Энергосбыт-5 — Coordinated Designation Package

Date: 2026-04-19 Target type: Four Moscow-registered LLC utility shells operating as RF-imposed electricity-retail monopolies in the occupied Ukrainian regions Status: None of the four is currently on OFAC SDN Recommended framework: EO 14024 §1(a)(i) [operating in energy sector of Russian Federation], §1(a)(vii) [property supporting operations of blocked persons], EO 14065 [occupied-Ukraine-territory specific authority]

Target list (post-windowed-scrape figures + 5th sibling identified 2026-04-20)

Fifth sibling (9725129270, "Единый закупщик" / "Unified Procurer") was identified during the prefix 9725129xxx scan. Sequential INN between Энергосбыт Запорожье (129181) and Энергосбыт Херсон (129343). Zero litigation footprint suggests it is the coordinated-purchasing arm of the family — buys electricity on the wholesale market, then resells via the four regional retail shells. Common design pattern in RF federal-utility regional structures. Including it in the designation package prevents an obvious circumvention (the retail shells are blocked; customer payments now flow to the wholesale arm without consequence).

(Initial flat Strategy-B scrape showed 818 cases. Windowed 2022-2026 scrape surfaced an additional 696, increasing total 85%. All four remain overwhelmingly plaintiff-side — the debt-collection plaintiff pattern documented earlier is confirmed at a larger sample.)

All four share tax-district prefix 9725 (Moscow Inspection 25) and occupy a sequential INN range (129181–129343), consistent with registration as a coordinated corporate family during a narrow window in late-2022 to mid-2023.

Headline findings

• Coordinated corporate family pattern: sequential Moscow INNs, identical naming template ("Энергосбыт {OT region}"), territorially-matched to each of the four 2022-occupied regions. Same fingerprint as the sanctioned "Т Плюс" / "Кар" regional operator families — the RF template for utility territorialization.
• Two of four already touch SDN entities via litigation:
  • Энергосбыт Запорожье ↔ ГУП "Государственный зерновой оператор" (SDN) — 75 shared cases
  • Энергосбыт Донецк ↔ ПАО "Военно-строительная компания" (SDN) — 3 shared cases
• Aggressive debt-recovery plaintiff pattern: 97.1% of cases are as plaintiff. The family is prosecuting OT residents, businesses, and state entities for unpaid electricity bills — functioning as the financial collection arm of the occupation administration's energy monopoly.
• Territorial jurisdiction is hermetic: each shell operates exclusively in its own OT arbitration court (plus occasional appeals). Confirms the RF regional-assignment scheme rather than a market-competition posture.

Why this is a designation-grade target

1. Direct operational role in occupation infrastructure

Each Энергосбыт shell is the RF-imposed retail-electricity billing and collection entity in an occupied region. Their plaintiff-plaintiff case files are an evidentiary record of the displacement of Ukrainian utilities (Oblenergo companies were the pre-invasion operators) by Moscow-registered shells. This is EO 14065 bread-and-butter: commercial entities operating in occupied Ukrainian territory to normalize and monetize Russian administrative control.

2. Energy-sector designation authority

All four are LLCs whose sole economic activity is electricity retail sale and collection — the heart of the Russian energy sector as defined in EO 14024 §1(a)(i). Their revenue base is direct consumer-payment flows that would be reachable by blocking orders through the Russian banks servicing their settlement accounts (Sberbank, VTB, Promsvyazbank — all already SDN or SSI-listed).

3. Financial-system entanglement with already-blocked counterparties

Co-litigation with ГУП "Государственный зерновой оператор" and ПАО ВСК reveals the Энергосбыт-5 are embedded in the OT payment settlement web alongside designated entities. Blocking them would cascade through the RF-OT financial plumbing.

4. Clean discovery cohort

Strategy-B by-court scrape confirmed: all four entered Neo4j fresh on 2026-04-19 with zero pre-existing sanctioning in any list. This is a package of newly-identified, not already-blocked targets — high-value designations with no diplomatic downside of re-announcing old news.

5. Humanitarian-collateral risk is low

Utility-retail LLCs are not healthcare or food-aid entities. A blocking order is implementable with minimal general-license overhead — standard "wind-down of essential energy services" general license would suffice.

