Legal Sidebari

Forfeiture Trail for Russian Oligarchs’ Luxury
Assets
October 13, 2022
The Justice Department recently announced issuance of seizure warrants for a luxury yacht and airplanes
located in various foreign countries and owned by sanctioned Russian oligarchs. The warrants anticipate
the seizure and confiscation of property related to these individuals violating Russian sanctions and
federal money laundering statutes. The affidavits filed in support of the warrants supply a statutory road
map for the government’s authority in these cases. Some Members of Congress have introduced a
growing number of legislative proposals related to the seizure of property owned by sanctioned Russian
oligarchs and those associated with the Russian regime, including H.R. 6930, which passed the House on
April 27, 2022. In addition, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducted a hearing on July 19, 2022.
Background
In response to Russia’s attacks on Ukraine in 2014 and 2022, both President Obama and President Biden
invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to imposed sanctions on a number
of Russian individuals and entities. To facilitate enforcement of those sanctions, Attorney General
Garland created a KleptoCapture task force, and the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network issued an Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption, which “urg[ed]
financial institutions to focus their efforts on detecting the proceeds of foreign public corruption.”
Russian oligarchs allegedly acquired and maintained the yacht and planes that are the subject of the
seizure warrants through a series of shell companies and straw men. These transactions often involved
electronic fund transfers in the Cayman Islands, Cyprus, and the Channel Island of Jersey.
Legal Context
Criminal and civil forfeiture begins with a crime. In the case of the seizure warrant for the yacht, the
affidavit in support of the warrant refers to violations of IEEPA and the money laundering statute; in the
case of the seizure warrant for the planes, the affidavits refer to violations of IEEPA, the money
laundering statute, and the Export Control Reform Act (ECRA). In both affidavits, the IEEPA and ECRA
allegations flow from charges of willful violations of executive orders, regulations, and licenses relating
to the sanctions against Russia. Additionally, the affidavits allege IEEPA violations and the use of
correspondent banking accounts, which implicate the money laundering statute. The government stated
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
LSB10840
CRS Legal Sidebar
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

---

Congressional Research Service
2
that “[n]early all U.S. dollar wire [transfer] transactions conducted by foreign financial institutions are
processed through correspondent bank accounts held in the United States.”
The government may confiscate crime-tainted property only when a statute declares such property
forfeitable. The yacht and airplane affidavits rely on the statute that renders forfeitable property
constituting, derived from, or traceable to money laundering predicate offenses such as IEEPA violations.
Courts in civil forfeiture cases, such as in the examples provided, ordinarily treat the forfeitable property
as the defendant in the proceeding and requires seizure of the property. The U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia may issue seizure warrants for forfeitable property located abroad. Foreign
authorities will execute the warrants pursuant to mutual legal assistance treaties or agreements with the
United States.
Once the confiscated yacht and airplanes have been auctioned off, the proceeds would be deposited in the
Treasury Department Forfeiture Fund.

Author Information

Charles Doyle

Senior Specialist in American Public Law




Disclaimer
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 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 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 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 copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

LSB10840 · VERSION 1 · NEW

---