Search
Contact
27.07.2018 | KPMG Law Insights

Foreign Trade Law & Export Control – The US withdrawal from the JCPOA and the reactivation of the Blocking Statute by the EU – Implications for European Companies in Foreign Trade

The U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and the reactivation of the Blocking Statute by the EU – Implications for European Companies in Foreign Trade

On May 8, 2018, U.S. President Donald J. Trump announced that he would terminate U.S. participation in the nuclear agreement reached with Iran – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Following the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal and the expiration of a wind-down period, the financial and economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. against Iran are to be gradually reinstated. Within the wind-down periods, which are 90 and 180 days and end on August 6, 2018 and November 4, 2018, respectively, companies should wind down and terminate existing business relationships in Iran.

After the end of the first wind-down period on August 6, 2018, sanctions related to foreign exchange and commodity trading, as well as against the Iranian automotive industry, among others, will come back into force. Finally, after the expiration of the second wind-down period, i.e., on November 4, 2018, sanctions against the oil industry, the energy sector, and the financial and insurance industries will revive. For example, the U.S. is already pushing for a global import ban on Iranian oil and has announced it will not make exceptions for the European Union (EU).

Response by the EU

The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal has drawn criticism. The EU, as well as the other signatories of the agreement, have explicitly expressed their support for the preservation of the nuclear agreement with Iran and want to maintain their economic relations in Iran.

To save the nuclear deal, the EU Commission has initiated the formal procedure to reactivate the so-called Blocking Statute (Regulation (EC) No. 2271/96). This anti-boycott provision aims to prevent the extraterritorial application of U.S. sanctions. The Blocking Statute thereby criminalizes participation in the Iran sanctions imposed by the U.S. on companies, but at the same time provides for the possibility of applying for exemptions.

The law is scheduled to take effect before August 6, 2018, the end of the first wind-down period.

Implications for exporting companies

However, European companies operating internationally are thus faced with the dilemma that compliance with the European anti-boycott regulation simultaneously leads to a violation of U.S. embargo provisions. This is compounded by the fact that failure to comply with U.S. sanctions can lead to serious consequences and drastic fines for companies. In addition, past experience has shown that the U.S. administration also consistently takes action against embargo violations by foreign companies.

The Blocking Statute, on the other hand, has not yet been applied in the past. The dispute at the time over sanctions against Cuba, Iran and Libya was settled. In this respect, it remains to be seen how the situation will develop and how the EU, in the event of a violation of the anti-boycott regulation, will react.

Explore #more

29.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Fund Risk Limitation Act and Location Promotion Act create new scope for infrastructure funds

As the federal government’s special infrastructure fund of 500 billion euros will probably not be enough to finance Germany’s roads, networks and the energy transition,…

29.10.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises management board of Nürnberger Beteiligungs-AG on sale to Vienna Insurance Group

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft (KPMG Law) provided legal advice to the Management Board of Nürnberger Beteiligungs-AG throughout the entire public takeover process by Vienna Insurance Group…

29.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

BAG on pair comparison: How employers should deal with salary differences

The Federal Labor Court (BAG) has issued another landmark decision on equal pay. In its ruling of October 23, 2025 (Ref. 8 AZR 300/24),…

23.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

What the Federal Network Agency’s FAQs mean for storage system operators

On October 17, 2025, the Federal Network Agency published FAQs on the regulatory treatment of stationary battery storage systems (“BESS”). The FAQs are a guide…

23.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

What the “construction turbo” means for municipalities and building supervisory authorities

The Bundestag has passed the “construction turbo” and local authorities can now significantly accelerate certain construction projects. According to the law passed on October 9,…

22.10.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law guest article in Das Investment: Private debt for the masses: How the FRBG is turning the fund market upside down

Paradigm shift in the fund market: The new FRBG makes private debt retail-capable and creates citizen participation funds. In this article, KPMG Law expert Ulrich

20.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Data centers: Requirements for emergency power generators continue to rise

When the power fails in data centers, the consequences are often severe: Data loss and system failures can cause considerable financial damage to companies. Emergency…

16.10.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law contribution to the anthology “Crypto-Asset Compliance”

KPMG Law experts Ulrich Keunecke and Marc Pussar have contributed chapter 3 on capital market and banking supervisory law aspects of crypto-assets to the anthology…

14.10.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise Bühler Motor GmbH on the sale of Bühler Motor Aviation GmbH to Astronics Germany GmbH

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) have advised Bühler Motor GmbH on the sale of all shares in Bühler Motor Aviation…

10.10.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law guest article in NZG: Compliance due diligence in SMEs: Minimum scope and contractual mapping of compliance risks of the target company

In the context of M&A transactions, compliance usually still plays a subordinate role in legal due diligence. The purpose of this article is, on…

Contact

Dr. Konstantin von Busekist

Managing Partner
Head of Global Compliance Practice
KPMG Law EMA Leader

Tersteegenstraße 19-23
40474 Düsseldorf

Tel.: +49 211 4155597123
kvonbusekist@kpmg-law.com

Anne-Kathrin Gillig

Partner
Frankfurt am Main Site Manager
Head of Compliance and Business Criminal Law

THE SQUAIRE Am Flughafen
60549 Frankfurt am Main

Tel.: +49 69 951195013
agillig@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll