Definition
Sanctions screening is the process of checking customers, counterparties, beneficial owners, wallet addresses and transactions against government sanctions lists, such as OFAC's SDN List and the UK and EU consolidated lists, to prevent dealings with designated persons and to freeze and report their assets as the law requires.
How it works
Screening runs at onboarding, whenever a sanctions list changes, and on payments in real time. Names and identifiers are compared against list entries using exact and fuzzy matching, and potential matches are reviewed by an analyst who confirms or discounts them. Confirmed matches lead to blocking or freezing, rejecting the transaction, and reporting to the relevant authority. Ownership also matters: entities owned by designated persons can be restricted even when they are not listed themselves.
Requirements by jurisdiction
US: OFAC civil penalties generally apply on a strict liability basis. Under OFAC's 50 Percent Rule, entities owned 50% or more in aggregate by blocked persons are blocked. Since March 2025, records of transactions subject to OFAC regulations must be kept for 10 years (31 CFR 501.601). Blocked virtual currency must be reported within 10 business days.
EU: Since 9 January 2025 the Instant Payments Regulation (EU) 2024/886 requires payment service providers offering instant credit transfers to check whether their users are subject to EU targeted financial sanctions at least daily and immediately after new designations.
UK: OFSI does not need to prove knowledge or reasonable cause to suspect for breaches on or after 15 June 2022. Its ownership and control test uses "more than 50%", unlike the US and EU "50% or more"; OFSI consulted in February 2026 on aligning this. Relevant firms must report known or suspected designated persons to OFSI as soon as practicable.
Common challenges
Fuzzy matching on names generates large volumes of false positives, while weak matching misses true hits. OFAC's compliance framework cites screening failures such as outdated lists, missing identifiers like SWIFT BICs, and ignoring alternative spellings. Ownership chains and transliteration add further complexity.
How teams handle it in practice
Teams tune matching thresholds by list and risk, use secondary identifiers (date of birth, nationality, BIC, wallet address) to discount matches, and track list updates for same-day re-screening. Alert disposition is documented for audit. Compliance platforms like Corsa can pre-assess matches with supporting evidence so analysts focus on genuine hits.
How Corsa helps:
Transaction Monitoring →
Frequently asked questions
Is sanctions screening the same as AML screening?
No. Sanctions screening is a legal prohibition check against official lists, often with strict liability, while AML screening (for example PEP and adverse media) informs risk assessment rather than prohibiting the relationship.
What is the difference between the US and UK ownership rules?
OFAC blocks entities owned 50% or more in aggregate by blocked persons. The UK test is ownership or control of more than 50%, and OFSI has consulted on aligning with US and EU frameworks.
How often should customers be rescreened?
Whenever relevant sanctions lists change. EU instant payment providers must screen their users at least daily.
Sources
ofac.treasury.gov/faqs/topic/1521
ofac.treasury.gov/faqs/topic/1626
ofac.treasury.gov/media/913571/download
ofac.treasury.gov/media/16331/download?inline
ecfr.gov/current/title-31/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-501/subpart-F/section-501.601
eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/886/oj/eng
ecb.europa.eu/paym/retail/instant_payments/html/instant_payments_regulation.en.html
gov.uk/government/publications/financial-sanctions-general-guidance/uk-financial-sanctions
gov.uk/government/publications/financial-sanctions-enforcement-and-monetary-penalties-guid
ofsi.blog.gov.uk/2026/02/16/call-for-evidence-on-ownership-and-control-in-financial-sancti