31 C.F.R. § 560.206
Prohibited trade-related transactions with Iran; goods, technology, or services
(a) Except as otherwise authorized pursuant to this part, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to May 7, 1995, no United States person, wherever located, may engage in any transaction or dealing in or related to:
(1) Goods or services of Iranian origin or owned or controlled by the Government of Iran; or
(2) Goods, technology, or services for exportation, reexportation, sale or supply, directly or indirectly, to Iran or the Government of Iran.
(b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the term transaction or dealing includes but is not limited to purchasing, selling, transporting, swapping, brokering, approving, financing, facilitating, or guaranteeing.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: United States v. Mousavi, 604 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2010).
United States v. Mousavi, 604 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2010). “§ 1705 , and the Iranian Transaction Regulations (ITR), 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 , commonly referred to as the *1087 United States’ trade embargo against Iran.”
Kashani v. Tsann Kuen China Enter. Co., 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4052 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004). “204 ); any “United States person, wherever located,” “engaging] in any transaction or dealing [transaction or dealing includes but is not limited to purchasing, selling, transporting, swapping, brokering, approving, financing, facilitating, or guaranteeing ( 31 C.F.R. § 560.206…”
In Re 650 Fifth Ave. & Related Props., 777 F. Supp. 2d 529 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). “31 C.F.R. § 560.206 . Further, “any new investment by a United States person in Iran or in property (including entities) owned or controlled by the Government of Iran is prohibited.”
United States v. Banki, 685 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2011). “” 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 (a)(1). . Banki and amici contend that U.”
NML Capital, Ltd. v. Repub. of Argentina, 727 F.3d 230 (2d Cir. 2013). “, 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 (forbidding trade by U.”
United States v. Amirnazmi, 645 F.3d 564 (3rd Cir. 2011). “” Specifically, he argues that the amorphousness of 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 (a) allowed the government to convict him for engaging “solely in preliminary negotiations with Iranian entities.”
Transfair Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 54 Fed. Cl. 78 (Fed. Cl. 2002). “” 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 (2000). Violations of these provisions are governed by the IEEPA, but, more specifically, the Iranian Transactions Regulations provide that one who violates these provisions is subject to “a civil penalty of not to exceed $11,000 per violation,” and whoever…”
MGM Prods. Grp., Inc. v. Aeroflot Russian Airlines, 573 F. Supp. 2d 772 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). “2,613 (“Prohibiting Imports from Iran”), 12,957 (“Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources”), and 12,959 (“Prohibiting Certain Transactions With Respect to Iran”), and several regulations promulgated by the Office of Foreign…”
United States v. Banki, 660 F.3d 665 (2d Cir. 2011). “” 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 (a)(1). 8 . Banki and amici contend that U.”
United States v. Jalal Hajavi (11th Cir. 2025). “included that he had to know he could not 2 With respect to Count Four, Hajavi complains that the district court’s gen- eral reference to “the prohibitions on exportation and re-exportation of items to Iran” fails to capture the specific practices prohibited by 31 C.F.R. §…”
Ghader v. The Plan Adm'r (D. Del. 2025). “204 and 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 prohibit a U.S. person from exporting services to Iran, including individuals who are ordinarily resident in Iran.”
Arabpour v. The Plan Adm'r (D. Del. 2025). “204 and 31 C.F.R. § 560.206 prohibit a U.S. person from exporting services to Iran, including individuals who are ordinarily resident in Iran.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.