R. 5120 and S. 2740). Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of the appropriations bill (H.R. 5120 and S. 2740). Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of the
Treasury Paul O’Neill said they would recommend that the President veto legislation that Treasury Paul O’Neill said they would recommend that the President veto legislation that
includes a loosening of restrictions on travel to Cuba (or a weakening of restrictions on private includes a loosening of restrictions on travel to Cuba (or a weakening of restrictions on private
financing for U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba).financing for U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba).6263 The White House also stated that President The White House also stated that President
Bush would veto such legislation.Bush would veto such legislation.6364
In July 23, 2002, floor action on H.R. 5120, the House approved three Cuba sanctions In July 23, 2002, floor action on H.R. 5120, the House approved three Cuba sanctions
amendments, including one on the easing of travel restrictions offered by Representative Jeff amendments, including one on the easing of travel restrictions offered by Representative Jeff

6162 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 107th Congress, see CRS Report RL30806, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 107th Congress, see CRS Report RL30806, Cuba: Issues
for the 107th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan and Maureen Taft-Morales. , by Mark P. Sullivan and Maureen Taft-Morales.
6263 U.S. Department of State, International Information Programs, Washington File, “Bush Administration Opposes U.S. Department of State, International Information Programs, Washington File, “Bush Administration Opposes
Legislative Efforts to Amend Cuba Policy,” July 16, 2002. Legislative Efforts to Amend Cuba Policy,” July 16, 2002.
6364 White House, press briefing by Ari Fleischer, July 24, 2002. White House, press briefing by Ari Fleischer, July 24, 2002.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2224

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Flake (the two other amendments would have eased restrictions on remittances and U.S. Flake (the two other amendments would have eased restrictions on remittances and U.S.
agricultural sales). The House approved the Flake travel amendment (H.Amdt. 552), by a vote of agricultural sales). The House approved the Flake travel amendment (H.Amdt. 552), by a vote of
262-167, which provided that no funds could be used to administer or enforce the Treasury 262-167, which provided that no funds could be used to administer or enforce the Treasury
Department regulations with respect to travel to Cuba. The Flake amendment would not prevent Department regulations with respect to travel to Cuba. The Flake amendment would not prevent
the issuance of general or specific licenses for travel to Cuba. Some observers raised the question the issuance of general or specific licenses for travel to Cuba. Some observers raised the question
of whether the effect of this amendment would be limited since the underlying embargo of whether the effect of this amendment would be limited since the underlying embargo
regulations restricting travel would remain unchanged; enforcement action against violations of regulations restricting travel would remain unchanged; enforcement action against violations of
the relevant embargo regulations could potentially take place in future years when the Treasury the relevant embargo regulations could potentially take place in future years when the Treasury
Department appropriations measure did not include the funding limitations on enforcing the travel Department appropriations measure did not include the funding limitations on enforcing the travel
restrictions.restrictions.6465
During consideration of H.R. 5120, the House also rejected two Cuba amendments. A Rangel During consideration of H.R. 5120, the House also rejected two Cuba amendments. A Rangel
amendment (H.Amdt. 555), rejected by a vote of 204-226, would have prevented any funds in the amendment (H.Amdt. 555), rejected by a vote of 204-226, would have prevented any funds in the
bill from being used to implement, administer, or enforce the overall economic embargo of Cuba, bill from being used to implement, administer, or enforce the overall economic embargo of Cuba,
which includes travel. A Goss amendment (H.Amdt. 551), rejected by a vote of 182-247, would which includes travel. A Goss amendment (H.Amdt. 551), rejected by a vote of 182-247, would
have provided that any limitation on the use of funds to administer or enforce regulations have provided that any limitation on the use of funds to administer or enforce regulations
restricting travel to Cuba or travel-related transactions would only apply after the President restricting travel to Cuba or travel-related transactions would only apply after the President
certified to Congress that certain conditions were met regarding biological weapons and certified to Congress that certain conditions were met regarding biological weapons and
terrorism.terrorism.6566 The rule for the bill’s consideration, H.Res. 488 (H.Rept. 107-585), had provided that The rule for the bill’s consideration, H.Res. 488 (H.Rept. 107-585), had provided that
the Goss amendment would not be subject to amendment. the Goss amendment would not be subject to amendment.
The House subsequently passed H.R. 5120 on July 24, 2002, by a vote of 308-121, with the three The House subsequently passed H.R. 5120 on July 24, 2002, by a vote of 308-121, with the three
Cuba amendments, including the Flake Cuba travel amendment. Cuba amendments, including the Flake Cuba travel amendment.
The Senate version of the Treasury Department appropriations measure, S. 2740, as reported by The Senate version of the Treasury Department appropriations measure, S. 2740, as reported by
the Senate Committee on Appropriations on July 17, 2002 (S.Rept. 107-212), included a the Senate Committee on Appropriations on July 17, 2002 (S.Rept. 107-212), included a
provision, in Section 516, that was similar, although not identical, to the Flake amendment provision, in Section 516, that was similar, although not identical, to the Flake amendment
described above. It provided that no funds may be used to enforce the Treasury Department described above. It provided that no funds may be used to enforce the Treasury Department
regulations with respect to any travel or travel-related transactions and would not prevent OFAC regulations with respect to any travel or travel-related transactions and would not prevent OFAC
from issuing general and specific licenses for travel to Cuba. In addition, Section 124 of the from issuing general and specific licenses for travel to Cuba. In addition, Section 124 of the
Senate bill stipulated that no Treasury Department funds for “Departmental Offices, Salaries, and Senate bill stipulated that no Treasury Department funds for “Departmental Offices, Salaries, and
Expenses” may be used by OFAC until OFAC has certain procedures in place to expedite license Expenses” may be used by OFAC until OFAC has certain procedures in place to expedite license
applications for travel to Cuba. applications for travel to Cuba.
Congress did not complete action on the FY2003 Treasury Department appropriations measure Congress did not complete action on the FY2003 Treasury Department appropriations measure
before the end of the 107th Congress, so action was deferred until the 108th Congress. before the end of the 107th Congress, so action was deferred until the 108th Congress.
Additional Legislative Initiatives in the 107th Congress
Several other initiatives were introduced in the 107th Congress that would have eased U.S. Several other initiatives were introduced in the 107th Congress that would have eased U.S.
restrictions on travel to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures. restrictions on travel to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures.
 H.R. 5022 (Flake), introduced June 26, 2002, would have lifted all restrictions on  H.R. 5022 (Flake), introduced June 26, 2002, would have lifted all restrictions on
travel to Cuba. travel to Cuba.
 Several broad bills would have lifted all sanctions on trade, financial  Several broad bills would have lifted all sanctions on trade, financial
transactions, and travel to Cuba: H.R. 174 (Serrano), the Cuban Reconciliation transactions, and travel to Cuba: H.R. 174 (Serrano), the Cuban Reconciliation
Act, introduced January 3, 2001, and identical bills S. 400 (Baucus) and H.R. 798 Act, introduced January 3, 2001, and identical bills S. 400 (Baucus) and H.R. 798

6465 “House Approves Limits on Treasury Enforcement of Cuba Embargo,” “House Approves Limits on Treasury Enforcement of Cuba Embargo,” Inside U.S. Trade, July 26, 2002. , July 26, 2002.
6566 For further information on the issues of biological weapons and terrorism as they relate to Cuba, see CRS Report For further information on the issues of biological weapons and terrorism as they relate to Cuba, see CRS Report
RL30806, RL30806, Cuba: Issues for the 107th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan and Maureen Taft-Morales. , by Mark P. Sullivan and Maureen Taft-Morales.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2325

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

(Rangel), the Free Trade with Cuba Act, introduced February 27 and 28, 2001, (Rangel), the Free Trade with Cuba Act, introduced February 27 and 28, 2001,
respectively. respectively.
 S. 1017 (Dodd) and H.R. 2138 (Serrano), the Bridges to the Cuban People Act of  S. 1017 (Dodd) and H.R. 2138 (Serrano), the Bridges to the Cuban People Act of
2001, introduced June 12, 2001, would, among other provisions, have removed 2001, introduced June 12, 2001, would, among other provisions, have removed
all restrictions on travel to Cuba by U.S. nationals or lawful permanent resident all restrictions on travel to Cuba by U.S. nationals or lawful permanent resident
aliens. aliens.
 Several bills would, among other provisions, have repealed the travel restrictions  Several bills would, among other provisions, have repealed the travel restrictions
imposed in the 106th Congress by the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export imposed in the 106th Congress by the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export
Enhancement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-387, Title IX, Section 910). These include Enhancement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-387, Title IX, Section 910). These include
identical bills S. 402 (Baucus) and H.R. 797 (Rangel), the Cuban Humanitarian identical bills S. 402 (Baucus) and H.R. 797 (Rangel), the Cuban Humanitarian
Trade Act of 2001, introduced February 27 and 28, 2001; S. 171 (Dorgan), Trade Act of 2001, introduced February 27 and 28, 2001; S. 171 (Dorgan),
introduced January 24, 2001; and S. 239 (Hagel), the Cuba Food and Medicine introduced January 24, 2001; and S. 239 (Hagel), the Cuba Food and Medicine
Access Act of 2001, introduced February 1, 2001. Access Act of 2001, introduced February 1, 2001.
Legislative Initiatives in the 108th Congress, 2003-~~200466~~200467
In the 108th Congress, several FY2004 and FY2005 appropriations bills had provisions that would In the 108th Congress, several FY2004 and FY2005 appropriations bills had provisions that would
have eased Cuba travel restrictions in various ways, but ultimately these provisions were not have eased Cuba travel restrictions in various ways, but ultimately these provisions were not
included in final appropriations measures. The George W. Bush Administration had threatened to included in final appropriations measures. The George W. Bush Administration had threatened to
veto legislation if it contained provisions weakening Cuba sanctions. In addition, several bills in veto legislation if it contained provisions weakening Cuba sanctions. In addition, several bills in
the 108th Congress were introduced that specifically would have lifted or eased restrictions on the 108th Congress were introduced that specifically would have lifted or eased restrictions on
travel to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures. travel to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures.
First Session Action
Since action on FY2003 Treasury Department appropriations was not completed before the end of Since action on FY2003 Treasury Department appropriations was not completed before the end of
the 107th Congress, the 108th Congress faced early action on it and other unfinished FY2003 the 107th Congress, the 108th Congress faced early action on it and other unfinished FY2003
appropriations measures. The final version of the FY2003 omnibus appropriations measure, appropriations measures. The final version of the FY2003 omnibus appropriations measure,
H.J.Res. 2 (P.L. 108-7), which included Treasury Department appropriations, did not include H.J.Res. 2 (P.L. 108-7), which included Treasury Department appropriations, did not include
provisions affecting restrictions on travel to Cuba. The White House had threatened to veto the provisions affecting restrictions on travel to Cuba. The White House had threatened to veto the
measure if it contained provisions weakening the embargo. While the Senate version did not measure if it contained provisions weakening the embargo. While the Senate version did not
include the Senate Appropriations Committee provision from the 107th Congress that would have include the Senate Appropriations Committee provision from the 107th Congress that would have
eased travel restrictions by prohibiting any funding for enforcing the Cuba travel regulations, it eased travel restrictions by prohibiting any funding for enforcing the Cuba travel regulations, it
did include a provision (contained in Division J, Section 124) that would have expedited action did include a provision (contained in Division J, Section 124) that would have expedited action
on travel applications for travel by OFAC within 90 days of receipt. Ultimately, however, the on travel applications for travel by OFAC within 90 days of receipt. Ultimately, however, the
Senate provision was dropped in the conference report (H.Rept. 108-10) on the omnibus measure. Senate provision was dropped in the conference report (H.Rept. 108-10) on the omnibus measure.
Both the House and Senate versions of the FY2004 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill, Both the House and Senate versions of the FY2004 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill,
H.R. 2989, had nearly identical provisions that would have prevented funds from being used to H.R. 2989, had nearly identical provisions that would have prevented funds from being used to
administer or enforce restrictions on travel or travel-related transactions. But the provisions were administer or enforce restrictions on travel or travel-related transactions. But the provisions were
dropped in the conference report to the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-199 dropped in the conference report to the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-199
(H.R. 2673, H.Rept. 108-401, filed November 25, 2003), which incorporated seven regular (H.R. 2673, H.Rept. 108-401, filed November 25, 2003), which incorporated seven regular
appropriations acts, including Transportation-Treasury appropriations. The conference also appropriations acts, including Transportation-Treasury appropriations. The conference also
dropped two Cuba provisions from the House version of H.R. 2989 that would have eased dropped two Cuba provisions from the House version of H.R. 2989 that would have eased
restrictions on remittances and on people-to-people educational exchanges. The White House restrictions on remittances and on people-to-people educational exchanges. The White House
again threatened to veto any legislation that would weaken economic sanctions against Cuba. again threatened to veto any legislation that would weaken economic sanctions against Cuba.

