News Desk · Enforcement

Freight forwarder Pegasus Worldwide Logistics settles with OFAC for $175,015

OFAC says the firm helped import a machine supplied by a sanctioned company and took six months to fully answer an OFAC subpoena.

EnforcementUS9 Oct 20262 min read

On 9 October 2026 the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the US sanctions authority, announced a settlement with Pegasus Worldwide Logistics. OFAC describes Pegasus as a freight forwarding firm involved in cross-border shipments.

Pegasus agreed to pay $175,015 to settle its potential civil liability. According to OFAC, the case covers four apparent violations of the Illicit Drug Trafficking Sanctions Regulations and six apparent violations of the Reporting, Procedures and Penalties Regulations. An apparent violation is conduct that OFAC believes breaks its sanctions rules.

OFAC says that between September 2023 and February 2024 Pegasus dealt in blocked property by helping to import a machine supplied by a designated company. Blocked property is property in which a sanctioned party has an interest; US persons may not deal in it without OFAC permission. OFAC also says Pegasus failed to respond fully to an OFAC subpoena for six months.

OFAC says the settlement amount reflects its view that the conduct was non-egregious and was not voluntarily disclosed. OFAC's announcement does not name the designated company. AMLift could not access OFAC's full enforcement release for this case, so further details are not included here.

Why it matters to AML professionals

Sanctions risk is not limited to payments: a shipment of goods can involve a sanctioned supplier even when no money is sent to that supplier directly. Logistics firms, and the banks that serve them, need screening that covers every party named in trade and shipping documents. Responding fully and on time to a regulator's information request is a compliance obligation in its own right.

Red flags in this case

Shipping or import documents name a supplier, manufacturer or consignor that is not screened against sanctions lists
A freight forwarder customer handles cross-border shipments involving parties in jurisdictions linked to drug trafficking sanctions programs
Trade documents show a supplier name that differs from the party being paid
A customer delays or gives partial answers when asked for information about a transaction or its counterparties

If this landed in your queue

Screen every party in the trade documents, including the supplier, manufacturer, shipper and consignee, not only the payment counterparty
Check whether any listed party is owned or controlled by a sanctioned person before treating the screening hit as cleared
Hold the transaction and escalate to the sanctions team if a party is a confirmed match, and follow the blocking and reporting rules that apply
Record every request for information and response deadline, and escalate when a response is late or incomplete

Key terms

Blocked property: Property or interests in property of a sanctioned party that US persons must freeze and may not deal in without OFAC authorization.
Apparent violation: Conduct that OFAC believes breaches its sanctions rules, used in settlements where no final finding of a violation is made.
Non-egregious: OFAC's classification for cases it does not consider the most serious, which affects how the penalty amount is calculated.

Interview angle

Why does sanctions screening for a trade finance or logistics customer need to go beyond the payment beneficiary?

Explain that a sanctioned party can appear as the supplier, manufacturer, shipper or owner of goods without receiving the payment, so all parties in trade documents must be screened, along with ownership checks on the entities involved.

Sources

Go deeper on AMLift

Every fact in AMLift News Desk stories comes from an official source: a regulator, court, government gazette or the company's own filing.