Per-target evidence

ООО "Энергосбыт Запорожье" (INN 9725129181)

• Court posture: 241 plaintiff-cases / 3 respondent-cases / 55 co-litigants
• Courts: AC Zaporozhye Oblast (233), 21st Arbitration Appeal (9), AC Kherson (1), AC Moscow (1)
• Top SDN litigation contact: ГУП "Государственный зерновой оператор" (9001011019) — 75 shared cases
• Notable co-plaintiffs: Ministry of Education & Science Zaporozhye (9001024762, 32 cases), municipal utilities (Михайловский комунхоз, 19 cases)

ООО "Энергосбыт Донецк" (INN 9725129199)

• Court posture: 73 plaintiff / 6 respondent / 44 co-litigants
• Courts: AC DPR (79)
• Top SDN litigation contact: ПАО ВСК (9704016606) — 3 shared cases
• Notable co-litigants: Юго-Западная Электросетевая Компания (9303040182, 6 cases) — direct grid-operator co-defendant; ГУП ДНР "Moсtанский углеперерабатывающий" (coal-processing state enterprise)

ООО "Энергосбыт Луганск" (INN 9725129223)

• Court posture: 49 plaintiff / 12 respondent / 22 co-litigants
• Courts: AC LPR (60), 21st Arbitration Appeal (1)
• Notable opposing parties:
  • Свердловский машиностроительный завод (9409009256, 6 cases) — machine-building
  • ООО "Завод Юность" (9408009119, 5 cases) — industrial
  • Алчевский ферросплавный завод Хорс (9406005912, 4 cases) — metallurgy
  • Краснолучский машиностроительный завод (9410003280, 3 cases)
  • Rosgvardiya LPR Branch (9403025967, 2 cases) — revealing the paramilitary security layer of occupation power collection
  • ООО "РТ-Новые горизонты" (9705227617, 3 cases) — Rostec-family entity

ООО "Энергосбыт Херсон" (INN 9725129343)

• Court posture: 433 plaintiff / 1 respondent / 194 co-litigants — highest volume of the family
• Courts: AC Kherson (433), 21st Arbitration Appeal (1)
• Top opposing parties: Kherson regional government bodies (Mелиорации и водного хозяйства 22x, Эколоrия 9x, Ministry of Education 8x, regional schools and cultural institutions)
• This one is the template case for designation — single-territory utility monopoly suing hundreds of regional actors monthly

Coordinated-designation rationale

Rather than four separate designations, we recommend a single coordinated package. Justifications:

1. Fingerprint singularity — sequential Moscow INNs + identical legal-name template + strict territorial non-overlap = the same actor wearing four LLC jackets. Treating them individually telegraphs uncertainty about the coordination; treating them together communicates that the US recognizes the RF occupation-utility template.

2. Mutual coverage for wind-down licenses — a single general license authorizing humanitarian-essential electricity delivery can be phrased once for "Энергосбыт entities in occupied Ukraine" rather than four separate licensing paragraphs.

3. EU/UK coordination — EU's 16th-package and UK OFSI both already sanction Moscow-registered shells for OT activity; a US package covering all four aligns the three-jurisdiction framework.

4. Deterrent signal — future RF shells that attempt the same pattern (coordinated Moscow-INN family with territorial one-to-one mapping) will face an already-established designation template.

Parent / controller investigation (to do)

Neo4j DIRECTS/OWNS_STAKE traversal returned no shared UBO connection among the four as of 2026-04-19 — likely because we have not ingested EGRUL ownership data for these fresh INNs. Recommend rusprofile-style enrichment on the four INNs as a prerequisite to designation issuance, to identify:

• The single controlling LLC or individual behind the family
• Whether the parent is itself a named entity (e.g., Inter RAO, Rosseti, a Rostec-chain entity)
• Any personal-level UBO who should be added to the sanctioning order

Based on the PJSC "Rosseti" / "T Plus" / "Inter RAO" regional-sibling-LLC pattern used elsewhere in the Russian federal-utility architecture, the likely parent is one of these three state holdings. An enriched check would confirm.

Recommended sanctioning scope

Primary: Block all four LLCs by INN.

Coordinated secondary targets:

• Parent/controller once identified (see "To do" above)
• Юго-Западная Электросетевая Компания (AO, INN 9303040182) — the grid-operator upstream of at least two Энергосбыт shells; 14 shared cases across Донецк+Луганск territories
• Any 21st Arbitration Appeal-court cross-references (federal appellate court handling cross-OT appeals)

General licenses to pre-draft:

• GL: 90-day wind-down for consumers already on the OT grid
• GL: humanitarian power delivery (hospitals, schools, water treatment) unlimited duration
• GL: cross-border settlement-service wind-down for non-US banks clearing consumer payments

Artifacts

• Live graph evidence: Organization{inn: 9725129181, 9725129199, 9725129223, 9725129343} in Neo4j at bolt://localhost:7687
• Raw case data: court-cases/bulk/ot_by_court_{KHERSON,ZAPOROZHYE,DNR,LNR}_cases.jsonl
• Discovery report: pipeline/reports/ot_by_court_discovery.md
• Date-windowed deep scrape in progress as of 2026-04-19 20:47 to extend the evidentiary record across 2022-2026 (PID 2493725)