6667 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 108th Congress, see CRS Report RL31740, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 108th Congress, see CRS Report RL31740, Cuba: Issues
for the 108th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2426

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

The House provisions had been approved during September 9, 2003, House floor consideration of The House provisions had been approved during September 9, 2003, House floor consideration of
the H.R. 2989: H.Amdt. 375 (Flake), approved by a vote of 227-188, would have prevented funds the H.R. 2989: H.Amdt. 375 (Flake), approved by a vote of 227-188, would have prevented funds
from enforcing travel restrictions (§745 of the House version); H.Amdt. 377 (Delahunt), from enforcing travel restrictions (§745 of the House version); H.Amdt. 377 (Delahunt),
approved by a vote of 222-196, would have prevented funds from enforcing restrictions on approved by a vote of 222-196, would have prevented funds from enforcing restrictions on
remittances (§746); and H.Amdt. 382 (Davis (FL)), approved by a vote of 246-173, would have remittances (§746); and H.Amdt. 382 (Davis (FL)), approved by a vote of 246-173, would have
prohibited funds from being used to eliminate the travel category of people-to-people educational prohibited funds from being used to eliminate the travel category of people-to-people educational
exchanges (§749). exchanges (§749).
During Senate floor consideration of H.R. 2989 on October 23, 2003, the Senate approved by During Senate floor consideration of H.R. 2989 on October 23, 2003, the Senate approved by
voice vote S.Amdt. 1900 (Dorgan), nearly identical to the Flake amendment noted above that voice vote S.Amdt. 1900 (Dorgan), nearly identical to the Flake amendment noted above that
would have prevented funds from being used to administer or enforce restrictions on travel or would have prevented funds from being used to administer or enforce restrictions on travel or
travel-related transactions (§643 of the Senate version). A motion to table the Dorgan amendment travel-related transactions (§643 of the Senate version). A motion to table the Dorgan amendment
was defeated by a vote of 59-36. The Senate approved the bill by a vote of 91-3. The only was defeated by a vote of 59-36. The Senate approved the bill by a vote of 91-3. The only
difference between the Senate and House language was that the Dorgan amendment, as amended difference between the Senate and House language was that the Dorgan amendment, as amended
by S.Amdt. 1901 (Craig), provided that the section would take effect one day after enactment of by S.Amdt. 1901 (Craig), provided that the section would take effect one day after enactment of
the bill. the bill.
In other action, the conference on the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-199 In other action, the conference on the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-199
(H.R. 2673), also dropped a provision in the Senate version of the FY2004 agriculture (H.R. 2673), also dropped a provision in the Senate version of the FY2004 agriculture
appropriations bill that would have allowed travel to Cuba under a general license for travel appropriations bill that would have allowed travel to Cuba under a general license for travel
related to the sale of agricultural and medical goods. On July 17, 2003, the Senate Appropriations related to the sale of agricultural and medical goods. On July 17, 2003, the Senate Appropriations
Committee approved its version of the FY2004 agriculture appropriations bill, S. 1427, that Committee approved its version of the FY2004 agriculture appropriations bill, S. 1427, that
included a provision (§760) allowing travel to Cuba under a general license (which does not included a provision (§760) allowing travel to Cuba under a general license (which does not
require applying to the Treasury Department) for travel related to the commercial sale of require applying to the Treasury Department) for travel related to the commercial sale of
agricultural and medical goods. The Senate included this provision when it approved H.R. 2673 agricultural and medical goods. The Senate included this provision when it approved H.R. 2673
on November 6, 2003. The House-passed version of the bill, H.R. 2673, had no such provision. In on November 6, 2003. The House-passed version of the bill, H.R. 2673, had no such provision. In
early June 2003, the Treasury Department rejected an application for a specific license to travel to early June 2003, the Treasury Department rejected an application for a specific license to travel to
Cuba for organizers of a second U.S. food and agribusiness fair in Havana.Cuba for organizers of a second U.S. food and agribusiness fair in Havana.6768 The first such trade The first such trade
fair, held in September 2002, featured some 288 exhibitors from more than 30 states and resulted fair, held in September 2002, featured some 288 exhibitors from more than 30 states and resulted
in millions in U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba.in millions in U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba.6869
Second Session Action
Several FY2005 appropriations measures had provisions that would have eased Cuba sanctions, Several FY2005 appropriations measures had provisions that would have eased Cuba sanctions,
but these were dropped in the FY2005 omnibus appropriations measure (H.R. 4818, H.Rept. 108-but these were dropped in the FY2005 omnibus appropriations measure (H.R. 4818, H.Rept. 108-
792). 792).
The House-passed version of the FY2005 Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations bill, H.R. The House-passed version of the FY2005 Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations bill, H.R.
4754, approved July 8, 2004 (397-18), included a provision (§801) that would have prohibited 4754, approved July 8, 2004 (397-18), included a provision (§801) that would have prohibited
funds from being used to implement, administer, or enforce recent amendments to the Cuba funds from being used to implement, administer, or enforce recent amendments to the Cuba
embargo regulations that tightened restrictions on gift parcels and baggage taken by individuals embargo regulations that tightened restrictions on gift parcels and baggage taken by individuals
for travel to Cuba. The provision was added by a Flake amendment, H.Amdt. 647, approved by a for travel to Cuba. The provision was added by a Flake amendment, H.Amdt. 647, approved by a
vote of 221-194 on July 7, 2004. The Senate version of the bill, S. 2809, as reported out of vote of 221-194 on July 7, 2004. The Senate version of the bill, S. 2809, as reported out of
committee, did not include such a provision. committee, did not include such a provision.
Both the House-approved version of the FY2005 Transportation/Treasury appropriations bill, Both the House-approved version of the FY2005 Transportation/Treasury appropriations bill,
H.R. 5025, and the Senate Appropriations Committee version of the bill, S. 2806, had provisions H.R. 5025, and the Senate Appropriations Committee version of the bill, S. 2806, had provisions
that would have eased Cuba sanctions in various ways. In its statement of policy on H.R. 5025, that would have eased Cuba sanctions in various ways. In its statement of policy on H.R. 5025,

6768 Nancy San Martin, “U.S. Pulls Plug on Cuba Expo,” Nancy San Martin, “U.S. Pulls Plug on Cuba Expo,” Miami Herald, June 18, 2003. , June 18, 2003.
6869 Nancy San Martin, “U.S. Official Dampens Trade-Show Enthusiasm with Talks of Cuban Credit,” Nancy San Martin, “U.S. Official Dampens Trade-Show Enthusiasm with Talks of Cuban Credit,” Miami Herald, ,
September 29, 2002. September 29, 2002.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2527

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

the Administration indicated that the President would veto the measure if it contained provisions the Administration indicated that the President would veto the measure if it contained provisions
weakening Cuba sanctions. weakening Cuba sanctions.
The House-passed version of H.R. 5025 had three provisions that would have eased Cuba The House-passed version of H.R. 5025 had three provisions that would have eased Cuba
sanctions. During floor consideration on September 21, 2004, by a vote of 225-174, the House sanctions. During floor consideration on September 21, 2004, by a vote of 225-174, the House
approved a Davis (of Florida) amendment (H.Amdt. 769), which provided that no funds could be approved a Davis (of Florida) amendment (H.Amdt. 769), which provided that no funds could be
used to administer, implement, or enforce the Bush Administration’s June 2004 tightening of used to administer, implement, or enforce the Bush Administration’s June 2004 tightening of
restrictions on visiting relatives in Cuba. On September 22, 2004, the House approved two restrictions on visiting relatives in Cuba. On September 22, 2004, the House approved two
additional Cuba amendments by voice vote, a Waters amendment (H.Amdt. 770) that would have additional Cuba amendments by voice vote, a Waters amendment (H.Amdt. 770) that would have
prohibited funds from being used to implement any sanction imposed on private commercial sales prohibited funds from being used to implement any sanction imposed on private commercial sales
of agricultural commodities or medicine or medical supplies to Cuba and a Lee amendment of agricultural commodities or medicine or medical supplies to Cuba and a Lee amendment
(H.Amdt. 771) that would have prohibited funds from being used to implement, administer, or (H.Amdt. 771) that would have prohibited funds from being used to implement, administer, or
enforce the Bush Administration’s June 2004 tightening of restrictions on travel for educational enforce the Bush Administration’s June 2004 tightening of restrictions on travel for educational
activities. The House also rejected a Rangel amendment (H.Amdt. 772) on September 22, 2004, activities. The House also rejected a Rangel amendment (H.Amdt. 772) on September 22, 2004,
by a vote of 225-188 that would have more broadly prohibited funds from being used to by a vote of 225-188 that would have more broadly prohibited funds from being used to
implement, administer, or enforce the economic embargo of Cuba. During September 15, 2004, implement, administer, or enforce the economic embargo of Cuba. During September 15, 2004,
House floor consideration of H.R. 5025, Representative Jeff Flake announced his intention not to House floor consideration of H.R. 5025, Representative Jeff Flake announced his intention not to
offer an amendment, as he had for the past three years, which would have prohibited funds from offer an amendment, as he had for the past three years, which would have prohibited funds from
being used to administer or enforce restrictions on travel or travel-related transactions. being used to administer or enforce restrictions on travel or travel-related transactions.
The Senate version of the FY2005 Transportation/Treasury appropriations bill, S. 2806, as The Senate version of the FY2005 Transportation/Treasury appropriations bill, S. 2806, as
reported out of the Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 108-342) on September 15, 2004, reported out of the Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 108-342) on September 15, 2004,
had a provision (§222) that would have prohibited funds from administering or enforcing had a provision (§222) that would have prohibited funds from administering or enforcing
restrictions on Cuba travel or travel-related transactions. That provision, which was proposed by restrictions on Cuba travel or travel-related transactions. That provision, which was proposed by
Senator Byron Dorgan, was unanimously approved by the Subcommittee on Transportation, Senator Byron Dorgan, was unanimously approved by the Subcommittee on Transportation,
Treasury, and General Government on September 9, 2004. Treasury, and General Government on September 9, 2004.
The Senate version of the FY2005 Agriculture Appropriation bill, S. 2803, as reported by the The Senate version of the FY2005 Agriculture Appropriation bill, S. 2803, as reported by the
Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 108-340), had a provision (§776) that would have Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 108-340), had a provision (§776) that would have
directed the Secretary of the Treasury to promulgate regulations allowing for travel to Cuba under directed the Secretary of the Treasury to promulgate regulations allowing for travel to Cuba under
a “general license” when it was related to the commercial sale of agricultural and medical a “general license” when it was related to the commercial sale of agricultural and medical
products. The House-passed version of the bill, H.R. 4766, had no such provision. In its statement products. The House-passed version of the bill, H.R. 4766, had no such provision. In its statement
of policy on the bill, the Administration stated that the President would veto the measure if it of policy on the bill, the Administration stated that the President would veto the measure if it
contained a provision weakening Cuba sanctions. contained a provision weakening Cuba sanctions.
Additional Initiatives in the 108th Congress
Among other initiatives introduced in the 108th Congress, but not acted upon, two bills would Among other initiatives introduced in the 108th Congress, but not acted upon, two bills would
specifically have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba: S. 950 (Enzi), introduced April 30, 2003, specifically have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba: S. 950 (Enzi), introduced April 30, 2003,
and H.R. 2071 (Flake), introduced May 13, 2003. H.R. 3422 (Serrano), introduced October 30, and H.R. 2071 (Flake), introduced May 13, 2003. H.R. 3422 (Serrano), introduced October 30,
2003, would, among other provisions, have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba. Three broad 2003, would, among other provisions, have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba. Three broad
legislative initiatives were introduced that would have lifted all Cuba embargo restrictions, legislative initiatives were introduced that would have lifted all Cuba embargo restrictions,
including those on travel: H.R. 188 (Serrano), introduced January 7, 2003, S. 403 (Baucus), including those on travel: H.R. 188 (Serrano), introduced January 7, 2003, S. 403 (Baucus),
introduced February 13, 2003, and H.R. 1698 (Paul), introduced April 9, 2003. Another initiative, introduced February 13, 2003, and H.R. 1698 (Paul), introduced April 9, 2003. Another initiative,
S. 2449 (Baucus)/H.R. 4457 (Otter), introduced respectively on May 19 and 20, 2004, would S. 2449 (Baucus)/H.R. 4457 (Otter), introduced respectively on May 19 and 20, 2004, would
have required yearly congressional approval for the renewal of trade and travel restrictions with have required yearly congressional approval for the renewal of trade and travel restrictions with
respect to Cuba. Finally, H.R. 4678 (Davis of Florida), introduced June 24, 2004, in the aftermath respect to Cuba. Finally, H.R. 4678 (Davis of Florida), introduced June 24, 2004, in the aftermath
of the President’s tightening of Cuba sanctions, would have barred certain additional restrictions of the President’s tightening of Cuba sanctions, would have barred certain additional restrictions
on travel and remittances to Cuba. on travel and remittances to Cuba.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2628

