Should the government ban its citizens from using cross-border payment methods (like crypto) to send money to relatives in OFAC sanctioned countries (Palestine, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea)?

No

Palestine shouldn't be grouped with countries such as North Korea when it comes to sanctions especially due to the ongoing crisis.

Yes, exceptions should be made if the money goes to humanitarian aid. In this case, the burden of proof should be on the recipient

Sanctions should be lifted on Palestine but keep sanctions for the remainder of these countries, and sanctions should be closer targeted at leaders and the state apparatus and anything that funds tools of repression

money sent to families is fine it is when it is used to fund criminal / terrorist organisations that it should be banned

Palestine, absolutely not (why should people be allowed to send money to Israel which is currently run by war criminals?). Cuba? Outdated nonsense. Venezuela? Why, because they have a left-wing government? Russia, North Korea, Iran - OK.

Yes to prevent terrorism only. As long as it can be shown it's not for terror no further action should be t-ken

All payments to such a country must be on a record available to police indefinitely. This should not generally result in police concern, but may do

Draft strict legislation to ensure transactions of this type are used for the benefit of people and citizens rather than financing corrupt regimes or autocracies.

Depends on who they are and how much we know - only if there’s undeniable evidence that nobody has any ties to any government or organisation involved.

Use independent organizations to send the money to family members and ensure that it is not being used for purposes which may be against the UKs interests.

Why should we be influenced by the United States, last I checked we aren't Belarus. We should only ban our people from sending money to people in The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea.

No, with carefully considered exemptions and regulations to ensure humanitarian aid and support for vulnerable individuals can still be provided while mitigating risks of illicit financing.

Palestine? Definitely not (why should you be allowed to send money to Israel, which is currently ruled by war criminals?). Cuba? Outdated nonsense. Venezuela? Why, because they have a left-wing government? Russia, North Korea, Iran – OK.

I think the government should not allow its citizens to use cross payments to dangerous countries because it would insecure our nation

No, unless relatives in foreign countries are beyond doubt terrorists/willing regime supporters or strongly suspected of such.

No, but the ammount being sent should have a cap and the transctions should be overseen by the government to make sure these funds are not helping the sactioned governments

Dependant on circumstances - e.g. for health care, safety, escape vs making more money for the non needy

Only if the people sending and receiving the money aren't involved in terrorist or extremist activities. And also if the money isn't being used to fund any authoritarian regimes like the Iranian government for example.

Verify if it is being sent to Immediate family, for the purpose of living or supporting relative such as parents. If the person they are sending money to is deemed suspicious then ban all payments from the citizen to the payee.

No, but implement strict screening processes for these payments instead if they are going to OFAC sanctioned countries.

We should consider implementing stringent monitoring and compliance measures rather than an outright ban, to ensure that funds are not used for illicit activities while still allowing for legitimate humanitarian support.

No, but transactions through this medium should be regulated to prevent transactions linked to terrorism etc.

Yes, but exceptions should be made if the money goes to humanitarian aid. In this case, the burden of proof should be on the recipient.

I think this should be case by case, so there should be a system where , if you want to send money to family in these countries, then you should have to go to a bank and allow the bank to carry out these checks

The government shouldn't ban its citizens from using cross-border payment methods to send money to relatives in OFAC sanctioned countries, but should if it has nothing to do with sickness, etc.

It depends on the country as to why they are sending the money, it is too broad a question to answer without specific examples

Tough one. As their are people in these Countries looking after the environment, endangered species, and animals in general who may need support.

I don't think it should be banned but perhaps monitored much more strictly. Not only to prevent money being sent to finance hostile regimes etc but also to prevent scammers using it to exploit vulnerable people

Saying yes here would punish civilians in those countries who likely have no connection with the actions of their governments (especially since elections are often not free and fair) but the same mechanisms can, presumably, be used for purposes which I wouldn't support. So, it depends.

Should impose a limit to how much can be sent, to keep it at a domestic level and keep out large spending support that could be for bad actors

Cross-border payments to relatives to relatives should NOT be banned but cross-border payments to suspicious organisations should be banned

No, but if There is evidence of the money being used in a negative way to impact on our country then yes, that individual should be stopped

No, but there should be a method for individuals to said aid to these countries or provide funds via an approved government system to family in need.

