EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

• SanctionsRecords foundSanctioned by 1 authority: OFAC. Confirmed present in a source snapshot within the last 90 days.
• Debarment & exclusion— Checked, nothing found16 sources read, none holding a record for this company.
• Ownership & controlRecords found1 designated individual recorded in connection with this company: Shangfu LI.
• People— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.
• Identity & registration— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.
• Jurisdiction— Not scoredNot scored. The jurisdiction lists this system reads are: EU list of high-risk third countries (AMLD Art. 9). Each names specific countries, so absence from them is not a clearance of China. Separately, 22 of the sanctions authorities this system reads have designated companies registered in China — a count of this corpus, not a rating of the jurisdiction.
• Court records— Not assessedNothing has been read for this company on this dimension.

• OFACActive

  CAATSA - RUSSIA

  Designation date not published by this authority · OFAC SDN

No corporate ownership records on file for this company. Ownership is recorded only where a register or a designating authority publishes it, and coverage is thin for companies outside the jurisdictions with open beneficial-ownership registers.

Legal name

EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

Also known as

EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT · GENERAL ARMAMENT DEPARTMENT

Jurisdiction

CN

First recorded here

28 Aug 2026

1. Sanctioned individual connected by OFAC: Shangfu LI

   28 Aug 2026 · OFAC SDN

2. Sanction listed: OFAC — CAATSA - RUSSIA

   28 Aug 2026 · OFAC SDN

3. Alias recorded: GENERAL ARMAMENT DEPARTMENT

   28 Aug 2026 · OFAC SDN

4. Alias recorded: EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

   28 Aug 2026 · OFAC SDN

5. First recorded: EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

   28 Aug 2026 · OFAC SDN

No ownership test is on file for this company. The test reads who holds a company's shares from its shareholder register, and it is run each day for companies with a number in Estonia's, Latvia's or Poland's register. For a company anywhere else, no register read here states its shareholders, so the test cannot be run.

No corporate ownership records on file. This is an absence of evidence, not evidence of a simple structure — see the risk breakdown, where the ownership component is left unscored for exactly this reason.

None recorded with a stated ownership stake or control method.

Nothing to draw: this company has no recorded links to another company on file.

No address has been read for this company, so this was never checked — which is not the same as finding nothing.

• Fact

  equipment development department

  Legal name

  Evidence

  24837

  Read 28 Aug 2026

  Source

  OFAC SDN

  Primary source ↗

• Fact

  CN

  Jurisdiction

  Evidence

  24837

  Read 28 Aug 2026

  Source

  OFAC SDN

  Primary source ↗

• Fact

  OFAC — CAATSA - RUSSIA

  Designation

  Evidence

  24837

  Read 28 Aug 2026

  Source

  OFAC SDN

  Primary source ↗

Records from these sources are matched into one company only on a shared identifier, or by a human reviewer — never on name similarity alone. How this works. Not legal or compliance advice: check the originals before acting on anything here.

TRUE

A source states it. Rendered as a fact, with the source attached.

FALSE

A source explicitly denies it. Rare, and never inferred from silence.

UNKNOWN

Checked, nothing found. Rendered as an em dash, never as 0 or "no".

NOT_ASSESSED

Never checked — nothing was read here. Excluded from coverage, and not counted as clean.

4 records on this company — identifiers, aliases, officers, listings, figures — each carry the source that wrote them and are shown beside their own entries. The fields above are different: the entities table has no source column, so what is shown is every source whose stored payload contains the value verbatim. That is strong evidence, not proof of which write landed it, and where nothing contains the value the row says so instead of naming a plausible source.