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Legislative Initiatives in the 109th Congress, 2005-~~200669~~200670
In the 109th Congress, several amendments to FY2006 and FY2007 appropriations bills that In the 109th Congress, several amendments to FY2006 and FY2007 appropriations bills that
would have eased Cuba travel restrictions in various ways and restrictions on sending gift parcels would have eased Cuba travel restrictions in various ways and restrictions on sending gift parcels
to Cuba were defeated. Several bills were introduced that would have lifted or eased restrictions to Cuba were defeated. Several bills were introduced that would have lifted or eased restrictions
on travel and the provision of remittances to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures. on travel and the provision of remittances to Cuba, but no action was taken on these measures.
First Session Action
On June 30, 2005, the House rejected three amendments easing Cuba sanctions to H.R. 3058, the On June 30, 2005, the House rejected three amendments easing Cuba sanctions to H.R. 3058, the
FY2006 Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, Judiciary, District of FY2006 Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, Judiciary, District of
Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act. The amendments failed during House Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act. The amendments failed during House
floor consideration: H.Amdt. 420 (Davis (FL)) on family travel, by a vote of 208-211; H.Amdt. floor consideration: H.Amdt. 420 (Davis (FL)) on family travel, by a vote of 208-211; H.Amdt.
422 (Lee) on educational travel, by a vote of 187-233; and H.Amdt. 424 (Rangel) on the overall 422 (Lee) on educational travel, by a vote of 187-233; and H.Amdt. 424 (Rangel) on the overall
embargo, by a vote of 169-250. An additional amendment on religious travel, H.Amdt. 421 embargo, by a vote of 169-250. An additional amendment on religious travel, H.Amdt. 421
(Flake), was withdrawn, and an amendment on family travel by members of the U.S. military, (Flake), was withdrawn, and an amendment on family travel by members of the U.S. military,
H.Amdt. 419 (Flake), was ruled out of order for constituting legislation in an appropriations bill. H.Amdt. 419 (Flake), was ruled out of order for constituting legislation in an appropriations bill.
The introduction of H.Amdt. 419 was prompted by the case of a U.S. military member who The introduction of H.Amdt. 419 was prompted by the case of a U.S. military member who
served in Iraq, Sergeant Carlos Lazo, who was prohibited from visiting his two sons in Cuba served in Iraq, Sergeant Carlos Lazo, who was prohibited from visiting his two sons in Cuba
because he last visited there in 2003. because he last visited there in 2003.
During June 29, 2005, Senate consideration of H.R. 2361, the FY2006 Interior, Environment, and During June 29, 2005, Senate consideration of H.R. 2361, the FY2006 Interior, Environment, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, the Senate rejected (60-35; a two-thirds majority vote was Related Agencies Appropriations Act, the Senate rejected (60-35; a two-thirds majority vote was
required) a motion to suspend the rules with respect to S.Amdt. 1059 (Dorgan), which would required) a motion to suspend the rules with respect to S.Amdt. 1059 (Dorgan), which would
have allowed travel to Cuba under a general license for the purpose of visiting a member of the have allowed travel to Cuba under a general license for the purpose of visiting a member of the
person’s immediate family for humanitarian reasons. The amendment was then ruled out of order. person’s immediate family for humanitarian reasons. The amendment was then ruled out of order.
Its introduction had also been prompted by the case of Sergeant Carlos Lazo, who wanted to visit Its introduction had also been prompted by the case of Sergeant Carlos Lazo, who wanted to visit
his sons in Cuba, one of whom was gravely sick. his sons in Cuba, one of whom was gravely sick.
On June 15, 2005, the House rejected (210-216) H.Amdt. 270 (Flake) to H.R. 2862, the FY2006 On June 15, 2005, the House rejected (210-216) H.Amdt. 270 (Flake) to H.R. 2862, the FY2006
Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The amendment Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The amendment
would have prohibited the use of funds to implement, administer, or enforce June 2004 tightened would have prohibited the use of funds to implement, administer, or enforce June 2004 tightened
restrictions on sending gift parcels to Cuba. H.Amdt. 269 (McDermott), which would have restrictions on sending gift parcels to Cuba. H.Amdt. 269 (McDermott), which would have
prohibited the use of funds in the bill to prosecute any individual for travel to Cuba, was offered prohibited the use of funds in the bill to prosecute any individual for travel to Cuba, was offered
but subsequently withdrawn. but subsequently withdrawn.
During April 6, 2005, Senate floor consideration of the FY2006 and FY2007 Foreign Affairs During April 6, 2005, Senate floor consideration of the FY2006 and FY2007 Foreign Affairs
Authorization Act, S. 600, the Senate considered S.Amdt. 281 (Baucus) and a second-degree Authorization Act, S. 600, the Senate considered S.Amdt. 281 (Baucus) and a second-degree
amendment, S.Amdt. 282 (Craig) that would have facilitated the sale of U.S. agricultural products amendment, S.Amdt. 282 (Craig) that would have facilitated the sale of U.S. agricultural products
to Cuba. The language of the amendments consisted of the provisions of S. 328 (Craig), the to Cuba. The language of the amendments consisted of the provisions of S. 328 (Craig), the
Agricultural Export Facilitation Act of 2005, which included a provision for a general license for Agricultural Export Facilitation Act of 2005, which included a provision for a general license for
travel transactions related to the marketing and sale of agricultural products, as opposed to the travel transactions related to the marketing and sale of agricultural products, as opposed to the
then requirement of a specific license for such travel transactions. Neither action on the then requirement of a specific license for such travel transactions. Neither action on the
amendments nor on S. 600 was completed. amendments nor on S. 600 was completed.

6970 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 109th Congress, see CRS Report RL32730, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 109th Congress, see CRS Report RL32730, Cuba: Issues
for the 109th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2729

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Second Session Action
On June 14, 2006, the House rejected two amendments to the FY2007 Transportation/Treasury On June 14, 2006, the House rejected two amendments to the FY2007 Transportation/Treasury
appropriation bill, H.R. 5576, which would have eased Cuba travel restrictions. H.Amdt. 1050 appropriation bill, H.R. 5576, which would have eased Cuba travel restrictions. H.Amdt. 1050
(Rangel), rejected by a vote of 183-245, would have prohibited funds from being used to (Rangel), rejected by a vote of 183-245, would have prohibited funds from being used to
implement the overall economic embargo of Cuba. H.Amdt. 1051 (Lee), rejected by a vote of implement the overall economic embargo of Cuba. H.Amdt. 1051 (Lee), rejected by a vote of
187-236, would have prohibited funds from being used to implement the Administration’s June 187-236, would have prohibited funds from being used to implement the Administration’s June
2004 tightening of restrictions on educational travel to Cuba. An additional Cuba amendment, 2004 tightening of restrictions on educational travel to Cuba. An additional Cuba amendment,
H.Amdt. 1032 (Flake), would have prohibited the use of funds to amend regulations relating to H.Amdt. 1032 (Flake), would have prohibited the use of funds to amend regulations relating to
travel for religious activities in Cuba; it was withdrawn from consideration. travel for religious activities in Cuba; it was withdrawn from consideration.
In other action, on June 22, 2006, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the In other action, on June 22, 2006, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the
FY2007 Agriculture appropriations bill, H.R. 5384 (S.Rept. 109-266), which contained a FY2007 Agriculture appropriations bill, H.R. 5384 (S.Rept. 109-266), which contained a
provision (§755) liberalizing travel to Cuba related to the sale of agricultural and medical goods. provision (§755) liberalizing travel to Cuba related to the sale of agricultural and medical goods.
The provision would have provided for such travel under a general license, instead of under a The provision would have provided for such travel under a general license, instead of under a
specific license as then required, issued on a case-by-case basis by the Treasury Department. specific license as then required, issued on a case-by-case basis by the Treasury Department.
Final action on the appropriations measure was not completed by the end of the 109th Congress. Final action on the appropriations measure was not completed by the end of the 109th Congress.
Similar Senate provisions in FY2004 and FY2005 agricultural appropriations bills were stripped Similar Senate provisions in FY2004 and FY2005 agricultural appropriations bills were stripped
out of the final enacted measures. out of the final enacted measures.
Additional Initiatives in the 109th Congress
A number of other legislative initiatives were introduced in the 109th Congress that would have A number of other legislative initiatives were introduced in the 109th Congress that would have
eased restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba. Two bills—S. 894 (Enzi) and H.R. 1814 eased restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba. Two bills—S. 894 (Enzi) and H.R. 1814
(Flake)—would have specifically lifted overall restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 2617 (Davis (Flake)—would have specifically lifted overall restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 2617 (Davis
(FL)) would have prohibited any additional restrictions on per diem allowances, family visits to (FL)) would have prohibited any additional restrictions on per diem allowances, family visits to
Cuba, remittances, and accompanied baggage beyond those that were in effect on June 15, 2004. Cuba, remittances, and accompanied baggage beyond those that were in effect on June 15, 2004.
H.R. 3064 (Lee) would have prohibited the use of funds available to the Department of the H.R. 3064 (Lee) would have prohibited the use of funds available to the Department of the
Treasury to implement regulations from June 2004 that tightened restrictions on travel to Cuba Treasury to implement regulations from June 2004 that tightened restrictions on travel to Cuba
for educational activities. H.Con.Res. 206 (Serrano), introduced in the aftermath of Hurricane for educational activities. H.Con.Res. 206 (Serrano), introduced in the aftermath of Hurricane
Dennis that struck Cuba in July 2005 (causing 16 deaths and significant damage), would have Dennis that struck Cuba in July 2005 (causing 16 deaths and significant damage), would have
expressed the sense of Congress that the President should temporarily suspend restrictions on expressed the sense of Congress that the President should temporarily suspend restrictions on
remittances, gift parcels, and family travel to Cuba to allow Cuban Americans to assist their remittances, gift parcels, and family travel to Cuba to allow Cuban Americans to assist their
relatives. relatives.
Two bills—H.R. 208 (Serrano) and H.R. 579 (Paul)—would have lifted the overall embargo on Two bills—H.R. 208 (Serrano) and H.R. 579 (Paul)—would have lifted the overall embargo on
trade and financial transactions with Cuba, including restrictions on travel and remittances to trade and financial transactions with Cuba, including restrictions on travel and remittances to
Cuba. Cuba.
Two identical bills dealing with easing restrictions on exporting agricultural commodities to Two identical bills dealing with easing restrictions on exporting agricultural commodities to
Cuba—H.R. 719 (Moran of Kansas) and S. 328 (Craig)—included provisions that would have Cuba—H.R. 719 (Moran of Kansas) and S. 328 (Craig)—included provisions that would have
provided for a general license for travel transactions related to the marketing and sale of provided for a general license for travel transactions related to the marketing and sale of
agricultural products, as opposed to the then requirement of a specific license for such travel agricultural products, as opposed to the then requirement of a specific license for such travel
transactions. transactions.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2830