Yes, but for the only reason to keep money within the national economy, not because of any current foreign policy position on a certain nation state or country.

No but countries that are considered as OFAC's should be considered within relevant political contexts.

No There should be a background check with order border intelligence to check there are legitimate reasons.

No but it should be regulated to prevent dangerous situations. People should still be able to support those in need of support and loved ones regardless of their location

Yes, but for the only reason to keep money within the nation economy, not because of any current foreign policy position on a certain nation state or country.

Ban Israel and stop the support of genocide in Palestine by the UK. Ally with global south and China /Russia

No, but have a notification system on these type of payments. Less harm to those that may need it and will be a deterrent to those using it for nefarious reasons.

There could be a background check with order border intelligence as there are also legitimate reasons.

Palestine should not be on this list considering the UK doesnt consider it a county, but more importantly, because they shouldnt have been sanctioned hope this helps

Depends on who is receiving it, if screening the recipient is possible then it shouldn’t be a problem

It all depends on the situation. If it’s for aid then yes, if it’s to criminal organisations or suspicious individuals, then no.

If the funds are being used to fund terrorism then the money should be seized and used for social care

No, but payments should be monitored and subject to security checks to make sure funds aren't being passed on to any political or terrorist groups

No, but make it a requirement to register your payments somewhere and prove this is for personally family use.

Should NOT ban payments made to relatives - payments proved to be to suspicious organisations etc should be banned

not all people who come from these areas are terrorists or support their own governments... there has to be a way for family to support family - it's a human right. However, some limit on the funds sent may be a way of ensuring you're not unwittingly (or wittingly) supporting a terrorist organisation.

Yes, but If someone can provide evidence that they are sending this money to an authorised person they can.

Straight banning isn't feasible. Instead the government should work on political solutions to improve and make more transparent relations across countries. The government should aim to track movement of money

This would unfairly penalise families on subsistence living in some of those countries. There should be a registration systemto allow only cleared pathways to the nations.

Depends on the circumstances and value of the transaction. Should be monitored and have a way of raising a flag if money laundering is suspected

I would like to think people in need could get money, but am concerned about the risk of money going to dangerous regimes.

Yes, unless it can be proven the money is being used to remove them from a dangerous situation within those countries.

No, there is no reason why the people of these countries should be treated differently when it is their governments that caused the sanctions

Yes but with limitations. People should have the right to support relatives regardless of their location.

No, but there needs to be a way to ensure that any money sent is not be used to fund weapons or terrorism

No but the government should ensure that this money is only going to family for personal use and make it illegal to fund governments of hostile powers.

No measures taken by the government to do so would work as alternatives and ways to bypass the ban would be used regardless.

Money transfer should be subject to government scrutiny where an individual is under suspicion of terrorist activities

No, but the onus should be on them to be able to evidence that the funds were used for legitimate uses and random checks should be carried out to enforce this.

I think it potentially goes deeper than this. To families not, to explicitly fund something which is against our country, this should then be investigated such as funding terrorism.

Is bypassing government restrictions with cryptocurrencies a form of fighting for personal freedom, or does it create new dangers?

How do you balance the need for national security with the ability for families to stay financially connected in countries under sanctions?

Do you think preventing cross-border payments because of security concerns outweighs the personal needs of individuals who are in difficult situations?

Can technology like cryptocurrency really solve the struggles people face with traditional banks when transferring money internationally?

How would you feel if international sanctions meant you couldn’t financially support family members in another country, even during a crisis?

Do you think being able to send money across borders without using banks gives more freedom to the average person, or does it create more risks?

In your opinion, should governments restrict financial transactions with certain countries if it affects innocent people trying to survive?

Have you ever thought about how international money transfers impact people’s freedom to help loved ones across borders?

Do you believe there should be exceptions to financial restrictions when humanitarian aid is at stake, or are these rules too important to bend?

The UK should reject a broad ban on cross-border payments as a form of collective punishment that unfairly targets ordinary citizens, and instead implement a fair, humanitarian-focused, and transparent sanctions policy that ensures a clear, legal pathway for individuals to send money to relatives for basic necessities, while using targeted measures to punish the actions of authoritarian regimes.

How do you think cross-border payment systems should prioritize human rights while still respecting international laws and sanctions?