Practical guide
OFAC SDN vs Non-SDN: coverage and restrictions are different
Compare OFAC SDN and Non-SDN coverage, preserve underlying list identities, and avoid treating every OFAC screening result as a blocking designation.
On this page
Two distribution groups, not one legal meaning
OFAC distributes the SDN List and a separate Non-SDN Consolidated Sanctions List through its Sanctions List Service. The grouping helps users obtain data. It does not make the restrictions attached to every entry identical.
A screening system should preserve both the issuing authority and the underlying list or program context. A generic “sanctioned” badge can obscure an important distinction between blocking and other restrictions.
What an SDN result tells a reviewer
An SDN candidate points to a record in the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List. The reviewer must first determine whether it represents the submitted subject. A confirmed identity then needs an assessment of the relevant rules, transaction, exemptions, or authorizations.
A name resemblance is not enough to conclude that the customer is the listed party. Use the same identity-review discipline even when the underlying measure is significant.
What a Non-SDN result requires
Non-SDN data brings together lists that can involve narrower or different restrictions. Inspect the original entry, underlying list, current program material, and proposed activity. Do not apply an SDN action solely because the result came from OFAC.
This makes source lineage important in both the API and the analyst interface. A record should tell the reviewer where to find the authoritative restriction, not just which vendor returned the name.
Selecting coverage in SanctionsKit
The supported selectors are `ofac-sdn` and `ofac-non-sdn`. Request the sources your approved policy requires and check their current availability. A request using only `ofac-sdn` should be described as SDN screening, not full OFAC or global sanctions coverage.
When requesting both sources, retain the candidate’s original source identity. The same real-world party may appear in multiple records. Do not count those as independent confirmations of identity without comparing their provenance.
Synthetic example: one company in a consolidated search
An invented customer resembles a fictional record in a Non-SDN source. The reviewer confirms the identity, then examines the particular underlying restriction and the activity being considered. The review note records both the identity finding and the separate legal assessment.
The wrong shortcut is “OFAC match, therefore freeze everything.” The opposite shortcut, “not SDN, therefore unrestricted,” is also unreliable. Interpretation depends on the actual measure.
Questions to include in a coverage review
Can the application show the underlying source and record? Can a reviewer open the official material? Does the evidence export preserve selected sources and versions? Does the error path make a missing required source visible?
Use the OFAC API guide for request examples and the coverage limitations page for questions a list search cannot settle. Ownership and non-list restrictions remain separate considerations.