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Legislative Initiatives in the 110th Congress, 2007-~~200870~~200871
In the 110th Congress, several House and Senate committee versions of appropriations bills had In the 110th Congress, several House and Senate committee versions of appropriations bills had
provisions that would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba in various ways, but none of these provisions that would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba in various ways, but none of these
provisions were included in final enacted legislation. Numerous other bills were introduced that provisions were included in final enacted legislation. Numerous other bills were introduced that
would have eased restrictions on travel and remittance in various ways; no action was taken on would have eased restrictions on travel and remittance in various ways; no action was taken on
these measures. these measures.
First Session Action
In the first session of the 110th Congress, two Senate Appropriations Committee-reported versions In the first session of the 110th Congress, two Senate Appropriations Committee-reported versions
of appropriations bills had provisions that would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba for the of appropriations bills had provisions that would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba for the
marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods, but ultimately these provisions were not marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods, but ultimately these provisions were not
included in the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). The Senate version of included in the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). The Senate version of
the FY2008 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill, reported July 19, the FY2008 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill, reported July 19,
2007, H.R. 2829, had a provision in Section 620 that would eased such travel restrictions, while 2007, H.R. 2829, had a provision in Section 620 that would eased such travel restrictions, while
the Senate version of the FY2008 Agriculture appropriations bill, S. 1859, reported July 24, 2007, the Senate version of the FY2008 Agriculture appropriations bill, S. 1859, reported July 24, 2007,
had such a provision in Section 741. had such a provision in Section 741.
Second Session Action
In the second session, several versions of House and Senate appropriations bills had provisions In the second session, several versions of House and Senate appropriations bills had provisions
easing Cuba travel restrictions and other Cuba sanctions; none of these were included in the easing Cuba travel restrictions and other Cuba sanctions; none of these were included in the
FY2009 continuing resolution. The House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the FY2009 continuing resolution. The House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill for FY2009 on June 25, 2008, Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill for FY2009 on June 25, 2008,
which contained provisions in Title VI that would have eased restrictions on the sale of U.S. which contained provisions in Title VI that would have eased restrictions on the sale of U.S.
agricultural exports to Cuba and on family travel to Cuba. The committee ultimately introduced agricultural exports to Cuba and on family travel to Cuba. The committee ultimately introduced
and reported the bill, H.R. 7323, on December 10, 2008 (H.Rept. 110-920). With regard to family and reported the bill, H.R. 7323, on December 10, 2008 (H.Rept. 110-920). With regard to family
travel, Section 622 would have allowed for such travel once a year (instead of the then restriction travel, Section 622 would have allowed for such travel once a year (instead of the then restriction
of once every three years), while Section 623 would have expanded such travel by a person to of once every three years), while Section 623 would have expanded such travel by a person to
visit an aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or first cousin (instead of the then restriction limiting such visit an aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or first cousin (instead of the then restriction limiting such
travel to visit a spouse, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or sibling). travel to visit a spouse, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or sibling).
On July 14, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2009 On July 14, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2009
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill, S. 3260 (S.Rept. 110-417), Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill, S. 3260 (S.Rept. 110-417),
which included provisions easing restrictions on family travel and on travel to Cuba relating to which included provisions easing restrictions on family travel and on travel to Cuba relating to
the commercial sale of agricultural and medical goods. With regard to family travel, Section 620 the commercial sale of agricultural and medical goods. With regard to family travel, Section 620
would have provided that no funds could be used to administer, implement, or enforce the would have provided that no funds could be used to administer, implement, or enforce the
Administration’s June 2004 tightening of restrictions related to travel to visit relatives in Cuba. Administration’s June 2004 tightening of restrictions related to travel to visit relatives in Cuba.
With regard to travel for agricultural or medical sales, Section 619 would have allowed for a With regard to travel for agricultural or medical sales, Section 619 would have allowed for a
general license for such travel instead of a specific license that requires permission from the general license for such travel instead of a specific license that requires permission from the
Treasury Department. Treasury Department.
On July 21, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2009 On July 21, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2009
Agriculture Appropriations bill, S. 3289 (S.Rept. 110-426), with a provision in Section 737 that Agriculture Appropriations bill, S. 3289 (S.Rept. 110-426), with a provision in Section 737 that
would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba for the sale of agricultural and medical goods. would have eased restrictions on travel to Cuba for the sale of agricultural and medical goods.
The provision would have allowed for a general license for such travel instead of a specific The provision would have allowed for a general license for such travel instead of a specific

7071 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 110th Congress, see CRS Report RL33819, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 110th Congress, see CRS Report RL33819, Cuba: Issues
for the 110th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2931

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

license that requires permission from the Treasury Department. The measure had been approved license that requires permission from the Treasury Department. The measure had been approved
by the committee on July 17, 2008. by the committee on July 17, 2008.
Additional Initiatives in the 110th Congress
A number of other initiatives introduced in the 110th Congress would have eased Cuba travel A number of other initiatives introduced in the 110th Congress would have eased Cuba travel
restrictions. H.R. 654 (Rangel), S. 721 (Enzi), and Section 254 of S. 554 (Dorgan) would prohibit restrictions. H.R. 654 (Rangel), S. 721 (Enzi), and Section 254 of S. 554 (Dorgan) would prohibit
the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to Cuba or any of the transactions incident to the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to Cuba or any of the transactions incident to
travel. Two bills that would lift overall economic sanctions—H.R. 217 (Serrano) and H.R. 624 travel. Two bills that would lift overall economic sanctions—H.R. 217 (Serrano) and H.R. 624
(Rangel)—would also lift travel restrictions. H.R. 177 (Lee) would ease restrictions on (Rangel)—would also lift travel restrictions. H.R. 177 (Lee) would ease restrictions on
educational travel to Cuba. H.R. 757 (Delahunt) would lift restrictions on family travel and the educational travel to Cuba. H.R. 757 (Delahunt) would lift restrictions on family travel and the
provision of remittances for family members in Cuba. H.R. 1026 (Moran, Jerry), which would provision of remittances for family members in Cuba. H.R. 1026 (Moran, Jerry), which would
facilitate the sale of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba, includes a provision that would provide facilitate the sale of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba, includes a provision that would provide
for general license authority for travel-related transactions for people involved in agricultural for general license authority for travel-related transactions for people involved in agricultural
sales and marketing activities or in the transportation of such sales. H.R. 2819 (Rangel) and S. sales and marketing activities or in the transportation of such sales. H.R. 2819 (Rangel) and S.
1673 (Baucus), which would ease restrictions on U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba, 1673 (Baucus), which would ease restrictions on U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba,
would also lift restrictions on travel to Cuba. The Senate Committee on Finance held a hearing on would also lift restrictions on travel to Cuba. The Senate Committee on Finance held a hearing on
S. 1673 on December 11, 2007. S. 1673 on December 11, 2007.
Legislative Initiatives in the Aftermath of 2008 Hurricanes
In the aftermath of the Hurricanes Gustav and Ike that struck Cuba, respectively, in late August In the aftermath of the Hurricanes Gustav and Ike that struck Cuba, respectively, in late August
and early September 2008, several legislative initiatives were introduced that would have and early September 2008, several legislative initiatives were introduced that would have
temporarily eased U.S. embargo restrictions in several areas, including restrictions on family temporarily eased U.S. embargo restrictions in several areas, including restrictions on family
travel, remittances, the provision of gift parcels, and the sale of relief supplies to Cuba. On travel, remittances, the provision of gift parcels, and the sale of relief supplies to Cuba. On
September 15, 2008, Senator Dodd September 15, 2008, Senator Dodd ~~offered~~ S.Amdt. 5581 S.Amdt. 5581 offered to the Department of Defense to the Department of Defense
authorization bill (S. 3001) that would have, for a 180-day period, allowed unrestricted family authorization bill (S. 3001) that would have, for a 180-day period, allowed unrestricted family
travel; eased restrictions on remittances by removing the limit and allowing any American to send travel; eased restrictions on remittances by removing the limit and allowing any American to send
remittances to Cuba; expanded the list of allowable items that may be included in gift parcels; and remittances to Cuba; expanded the list of allowable items that may be included in gift parcels; and
allowed for unrestricted U.S. cash sales of food, medicines, and relief supplies to Cuba. The allowed for unrestricted U.S. cash sales of food, medicines, and relief supplies to Cuba. The
amendment was not considered and therefore not part of the final bill. amendment was not considered and therefore not part of the final bill.
In the House, two legislative initiatives were introduced in the aftermath of the hurricanes that In the House, two legislative initiatives were introduced in the aftermath of the hurricanes that
would have temporarily eased restrictions in various ways. On September 16, 2008, would have temporarily eased restrictions in various ways. On September 16, 2008,
Representative Flake introduced H.R. 6913, which would have prohibited any funds from going Representative Flake introduced H.R. 6913, which would have prohibited any funds from going
to the Department of Commerce to implement, administer, or enforce tightened restrictions on the to the Department of Commerce to implement, administer, or enforce tightened restrictions on the
contents of gift parcels to Cuba that were introduced in June 2004. On September 18, 2008, contents of gift parcels to Cuba that were introduced in June 2004. On September 18, 2008,
Representative Delahunt introduced H.R. 6962, the Humanitarian Relief to Cuba Act, which Representative Delahunt introduced H.R. 6962, the Humanitarian Relief to Cuba Act, which
would have, for a 180-day period, allowed unrestricted family travel; eased restrictions on would have, for a 180-day period, allowed unrestricted family travel; eased restrictions on
remittances by removing the limit and allowing any American to send remittances to Cuba; and remittances by removing the limit and allowing any American to send remittances to Cuba; and
expanded the list of allowable items that may be included in gift parcels. expanded the list of allowable items that may be included in gift parcels.
Legislative Initiatives in the 111th Congress, 2009-~~201071~~201072
The 111th Congress took action in March 2009 to ease restrictions on family travel and travel for The 111th Congress took action in March 2009 to ease restrictions on family travel and travel for
the marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods. The eased family travel restrictions the marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods. The eased family travel restrictions
were superseded by the Obama Administration’s April 2009 action to allow unlimited family were superseded by the Obama Administration’s April 2009 action to allow unlimited family
travel and remittances. At the same time, the Administration also eased restrictions for travel for travel and remittances. At the same time, the Administration also eased restrictions for travel for

7172 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 111th Congress, see CRS Report R40193, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 111th Congress, see CRS Report R40193, Cuba: Issues
for the 111th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3032

