Sanctions

As cybercrime spreads in its many mutations, governments and regulators across the globe continue to develop a variety of solutions. One regulatory method that has gained in popularity and sophistication in recent years is the financial response to cybercrime. The United States in particular has explored financial sanctions at the “front end,” to deprive cybercriminals of access to financial channels, and financial penalties at the “back end,” particularly asset forfeiture, to recover the proceeds of criminal activity. 

Financial Sanctions

Treating China lightly for its support of North Korea is consistent with the approach of the Bush and Obama administrations, but it makes little legal or strategic sense today. 

Last summer, I pointed out that U.S. law already authorizes the President to impose targeted economic sanctions to deter or punish Chinese aggression in the South China Sea. That none were imposed, however, is hardly surprising. Although U.S. sanctions are often threatened, the U.S. government has rarely, if ever, imposed economic sanctions on a Chinese company or individual, even for offenses such as cyber-theft or illegal trade with Iran.

The media scrutiny around the U.S-Iranian $1.7 billion financial settlement is a Rohrschach test for how you feel about the Iran Nuclear Deal.