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

telecommunications-related sales and for attendance at professional meetings related to telecommunications-related sales and for attendance at professional meetings related to
commercial telecommunications. Numerous other bills introduced in the 111th Congress would commercial telecommunications. Numerous other bills introduced in the 111th Congress would
have lifted or eased restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, but these restrictions were not have lifted or eased restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, but these restrictions were not
considered. One House initiative, H.R. 4645 (Peterson), would have lifted all restrictions on considered. One House initiative, H.R. 4645 (Peterson), would have lifted all restrictions on
travel to Cuba and also would have eased restrictions on the payment mechanisms for U.S. travel to Cuba and also would have eased restrictions on the payment mechanisms for U.S.
agricultural exports to Cuba. The House Agriculture Committee approved the measure; no further agricultural exports to Cuba. The House Agriculture Committee approved the measure; no further
action was taken on the bill. action was taken on the bill.
First Session Action
On March 11, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 On March 11, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009
(P.L. 111-8), with two provisions easing restrictions on travel to Cuba.(P.L. 111-8), with two provisions easing restrictions on travel to Cuba.7273 The provisions were The provisions were
identical to provisions that had been included in the Senate Appropriations Committee version of identical to provisions that had been included in the Senate Appropriations Committee version of
the FY2009 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill in the 110th the FY2009 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill in the 110th
Congress, S. 3260. Congress, S. 3260.
In the enacted bill, Section 620 of Division D, Financial Services and General Government In the enacted bill, Section 620 of Division D, Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2009, amended the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of Appropriations Act, 2009, amended the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of
2000 (TSRA) to require the Secretary of the Treasury to issue regulations for travel to, from, or 2000 (TSRA) to require the Secretary of the Treasury to issue regulations for travel to, from, or
within Cuba under a general license for the marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods, within Cuba under a general license for the marketing and sale of agricultural and medical goods,
meaning that there would be no requirement to obtain special permission from OFAC. Such travel meaning that there would be no requirement to obtain special permission from OFAC. Such travel
had required a specific license from OFAC, issued on a case-by-case basis. OFAC issued had required a specific license from OFAC, issued on a case-by-case basis. OFAC issued
regulations implementing this provision on September 3, 2009. regulations implementing this provision on September 3, 2009.
Section 621 of Division D prohibited funds from being used to administer, implement, or enforce Section 621 of Division D prohibited funds from being used to administer, implement, or enforce
family travel restrictions that were imposed by the Bush Administration in June 2004. OFAC family travel restrictions that were imposed by the Bush Administration in June 2004. OFAC
implemented this provision by reinstating a general license for family travel as it existed prior to implemented this provision by reinstating a general license for family travel as it existed prior to
the Bush Administration’s tightening of restrictions in June 2004. As implemented by the the Bush Administration’s tightening of restrictions in June 2004. As implemented by the
Treasury Department, travel was allowed once every 12 months to visit a close relative for an Treasury Department, travel was allowed once every 12 months to visit a close relative for an
unlimited length of stay, and the limit for daily expenditure allowed by family travelers became unlimited length of stay, and the limit for daily expenditure allowed by family travelers became
the same as for other authorized travelers to Cuba (the State Department maximum per diem rate the same as for other authorized travelers to Cuba (the State Department maximum per diem rate
for Havana). The new general license also expanded the definition of “close relative” to mean any for Havana). The new general license also expanded the definition of “close relative” to mean any
individual related to the traveler by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three individual related to the traveler by blood, marriage, or adoption who is no more than three
generations removed from that person. This provision was superseded by the Obama generations removed from that person. This provision was superseded by the Obama
Administration’s further liberalization of family travel to Cuba announced in April 2009. Administration’s further liberalization of family travel to Cuba announced in April 2009.
The joint explanatory statement to P.L. 111-8 also required the Department of the Treasury to The joint explanatory statement to P.L. 111-8 also required the Department of the Treasury to
prepare a report within 90 days on the steps that it is taking to assess OFAC’s allocation of prepare a report within 90 days on the steps that it is taking to assess OFAC’s allocation of
resources for investigating and penalizing violations of the Cuba embargo with respect to the resources for investigating and penalizing violations of the Cuba embargo with respect to the
numerous other sanctions programs it administers. As part of the report, the Treasury Department numerous other sanctions programs it administers. As part of the report, the Treasury Department
was directed to provide detailed information on OFAC’s Cuba-related licensing on its was directed to provide detailed information on OFAC’s Cuba-related licensing on its
enforcement of the Cuba embargo. enforcement of the Cuba embargo.
On November 19, 2009, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing on U.S. On November 19, 2009, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing on U.S.
restrictions on travel to Cuba entitled “Is It Time to Lift the Ban on Travel to Cuba?” that featured restrictions on travel to Cuba entitled “Is It Time to Lift the Ban on Travel to Cuba?” that featured
former U.S. government officials and other private witnesses. former U.S. government officials and other private witnesses.

7273 A third Cuba provision in the law prohibited funding to administer, implement, or enforce certain requirements for A third Cuba provision in the law prohibited funding to administer, implement, or enforce certain requirements for
U.S. agricultural exporters using the “payment of cash in advance” payment mechanism for selling their goods to Cuba. U.S. agricultural exporters using the “payment of cash in advance” payment mechanism for selling their goods to Cuba.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3133

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Second Session Action
In the second session, legislative action related to Cuba travel restrictions occurred in the House In the second session, legislative action related to Cuba travel restrictions occurred in the House
Committee on Agriculture, and no subsequent action was taken. On March 11, 2010, the Committee on Agriculture, and no subsequent action was taken. On March 11, 2010, the
committee held a hearing to review U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba. At the hearing, there was committee held a hearing to review U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba. At the hearing, there was
discussion of recently introduced H.R. 4645 (Peterson), a measure that would remove restrictions discussion of recently introduced H.R. 4645 (Peterson), a measure that would remove restrictions
on travel to Cuba and also remove some restrictions regarding payments for U.S. agricultural on travel to Cuba and also remove some restrictions regarding payments for U.S. agricultural
exports to Cuba. On June 30, 2010, the committee reported out H.R. 4645 by a vote of 25-20 exports to Cuba. On June 30, 2010, the committee reported out H.R. 4645 by a vote of 25-20
(H.Rept. 111-653). The bill would have lifted all restrictions on travel to Cuba. It also included (H.Rept. 111-653). The bill would have lifted all restrictions on travel to Cuba. It also included
two provisions easing restrictions on the payment mechanisms for U.S. agricultural exports to two provisions easing restrictions on the payment mechanisms for U.S. agricultural exports to
Cuba. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs was scheduled to hold a markup of the bill on Cuba. The House Committee on Foreign Affairs was scheduled to hold a markup of the bill on
September 29, 2010, but postponed its consideration, and in the aftermath of the 2011 U.S. September 29, 2010, but postponed its consideration, and in the aftermath of the 2011 U.S.
legislative elections, no further action was taken. An identical companion bill in the Senate, S. legislative elections, no further action was taken. An identical companion bill in the Senate, S.
3112 (Klobuchar), was introduced March 15, 2010, and referred to the Committee on Foreign 3112 (Klobuchar), was introduced March 15, 2010, and referred to the Committee on Foreign
Relations. Relations.
On April 29, 2010, the House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Trade, held a On April 29, 2010, the House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Trade, held a
hearing on U.S.-Cuba policy that examined whether relaxing current Cuba travel and trade hearing on U.S.-Cuba policy that examined whether relaxing current Cuba travel and trade
restrictions would advance U.S. economic objectives, as well as U.S. political and human rights restrictions would advance U.S. economic objectives, as well as U.S. political and human rights
goals in Cuba. goals in Cuba.
Additional Initiatives in the 111th Congress
Several other legislative initiatives were introduced in the 111th Congress that would have eased Several other legislative initiatives were introduced in the 111th Congress that would have eased
restrictions on travel to Cuba; no action was taken on these measures. H.R. 874 (Delahunt)/S. 428 restrictions on travel to Cuba; no action was taken on these measures. H.R. 874 (Delahunt)/S. 428
(Dorgan) and H.R. 1528 (Rangel) would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 188 (Dorgan) and H.R. 1528 (Rangel) would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 188
(Serrano), H.R. 1530 (Rangel), and H.R. 2272 (Rush) would have lifted the overall embargo on (Serrano), H.R. 1530 (Rangel), and H.R. 2272 (Rush) would have lifted the overall embargo on
trade and financial transactions with Cuba, including travel restrictions. H.R. 1531 (Rangel)/S. trade and financial transactions with Cuba, including travel restrictions. H.R. 1531 (Rangel)/S.
1089 (Baucus) would have facilitated the export of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba and also 1089 (Baucus) would have facilitated the export of U.S. agricultural products to Cuba and also
would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 332 (Lee) would have eased would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 332 (Lee) would have eased
restrictions on educational travel by providing that no funds made available to the Department of restrictions on educational travel by providing that no funds made available to the Department of
the Treasury may be used to implement, administer, or enforce regulations to require specific the Treasury may be used to implement, administer, or enforce regulations to require specific
licenses for travel-related transactions directly related to educational activities in Cuba. S. 774 licenses for travel-related transactions directly related to educational activities in Cuba. S. 774
(Dorgan), H.R. 1918 (Flake), and S. 1517 (Murkowski) would have amended the Trade Sanctions (Dorgan), H.R. 1918 (Flake), and S. 1517 (Murkowski) would have amended the Trade Sanctions
Reform and Economic Enhancement Act of 2000 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to Reform and Economic Enhancement Act of 2000 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to
authorize travel to Cuba under a general license in connection to hydrocarbon exploration and authorize travel to Cuba under a general license in connection to hydrocarbon exploration and
extraction activities. In contrast, H.Con.Res. 132 (Tiahrt) would have called for the fulfillment of extraction activities. In contrast, H.Con.Res. 132 (Tiahrt) would have called for the fulfillment of
certain democratic conditions before the United States increases trade and tourism to Cuba. certain democratic conditions before the United States increases trade and tourism to Cuba.
Legislative Initiatives in the 112th Congress, 2011-~~201273~~201274
There were several attempts in the first session of the 112th Congress aimed at rolling back the There were several attempts in the first session of the 112th Congress aimed at rolling back the
Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on travel and remittances; none of these were Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on travel and remittances; none of these were
approved. Several legislative initiatives were also introduced that would have further eased or approved. Several legislative initiatives were also introduced that would have further eased or
lifted such restrictions altogether; no action was taken on these measures. lifted such restrictions altogether; no action was taken on these measures.

7374 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 112th Congress, see CRS Report R41617, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 112th Congress, see CRS Report R41617, Cuba: Issues
for the 112th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3234

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

FAA Reauthorization
During consideration of the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill, S. 223, in During consideration of the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill, S. 223, in
February 2011, an amendment was submitted, but never considered, S.Amdt. 61 (Rubio), that February 2011, an amendment was submitted, but never considered, S.Amdt. 61 (Rubio), that
would have prohibited an expansion of flights to locations in countries that are designated state would have prohibited an expansion of flights to locations in countries that are designated state
sponsors of terrorism (which, at the time, included Cuba). sponsors of terrorism (which, at the time, included Cuba).
FY2012 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations
The House Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2012 Financial Services and The House Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2012 Financial Services and
General Government Appropriations bill, H.R. 2434, on July 7, 2011, with a provision in Section General Government Appropriations bill, H.R. 2434, on July 7, 2011, with a provision in Section
901 that would have rolled back the Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on family 901 that would have rolled back the Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on family
travel and on remittances overall. (The Senate Appropriations Committee version of the measure, travel and on remittances overall. (The Senate Appropriations Committee version of the measure,
S. 1573, did not contain a similar provision.) The House provision had been offered as an S. 1573, did not contain a similar provision.) The House provision had been offered as an
amendment by Representative Mario Diaz-Balart that was agreed to by voice vote during the amendment by Representative Mario Diaz-Balart that was agreed to by voice vote during the
committee’s June 24, 2011, markup of the measure. The provision would have repealed committee’s June 24, 2011, markup of the measure. The provision would have repealed
amendments to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations made since January 19, 2009, regarding amendments to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations made since January 19, 2009, regarding
family travel (31 C.F.R. 515.561), carrying remittances (31 C.F.R. 515.560(c)(4)(i)), and sending family travel (31 C.F.R. 515.561), carrying remittances (31 C.F.R. 515.560(c)(4)(i)), and sending
remittances to Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.570). According to the provision, such regulations would be remittances to Cuba (31 C.F.R. 515.570). According to the provision, such regulations would be
restored and carried out as in effect on January 19, 2009, notwithstanding any guidelines, restored and carried out as in effect on January 19, 2009, notwithstanding any guidelines,
opinions, letters, presidential directives, or agency practices relating to such regulations that are opinions, letters, presidential directives, or agency practices relating to such regulations that are
issued or carried out after such date. issued or carried out after such date.
If the provision were to be enacted, family travel would have been limited to once every three If the provision were to be enacted, family travel would have been limited to once every three
years for a period of up to 14 days and would have required a specific license from the Treasury years for a period of up to 14 days and would have required a specific license from the Treasury
Department; licensed travelers would have been allowed to carry $300 in remittances compared Department; licensed travelers would have been allowed to carry $300 in remittances compared
to the $3,000 currently allowed; family remittances would have been limited to $300 per quarter; to the $3,000 currently allowed; family remittances would have been limited to $300 per quarter;
nonfamily remittances restored by the Obama Administration, up to $500 per quarter, would not nonfamily remittances restored by the Obama Administration, up to $500 per quarter, would not
have been allowed; and the general license for remittances to religious organizations would have have been allowed; and the general license for remittances to religious organizations would have
been eliminated, with such remittances permitted via specific license. been eliminated, with such remittances permitted via specific license.
The White House’s Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 2434, issued July 13, 2011, stated The White House’s Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 2434, issued July 13, 2011, stated
that the Administration opposed Section 901 because it would reverse the President’s policy on that the Administration opposed Section 901 because it would reverse the President’s policy on
family travel and remittances, and that the President’s senior advisors would recommend a veto if family travel and remittances, and that the President’s senior advisors would recommend a veto if
the bill contained the provision. According to the statement, Section 901 “would undo the the bill contained the provision. According to the statement, Section 901 “would undo the
President’s efforts to increase contact between divided Cuban families, undermine the President’s efforts to increase contact between divided Cuban families, undermine the
enhancement of the Cuban people’s economic independence and support for private sector enhancement of the Cuban people’s economic independence and support for private sector
activity in Cuba that come from increased remittances from family members, and therefore isolate activity in Cuba that come from increased remittances from family members, and therefore isolate
the Cuban people and make them more dependent on Cuban authorities.”the Cuban people and make them more dependent on Cuban authorities.”7475
A second Cuba amendment agreed to by voice vote during the markup of H.R. 2434 was offered A second Cuba amendment agreed to by voice vote during the markup of H.R. 2434 was offered
by Representative Jeff Flake. The amendment made changes to the committee report to the bill by Representative Jeff Flake. The amendment made changes to the committee report to the bill
(H.Rept. 112-136) and would have required a report from OFAC on the current number of (H.Rept. 112-136) and would have required a report from OFAC on the current number of
pending applications seeking specific licenses related to educational exchanges not involving pending applications seeking specific licenses related to educational exchanges not involving
academic study pursuant to a degree program under the auspices of an organization that sponsors academic study pursuant to a degree program under the auspices of an organization that sponsors
and organizes such programs to promote people-to-people contact. The report also would have and organizes such programs to promote people-to-people contact. The report also would have
required information on the number of these licenses that OFAC has approved to date, its plan for required information on the number of these licenses that OFAC has approved to date, its plan for
getting through the current queue of license applications, and its plan for expeditiously reviewing getting through the current queue of license applications, and its plan for expeditiously reviewing
those applications in the future. those applications in the future.

7475 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy, H.R.
2434—Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2012, July 13, 2011. 2434—Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2012, July 13, 2011.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3335

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

In November 2011, an attempt to include the Senate version of the Financial Services In November 2011, an attempt to include the Senate version of the Financial Services
appropriations measure, S. 1573, in a “minibus” with two other full-year appropriations measures appropriations measure, S. 1573, in a “minibus” with two other full-year appropriations measures
and a short-term continuing resolution failed in part because of disagreement over a Cuba and a short-term continuing resolution failed in part because of disagreement over a Cuba
provision that would have allowed direct transfers from a Cuban financial institution to a U.S. provision that would have allowed direct transfers from a Cuban financial institution to a U.S.
financial institution to pay for U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba. financial institution to pay for U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba.
In December 2011, a legislative battle ensued over the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2012, In December 2011, a legislative battle ensued over the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2012,
H.R. 2055, a “megabus” bill that combined nine full-year appropriations measures, including the H.R. 2055, a “megabus” bill that combined nine full-year appropriations measures, including the
Financial Services and General Government bill. At issue was the potential inclusion of two Cuba Financial Services and General Government bill. At issue was the potential inclusion of two Cuba
provisions that had been in the House Appropriations Committee-approved version of the provisions that had been in the House Appropriations Committee-approved version of the
Financial Services bill, H.R. 2434: one described above that would roll back to January 2009 the Financial Services bill, H.R. 2434: one described above that would roll back to January 2009 the
Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on family travel and on remittances; and the Obama Administration’s actions easing restrictions on family travel and on remittances; and the
second a provision that would continue to clarify, for the third fiscal year in a row, the definition second a provision that would continue to clarify, for the third fiscal year in a row, the definition
of “payment of cash in advance” for U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba so that the of “payment of cash in advance” for U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba so that the
payment was due upon delivery in Cuba as opposed to being due before the goods left U.S. ports. payment was due upon delivery in Cuba as opposed to being due before the goods left U.S. ports.
(The text of the two Cuba provisions was also included in Division C, Sections 632 and 634, of (The text of the two Cuba provisions was also included in Division C, Sections 632 and 634, of
H.R. 3671, a new “megabus” bill introduced by House Republicans on December 14, 2011.) H.R. 3671, a new “megabus” bill introduced by House Republicans on December 14, 2011.)
Ultimately, congressional leaders agreed to not include the two Cuba provisions in H.R. 2055 Ultimately, congressional leaders agreed to not include the two Cuba provisions in H.R. 2055
(H.Rept. 112-331), and the measure was approved by the House and Senate, respectively, on (H.Rept. 112-331), and the measure was approved by the House and Senate, respectively, on
December 16 and 17, 2011, and signed into law on December 23, 2011 (P.L. 112-74). The White December 16 and 17, 2011, and signed into law on December 23, 2011 (P.L. 112-74). The White
House reportedly had exerted strong pressure not to include the Cuba provision that would have House reportedly had exerted strong pressure not to include the Cuba provision that would have
rolled back the Administration’s easing of restrictions on travel and remittances. Dropping the rolled back the Administration’s easing of restrictions on travel and remittances. Dropping the
second provision on the definition of “payment of cash in advance” for U.S. agricultural and second provision on the definition of “payment of cash in advance” for U.S. agricultural and
medical products appears to have been a political tradeoff made to compensate for the travel medical products appears to have been a political tradeoff made to compensate for the travel
rollback provision being dropped. rollback provision being dropped.
FY2012 Foreign Relations Authorization Act
In other congressional action, on July 21, 2011, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs marked In other congressional action, on July 21, 2011, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs marked
up H.R. 2583 (H.Rept. 112-223), the FY2012 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, with a up H.R. 2583 (H.Rept. 112-223), the FY2012 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, with a
provision (§1126 of the reported bill) that would have required the President to fully enforce all provision (§1126 of the reported bill) that would have required the President to fully enforce all
U.S. regulations on travel to Cuba as in effect on January 19, 2009, and impose the corresponding U.S. regulations on travel to Cuba as in effect on January 19, 2009, and impose the corresponding
penalties against individuals determined to be in violation of such regulations. The provision was penalties against individuals determined to be in violation of such regulations. The provision was
added by an amendment offered by Representative David Rivera, approved 36-6, that had the added by an amendment offered by Representative David Rivera, approved 36-6, that had the
intent of reinstating tighter travel restrictions as they existed under the Bush Administration in intent of reinstating tighter travel restrictions as they existed under the Bush Administration in
January 2009. January 2009.
Amendments to the Cuban Adjustment Act
Two additional measures introduced in August 2011 would have amended the Cuban Adjustment Two additional measures introduced in August 2011 would have amended the Cuban Adjustment
Act of 1966 (CAA, P.L. 89-732) to curb travel to Cuba by Cubans who had recently immigrated Act of 1966 (CAA, P.L. 89-732) to curb travel to Cuba by Cubans who had recently immigrated
to the United States. Introduced on August 1, 2011, H.R. 2771 (Rivera) would have amended the to the United States. Introduced on August 1, 2011, H.R. 2771 (Rivera) would have amended the
CAA to increase to five years the period during which a Cuban national must be physically CAA to increase to five years the period during which a Cuban national must be physically
present in the United States in order to qualify for adjustment of status to that of a permanent present in the United States in order to qualify for adjustment of status to that of a permanent
resident. The legislation also would have provided that an alien would be ineligible for resident. The legislation also would have provided that an alien would be ineligible for
adjustment to permanent resident status if the alien returned to Cuba after admission or parole adjustment to permanent resident status if the alien returned to Cuba after admission or parole
into the United States before becoming a U.S. citizen. A subsequent version, H.R. 2831 (Rivera), into the United States before becoming a U.S. citizen. A subsequent version, H.R. 2831 (Rivera),
introduced August 30, 2011, just contained the provision maintaining that an alien from Cuba introduced August 30, 2011, just contained the provision maintaining that an alien from Cuba
would be ineligible for adjustment to permanent resident status under the CAA if he or she would be ineligible for adjustment to permanent resident status under the CAA if he or she
returned to Cuba before becoming a U.S. citizen. The House Committee on the Judiciary, returned to Cuba before becoming a U.S. citizen. The House Committee on the Judiciary,
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3436

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Subcommittee on Immigration on Policy Enforcement, held a hearing on H.R. 2831 on May 31, Subcommittee on Immigration on Policy Enforcement, held a hearing on H.R. 2831 on May 31,
2012. 2012.
Initiatives to Ease Restrictions on Travel and Remittances
In contrast to measures aimed at rolling back the Obama Administration’s polices easing travel In contrast to measures aimed at rolling back the Obama Administration’s polices easing travel
and remittances to Cuba, several measures would have eased or lifted travel restrictions and remittances to Cuba, several measures would have eased or lifted travel restrictions
altogether. H.R. 1886 (Rangel) would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 1888 altogether. H.R. 1886 (Rangel) would have prohibited restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 1888
(Rangel), in addition to removing some restrictions on the export of U.S. agricultural products to (Rangel), in addition to removing some restrictions on the export of U.S. agricultural products to
Cuba, would also have prohibited Cuba travel restrictions. Two initiatives that would have lifted Cuba, would also have prohibited Cuba travel restrictions. Two initiatives that would have lifted
the overall embargo on trade and restrictions on financial transaction with Cuba, H.R. 255 the overall embargo on trade and restrictions on financial transaction with Cuba, H.R. 255
(Serrano) and H.R. 1887 (Rangel), would also have lifted restrictions on travel and remittances to (Serrano) and H.R. 1887 (Rangel), would also have lifted restrictions on travel and remittances to
Cuba. H.R. 380 (Lee) would have provided that no funds made available to the Department of the Cuba. H.R. 380 (Lee) would have provided that no funds made available to the Department of the
Treasury could be used to implement, administer, or enforce regulations to require specific Treasury could be used to implement, administer, or enforce regulations to require specific
licenses for travel-related transactions directly related to educational activities in Cuba. licenses for travel-related transactions directly related to educational activities in Cuba.
Legislative Initiatives in the 113th Congress, 2013-~~201475~~201476
In the 113th Congress, appropriations measures had provisions that would have tightened and In the 113th Congress, appropriations measures had provisions that would have tightened and
eased Cuba travel restrictions, but none of these provisions were included in final action. eased Cuba travel restrictions, but none of these provisions were included in final action.
Additional measures were introduced that would have lifted travel restrictions; no action was Additional measures were introduced that would have lifted travel restrictions; no action was
taken on these measures. taken on these measures.
First Session
In the first session of the 113th Congress, the House and Senate versions of the FY2014 Financial In the first session of the 113th Congress, the House and Senate versions of the FY2014 Financial
Services and General Government appropriations measure, H.R. 2786 and S. 1371, as reported by Services and General Government appropriations measure, H.R. 2786 and S. 1371, as reported by
the Appropriations Committees in July 2013, had different provisions regarding U.S. policy the Appropriations Committees in July 2013, had different provisions regarding U.S. policy
regarding travel to Cuba. The House version would have tightened restrictions on travel by regarding travel to Cuba. The House version would have tightened restrictions on travel by
prohibiting funding for any additional authorization of people-to-people exchanges during the prohibiting funding for any additional authorization of people-to-people exchanges during the
fiscal year, while the Senate version would have eased restrictions on travel by authorizing a new fiscal year, while the Senate version would have eased restrictions on travel by authorizing a new
general license for professional travel related to disaster prevention, emergency preparedness, and general license for professional travel related to disaster prevention, emergency preparedness, and
natural resource protection. Ultimately, however, neither of these provisions was included in the natural resource protection. Ultimately, however, neither of these provisions was included in the
FY2014 omnibus appropriations measure, H.R. 3547 (P.L. 113-76), signed into law January 17, FY2014 omnibus appropriations measure, H.R. 3547 (P.L. 113-76), signed into law January 17,
2014. 2014.
As reported out of the House Appropriations Committee on July 23, 2013, H.R. 2786 (H.Rept. As reported out of the House Appropriations Committee on July 23, 2013, H.R. 2786 (H.Rept.
113-172) had a provision in Section 124 that would have prohibited FY2014 funding used “to 113-172) had a provision in Section 124 that would have prohibited FY2014 funding used “to
approve, license, facilitate, authorize, or otherwise allow” travel-related or other transactions approve, license, facilitate, authorize, or otherwise allow” travel-related or other transactions
related to nonacademic educational exchanges (i.e., people-to-people travel) to Cuba set forth in related to nonacademic educational exchanges (i.e., people-to-people travel) to Cuba set forth in
31 C.F.R. 515.565(b)(2) of the CACR. The committee report to the House bill contended that this 31 C.F.R. 515.565(b)(2) of the CACR. The committee report to the House bill contended that this
category of travel violates the prohibition on travel related to tourist activities set forth in the category of travel violates the prohibition on travel related to tourist activities set forth in the
Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-387, Title IX). The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-387, Title IX). The
report also maintained that the stated purpose of people-to-people travel—to promote the Cuban report also maintained that the stated purpose of people-to-people travel—to promote the Cuban
people’s independence from Cuban authorities—“cannot be accomplished through itineraries that people’s independence from Cuban authorities—“cannot be accomplished through itineraries that
mainly feature interactions with representatives of a dictatorship that actively oppresses the mainly feature interactions with representatives of a dictatorship that actively oppresses the
Cuban people, nor can it be accomplished through itineraries that do not require meetings with Cuban people, nor can it be accomplished through itineraries that do not require meetings with
pro-democracy activists or independent members of Cuban civil society.” pro-democracy activists or independent members of Cuban civil society.”

7576 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 113th Congress, see CRS Report R43024, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 113th Congress, see CRS Report R43024, Cuba: U.S.
Policy and Issues for the 113th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3537

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

The House bill had a second Cuba provision in Section 125 that would have required a Treasury The House bill had a second Cuba provision in Section 125 that would have required a Treasury
Department report within 90 days of the bill’s enactment with information for each fiscal year Department report within 90 days of the bill’s enactment with information for each fiscal year
since FY2007 on the number of travelers visiting close relatives in Cuba, the average duration of since FY2007 on the number of travelers visiting close relatives in Cuba, the average duration of
these trips, the average amount of U.S. dollars spent per family traveler (including amount of these trips, the average amount of U.S. dollars spent per family traveler (including amount of
remittances carried to Cuba), the number of return trips per year, and the total sum of U.S. dollars remittances carried to Cuba), the number of return trips per year, and the total sum of U.S. dollars
spent collectively by family travelers for each fiscal year. spent collectively by family travelers for each fiscal year.
As reported out of the Senate Appropriations Committee on July 25, 2013, S. 1371 (S.Rept. 113- As reported out of the Senate Appropriations Committee on July 25, 2013, S. 1371 (S.Rept. 113-
80) had a provision in Section 628 that would have provided for a new general license for travel-80) had a provision in Section 628 that would have provided for a new general license for travel-
related transactions for full-time professional research; attendance at professional meetings if the related transactions for full-time professional research; attendance at professional meetings if the
sponsoring organization was a U.S. organization; and the organization and management of sponsoring organization was a U.S. organization; and the organization and management of
professional meetings or conferences in Cuba if the sponsoring organization was a U.S. professional meetings or conferences in Cuba if the sponsoring organization was a U.S.
professional organization—if the travel was related to disaster prevention; emergency professional organization—if the travel was related to disaster prevention; emergency
preparedness; and natural resource protection, including for fisheries, coral reefs, and migratory preparedness; and natural resource protection, including for fisheries, coral reefs, and migratory
species. This provision would have expanded the general licenses available for professional species. This provision would have expanded the general licenses available for professional
research and meetings in Cuba that allow full-time professionals to conduct professional research research and meetings in Cuba that allow full-time professionals to conduct professional research
in their areas (with certain conditions), attend professional meetings or conferences in Cuba in their areas (with certain conditions), attend professional meetings or conferences in Cuba
organized by an international professional organization, and attend professional meetings for organized by an international professional organization, and attend professional meetings for
commercial telecommunications transactions (31 C.F.R. 515.564). commercial telecommunications transactions (31 C.F.R. 515.564).
Second Session
In the second session of the 113th Congress, the House-passed version of the FY2015 Financial In the second session of the 113th Congress, the House-passed version of the FY2015 Financial
Services and General Government Appropriations Act, H.R. 5016 (H.Rept. 113-508), had a Services and General Government Appropriations Act, H.R. 5016 (H.Rept. 113-508), had a
provision that would have prohibited the use of any funds in the act to approve, license, facilitate, provision that would have prohibited the use of any funds in the act to approve, license, facilitate,
authorize, or otherwise allow people-to-people travel. The measure also had a provision that authorize, or otherwise allow people-to-people travel. The measure also had a provision that
would have required the Administration to prepare a report with specific information on family would have required the Administration to prepare a report with specific information on family
travel to Cuba since FY2007. A draft Senate bill (not introduced, but released by the Senate travel to Cuba since FY2007. A draft Senate bill (not introduced, but released by the Senate
Committee on Appropriations in July 2014) did not include any provisions on Cuba sanctions. Committee on Appropriations in July 2014) did not include any provisions on Cuba sanctions.
H.R. 5016 was approved by the House July 16, 2014, by a vote of 228 to 195. Section 126 of the H.R. 5016 was approved by the House July 16, 2014, by a vote of 228 to 195. Section 126 of the
bill would have prevented any funds in the act from being used “to approve, license, facilitate, bill would have prevented any funds in the act from being used “to approve, license, facilitate,
authorize or otherwise allow” people-to-people travel. Section 127 would have required a joint authorize or otherwise allow” people-to-people travel. Section 127 would have required a joint
report from the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security with report from the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security with
information for each fiscal year since FY2007 on the number of travelers visiting close relatives information for each fiscal year since FY2007 on the number of travelers visiting close relatives
in Cuba; the average duration of these trips; the average amount of U.S. dollars spent per family in Cuba; the average duration of these trips; the average amount of U.S. dollars spent per family
traveler (including amount of remittances carried to Cuba); the number of return trips per year; traveler (including amount of remittances carried to Cuba); the number of return trips per year;
and the total sum of U.S. dollars spent collectively by family travelers for each fiscal year. As and the total sum of U.S. dollars spent collectively by family travelers for each fiscal year. As
noted above, similar provisions had appeared in the House Appropriations Committee-reported noted above, similar provisions had appeared in the House Appropriations Committee-reported
FY2014 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, H.R. 2786, but FY2014 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, H.R. 2786, but
ultimately were not included in the Consolidated Appropriation Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76). ultimately were not included in the Consolidated Appropriation Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76).
The House Committee on Appropriations report to H.R. 5016 (H.Rept. 113-508) contended that The House Committee on Appropriations report to H.R. 5016 (H.Rept. 113-508) contended that
the people-to-people category of travel “contravenes the explicit prohibition against tourist the people-to-people category of travel “contravenes the explicit prohibition against tourist
activities as provided in section 910(b) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement activities as provided in section 910(b) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement
Act of 2000 (TSRA),” (22 U.S.C. 7209(b)). The report also maintained that the stated purpose of Act of 2000 (TSRA),” (22 U.S.C. 7209(b)). The report also maintained that the stated purpose of
people-to-people travel—to promote the Cuban people’s independence from Cuban authorities—people-to-people travel—to promote the Cuban people’s independence from Cuban authorities—
“cannot be accomplished through itineraries that mainly feature interactions with representatives “cannot be accomplished through itineraries that mainly feature interactions with representatives
of a dictatorship that actively oppresses the Cuban people, nor can it be accomplished through of a dictatorship that actively oppresses the Cuban people, nor can it be accomplished through
itineraries that do not require meetings with pro-democracy activists or independent members of itineraries that do not require meetings with pro-democracy activists or independent members of
Cuban civil society.” Cuban civil society.”
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3638

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Ultimately Congress did not complete action on H.R. 5016, and the FY2015 omnibus Ultimately Congress did not complete action on H.R. 5016, and the FY2015 omnibus
appropriations measure approved in December 2014 (P.L. 113-235) did not include the Cuba-appropriations measure approved in December 2014 (P.L. 113-235) did not include the Cuba-
related travel provisions in H.R. 5016. related travel provisions in H.R. 5016.
Additional Legislation Introduced in the 113th Congress
In addition to the appropriations measured discussed above, several other initiatives were In addition to the appropriations measured discussed above, several other initiatives were
introduced in the 113th Congress that would lifted all travel restrictions, but no action was taken introduced in the 113th Congress that would lifted all travel restrictions, but no action was taken
on these measures: H.R. 871 (Rangel) would have lifted travel restrictions; H.R. 873 (Rangel) on these measures: H.R. 871 (Rangel) would have lifted travel restrictions; H.R. 873 (Rangel)
would have lifted travel restrictions and restrictions on U.S. agricultural exports; and H.R. 214 would have lifted travel restrictions and restrictions on U.S. agricultural exports; and H.R. 214
(Serrano), H.R. 872 (Rangel), and H.R. 1917 (Rush) would have lifted the overall embargo, (Serrano), H.R. 872 (Rangel), and H.R. 1917 (Rush) would have lifted the overall embargo,
including travel restrictions. including travel restrictions.
Legislative Initiatives in the 114th Congress, 2015-~~201676~~201677
Several legislative initiatives introduced in the 114th Congress would have lifted remaining Several legislative initiatives introduced in the 114th Congress would have lifted remaining
restrictions on travel and remittances; no action was taken on these measures. Three bills would restrictions on travel and remittances; no action was taken on these measures. Three bills would
have lifted the overall embargo, including restrictions on travel and remittances: H.R. 274 (Rush), have lifted the overall embargo, including restrictions on travel and remittances: H.R. 274 (Rush),
H.R. 403 (Rangel), and H.R. 735 (Serrano). One bill, H.R. 635 (Rangel), would have facilitated H.R. 403 (Rangel), and H.R. 735 (Serrano). One bill, H.R. 635 (Rangel), would have facilitated
the export of U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba and lifted travel restrictions. Three the export of U.S. agricultural and medical exports to Cuba and lifted travel restrictions. Three
bills would have focused solely on prohibiting restrictions on travel to Cuba: H.R. 634 (Rangel), bills would have focused solely on prohibiting restrictions on travel to Cuba: H.R. 634 (Rangel),
H.R. 664 (Sanford), and S. 299 (Flake). S. 2990 (Collins) would have permitted the provision of H.R. 664 (Sanford), and S. 299 (Flake). S. 2990 (Collins) would have permitted the provision of
services to foreign air carriers en route to or from Cuba. (OFAC issued a license in July 2016 to services to foreign air carriers en route to or from Cuba. (OFAC issued a license in July 2016 to
Bangor International Airport to provide services to such flights.) Bangor International Airport to provide services to such flights.)
In contrast, other initiatives would have slowed down easing of travel restrictions or restricted In contrast, other initiatives would have slowed down easing of travel restrictions or restricted
regular scheduled air travel with Cuba. No action was taken on these measures. Two bills, S. 1388 regular scheduled air travel with Cuba. No action was taken on these measures. Two bills, S. 1388
(Vitter) and H.R. 2466 (Rooney), would have required the President to submit a plan for resolving (Vitter) and H.R. 2466 (Rooney), would have required the President to submit a plan for resolving
all outstanding claims relating to property confiscated by the government of Cuba before taking all outstanding claims relating to property confiscated by the government of Cuba before taking
action to ease restrictions on travel to or trade with Cuba. Two similar bills, H.R. 5728 (Katko) action to ease restrictions on travel to or trade with Cuba. Two similar bills, H.R. 5728 (Katko)
and S. 3289 (Rubio), would have prohibited scheduled passenger air transportation between the and S. 3289 (Rubio), would have prohibited scheduled passenger air transportation between the
United States and Cuba until a study was completed regarding Cuba’s airport security and until United States and Cuba until a study was completed regarding Cuba’s airport security and until
agreements had been reached with Cuba allowing the U.S. Federal Air Marshal Service to agreements had been reached with Cuba allowing the U.S. Federal Air Marshal Service to
conduct missions on regularly scheduled flights and providing Transportation Security conduct missions on regularly scheduled flights and providing Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) inspectors access to all areas of last-point-of-departure airports in Cuba for Administration (TSA) inspectors access to all areas of last-point-of-departure airports in Cuba for
security assessments. (As noted above, Cuba and the United States reached an agreement in late security assessments. (As noted above, Cuba and the United States reached an agreement in late
September 2016 that will allow Federal Air Marshals on board regularly scheduled flights to and September 2016 that will allow Federal Air Marshals on board regularly scheduled flights to and
from Cuba.) from Cuba.)
Efforts to ease and tighten travel restrictions played out in the FY2016 appropriations process, but Efforts to ease and tighten travel restrictions played out in the FY2016 appropriations process, but
ultimately no such provisions were included in the FY2016 omnibus appropriations measure (P.L. ultimately no such provisions were included in the FY2016 omnibus appropriations measure (P.L.
114-113). The Senate Appropriations Committee-approved version of the FY2016 Financial 114-113). The Senate Appropriations Committee-approved version of the FY2016 Financial
Services appropriation bill, S. 1910, had a provision that would have lifted restrictions on travel Services appropriation bill, S. 1910, had a provision that would have lifted restrictions on travel
to Cuba. In contrast, House-passed H.R. 2577, the FY2016 House Transportation, Housing, and to Cuba. In contrast, House-passed H.R. 2577, the FY2016 House Transportation, Housing, and
Urban Development appropriations bill, had two Cuba provisions that would have affected the Urban Development appropriations bill, had two Cuba provisions that would have affected the
Administration’s efforts to increase travel to and from Cuba by impeding the establishment of Administration’s efforts to increase travel to and from Cuba by impeding the establishment of
regularly scheduled air service and passenger ferry service. In addition, the House Appropriations regularly scheduled air service and passenger ferry service. In addition, the House Appropriations

7677 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 114th Congress, see CRS Report R43926, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 114th Congress, see CRS Report R43926, Cuba: Issues
and Actions in the 114th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3739

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Committee-approved FY2016 Financial Services appropriations bill, H.R. 2995, had a broader Committee-approved FY2016 Financial Services appropriations bill, H.R. 2995, had a broader
provision that would have prevented people-to-people educational travel. provision that would have prevented people-to-people educational travel.
In the FY2017 appropriations process, the House and Senate versions of the Financial Services In the FY2017 appropriations process, the House and Senate versions of the Financial Services
appropriations measure had contrasting provisions on travel, but the 114th Congress did not appropriations measure had contrasting provisions on travel, but the 114th Congress did not
complete action on FY2017 appropriations. In the House Financial Services appropriations bill, complete action on FY2017 appropriations. In the House Financial Services appropriations bill,
H.R. 5485 (H.Rept. 114-624), as approved by the House on July 7, 2016, Section 132 would have H.R. 5485 (H.Rept. 114-624), as approved by the House on July 7, 2016, Section 132 would have
prohibited funding that licenses, facilitates, or otherwise allows people-to-people travel. The prohibited funding that licenses, facilitates, or otherwise allows people-to-people travel. The
measure would have had a significant impact on the expansion of U.S. travel to Cuba that has measure would have had a significant impact on the expansion of U.S. travel to Cuba that has
occurred in recent years, including the recently begun cruise ship travel to Cuba. Another occurred in recent years, including the recently begun cruise ship travel to Cuba. Another
provision in the House bill, Section 134, would have prohibited funding to approve, license, provision in the House bill, Section 134, would have prohibited funding to approve, license,
facilitate, authorize, or otherwise allow any financial transaction with an entity controlled, in facilitate, authorize, or otherwise allow any financial transaction with an entity controlled, in
whole or in part, by the Cuban military or intelligence service or any officer or immediate family whole or in part, by the Cuban military or intelligence service or any officer or immediate family
member thereof. This provision could have had a significant effect on U.S. travel to Cuba because member thereof. This provision could have had a significant effect on U.S. travel to Cuba because
the Cuban military has an important role in hotel and other travel services in the country. the Cuban military has an important role in hotel and other travel services in the country.
In the Senate Appropriations Committee’s version of the FY2017 Financial Services In the Senate Appropriations Committee’s version of the FY2017 Financial Services
appropriations measure, S. 3067 (S.Rept. 114-280), Section 635 would have prohibited funding in appropriations measure, S. 3067 (S.Rept. 114-280), Section 635 would have prohibited funding in
the act or in any act to implement any law, regulation, or policy that restricts travel to Cuba. The the act or in any act to implement any law, regulation, or policy that restricts travel to Cuba. The
provision would have effectively lifted all restrictions on travel to Cuba. Another provision in the provision would have effectively lifted all restrictions on travel to Cuba. Another provision in the
Senate bill, Section 637, would have prohibited funds in the act or in any act from being used to Senate bill, Section 637, would have prohibited funds in the act or in any act from being used to
implement any law, regulation, or policy that prohibits the provision of technical services implement any law, regulation, or policy that prohibits the provision of technical services
otherwise permitted under an international air transportation agreement in the United States for an otherwise permitted under an international air transportation agreement in the United States for an
aircraft of a foreign carrier that is en route to or from Cuba based on the restrictions set forth in aircraft of a foreign carrier that is en route to or from Cuba based on the restrictions set forth in
the Cuban Assets Control Regulations. (As noted above, OFAC issued a license in July 2016 to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations. (As noted above, OFAC issued a license in July 2016 to
Bangor International Airport to provide services to such flights.) Bangor International Airport to provide services to such flights.)
Congress approved a full-year FY2017 appropriations measure in May 2017, when it enacted the Congress approved a full-year FY2017 appropriations measure in May 2017, when it enacted the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31). The act did not include any of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31). The act did not include any of the
contrasting provisions that had been in the House and Senate versions of the Financial Services contrasting provisions that had been in the House and Senate versions of the Financial Services
appropriations measure discussed above. appropriations measure discussed above.
Legislative Initiatives in the 115th Congress (2017-2018)7778
In the 115th Congress, six bills would have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 351 In the 115th Congress, six bills would have lifted restrictions on travel to Cuba. H.R. 351
(Sanford), the Freedom to Travel Act of 2017, would have focused solely on travel by lifting (Sanford), the Freedom to Travel Act of 2017, would have focused solely on travel by lifting
current restrictions on travel and prohibiting the President from regulating, directly or indirectly, current restrictions on travel and prohibiting the President from regulating, directly or indirectly,
travel to Cuba or any transaction incident to such travel. S. 1287 (Flake), the Freedom for travel to Cuba or any transaction incident to such travel. S. 1287 (Flake), the Freedom for
Americans to Travel Act of 2017, would have prohibited the President from restricting travel to Americans to Travel Act of 2017, would have prohibited the President from restricting travel to
Cuba or any transactions incident to travel to Cuba. H.R. 572 (Serrano), the Promoting American Cuba or any transactions incident to travel to Cuba. H.R. 572 (Serrano), the Promoting American
Agricultural and Medical Exports to Cuba Act of 2017, would have eased certain restrictions on Agricultural and Medical Exports to Cuba Act of 2017, would have eased certain restrictions on
agricultural and medical exports to Cuba and would have lifted restrictions on travel and agricultural and medical exports to Cuba and would have lifted restrictions on travel and
prohibited restrictions on travel if such travel would be lawful in the United States. Three bills prohibited restrictions on travel if such travel would be lawful in the United States. Three bills
would have lifted the embargo on Cuba by removing provisions of law restricting trade and other would have lifted the embargo on Cuba by removing provisions of law restricting trade and other
financial transactions with Cuba, including restrictions on travel, and would have prohibited financial transactions with Cuba, including restrictions on travel, and would have prohibited
restrictions on travel if such travel would be lawful in the United States: H.R. 574 (Serrano), the restrictions on travel if such travel would be lawful in the United States: H.R. 574 (Serrano), the
Cuba Reconciliation Act; H.R. 2966 (Rush), the United States-Cuba Normalization Act of 2017; Cuba Reconciliation Act; H.R. 2966 (Rush), the United States-Cuba Normalization Act of 2017;

7778 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 115th Congress, see CRS Report R44822, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 115th Congress, see CRS Report R44822, Cuba: U.S.
Policy in the 115th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3840

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

and S. 1699 (Wyden), the United States-Cuba Trade Act of 2017. (Both H.R. 2966 and S. 1699 and S. 1699 (Wyden), the United States-Cuba Trade Act of 2017. (Both H.R. 2966 and S. 1699
also would have prohibited restrictions on U.S. remittances to Cuba.) also would have prohibited restrictions on U.S. remittances to Cuba.)
The 115th Congress also took legislative action related to concerns about Cuba’s airport security. The 115th Congress also took legislative action related to concerns about Cuba’s airport security.
Congress completed action on the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, signed into law October 6, Congress completed action on the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, signed into law October 6,
2018, as P.L. 115-254 (H.R. 302), which included a provision in Section 1957 requiring the TSA 2018, as P.L. 115-254 (H.R. 302), which included a provision in Section 1957 requiring the TSA
to provide Congress a briefing on certain aspects of security measures at airports in Cuba that to provide Congress a briefing on certain aspects of security measures at airports in Cuba that
have air service to the United States. (The language of the provision is similar, although not have air service to the United States. (The language of the provision is similar, although not
identical, to a provision in H.R. 3328 [Katko], the Cuban Airport Security Act of 2017, approved identical, to a provision in H.R. 3328 [Katko], the Cuban Airport Security Act of 2017, approved
by the House in October 2017.)by the House in October 2017.)7879 P.L. 115-254 also required the TSA Administrator to (1) direct P.L. 115-254 also required the TSA Administrator to (1) direct
all public charters to provide updated flight data to more reliably track the public charter all public charters to provide updated flight data to more reliably track the public charter
operations of air carriers between the United States and Cuba and (2) develop and implement a operations of air carriers between the United States and Cuba and (2) develop and implement a
mechanism that corroborates and validates flight schedule data to more reliably track the public mechanism that corroborates and validates flight schedule data to more reliably track the public
charter operations of air carriers between the United States and Cuba.charter operations of air carriers between the United States and Cuba.7980
Legislative Initiatives in the 116th Congress, 2019-~~202080~~202081
In the 116th Congress, three bills were introduced that would have lifted restrictions on travel to In the 116th Congress, three bills were introduced that would have lifted restrictions on travel to
Cuba. Identical bills H.R. 3960 (McGovern) and S. 2303 (Leahy), the Freedom for Americans to Cuba. Identical bills H.R. 3960 (McGovern) and S. 2303 (Leahy), the Freedom for Americans to
Travel to Cuba Act of 2019, would have prohibited most restrictions on travel to or from Cuba by Travel to Cuba Act of 2019, would have prohibited most restrictions on travel to or from Cuba by
U.S. citizens and legal residents or any transactions incident to such travel. H.R. 2404 (Rush), the U.S. citizens and legal residents or any transactions incident to such travel. H.R. 2404 (Rush), the
United States-Cuba Relations Normalization Act, would have lifted most economic sanctions on United States-Cuba Relations Normalization Act, would have lifted most economic sanctions on
Cuba, including restrictions on travel and remittances. Cuba, including restrictions on travel and remittances.

Author Information

Mark P. Sullivan Mark P. Sullivan

Specialist in Latin American Affairs Specialist in Latin American Affairs

7879 H.R. 3328 also would have prohibited a U.S. air carrier from employing a Cuban national in Cuba unless the carrier H.R. 3328 also would have prohibited a U.S. air carrier from employing a Cuban national in Cuba unless the carrier
had publicly disclosed the full text of the formal agreement between the air carrier and the had publicly disclosed the full text of the formal agreement between the air carrier and the Empresa Cubana de
Aeropuertos y Servicios Aeronauticos or any other entity associated with the Cuban government. The bill would also, or any other entity associated with the Cuban government. The bill would also,
to the extent practicable, have prohibited U.S. air carriers from hiring Cuban nationals if they had been recruited, hired, to the extent practicable, have prohibited U.S. air carriers from hiring Cuban nationals if they had been recruited, hired,
or trained by entities that are owned, operated, or controlled in whole or in part by Cuba’s Council of State, Council of or trained by entities that are owned, operated, or controlled in whole or in part by Cuba’s Council of State, Council of
Ministers, Communist Party, Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or Ministry of Ministers, Communist Party, Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or Ministry of
the Interior. An identical bill, S. 2023 (Rubio), was introduced in the Senate in October 2017. the Interior. An identical bill, S. 2023 (Rubio), was introduced in the Senate in October 2017.
7980 This requirement relating to public air charters to and from Cuba stems from a recommendation made by the This requirement relating to public air charters to and from Cuba stems from a recommendation made by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) in a July 2018 report examining TSA’s assessments of Cuban aviation Government Accountability Office (GAO) in a July 2018 report examining TSA’s assessments of Cuban aviation
security. See GAO, security. See GAO, Aviation Security, Actions Needed to Better Identify and Track U.S.-Bound Public Charter
Operations from Cuba, GAO-18-526, July 2018. , GAO-18-526, July 2018.
8081 For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 116th Congress, see CRS Report R45657, For a complete listing and discussion of all Cuba bills in the 116th Congress, see CRS Report R45657, Cuba: U.S.
Policy in the 116th Congress and Through the Trump Administration, by Mark P. Sullivan. , by Mark P. Sullivan.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3941

Cuba: U.S. Restrictions on Travel and Remittances

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
RL31139 RL31139 · VERSION 9294 · UPDATED
4042