FR 2021-03823

The Federal Register document discusses the case of Fahad Saleem Kharbey, who was convicted in 2019 for exporting firearms and magazines from the United States to Dubai without the necessary licenses. As a consequence of this unlawful activity, the U.S. Department of Commerce has denied Kharbey's export privileges for a period of seven years, effective until May 31, 2026. During this time, Kharbey is prohibited from participating in or benefiting from any activities related to exports from the United States.

General Summary

The document describes the legal ramifications facing Fahad Saleem Kharbey following his conviction under U.S. export control laws. It specifically outlines the denial of export privileges, including an extensive list of prohibited activities for Kharbey. In addition, the document restricts others from engaging in export transactions on his behalf. Kharbey is provided with the opportunity to appeal the decision within 45 days of the order being issued.

Significant Issues or Concerns

The document highlights several areas of concern or lack of clarity:

1. Absence of Kharbey's Response: There is no explanation as to why Kharbey did not submit a written response to the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), potentially omitting insight into his perspective.

2. Complex Legal Language: The prohibition actions outlined are described in detailed legal terminology. This may render the document challenging for those without legal training to fully comprehend.

3. Broad Scope of Impact: The order specifies that entities connected to Kharbey may also face restrictions, yet it lacks detail on how these connections are defined or enforced.

4. Decision-Making Process: Details about how the decision to impose a seven-year denial period specifically for Kharbey were reached are not provided, leaving this aspect unexplained.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, this document illustrates the seriousness with which the U.S. government views violations of export control laws. It underscores the legal repercussions that can befall individuals or entities who breach these regulations, thus serving as a cautionary reminder of the importance of adhering to international trade laws.

Impact on Stakeholders

Negative Impacts:

• Fahad Saleem Kharbey: Kharbey faces a severe limitation on his ability to engage in export-related activities, effectively barring him from participating in this industry and complicating any future endeavors in international trade.

• Related Entities: Businesses or individuals associated with Kharbey may find themselves indirectly subject to the same prohibitions, which could lead to operational challenges or reputational damage.

Positive Impacts:

• Government and Regulatory Bodies: This order reinforces the authority of the U.S. Department of Commerce and related bodies in enforcing export control laws, which could lead to greater compliance across industries.

In conclusion, while the document serves to uphold the integrity of U.S. export laws, it also presents challenges related to legal complexities and the potentially wide-reaching effects on connected stakeholders. The case emphasizes the critical importance of regulatory compliance in international trade activities.

In reviewing the document concerning Fahad Saleem Kharbey, financial references play a significant role in understanding the consequences of his legal actions and subsequent penalties. These references are crucial both for the penalties imposed on Kharbey and for their broader implications in the enforcement of export control regulations.

Financial Penalties Imposed

Following Kharbey's conviction for unlawfully exporting firearms and magazines without appropriate clearance, the court handed down several financial penalties aimed at addressing the fallout from his actions. Kharbey was sentenced to a restitution amount of $755,281.13. Restitution typically aims to compensate for the financial impact of the crime on affected parties, though the document does not specify the recipients or the exact circumstances of this restitution.

Additionally, Kharbey was ordered to pay a special assessment of $200. This nominal fee often serves as a standard federal penalty accompanying convictions. It doesn't itself reflect the crime's financial complexities but underscores a mandatory punitive charge associated with federal offenses.

Financial Reference Context and Issues

The document outlines the severe restrictions on Kharbey's export privileges as a form of non-monetary penalty. This context is essential to consider, as financial consequences are not isolated to direct monetary penalties. Though the financial aspect of Kharbey's conviction is significant, there lacks detailed exploration or explanation for the restitution figure, leaving ambiguity about the calculation method or the entities compensated.

This financial penalty ties into the broader issues of how the enforcement process was conducted. The document notes that Kharbey did not provide a written submission to the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), leaving a gap in understanding how these financial decisions might have been clarified or contested by Kharbey. The absence of additional financial details potentially complicates the understanding of the full scope of penalties and obligations that Kharbey faces, both legally and financially.

Conclusion

The financial references within the document illustrate the tangible consequences of Kharbey's actions, emphasizing the legal system's approach to addressing violations of export controls. However, the details surrounding the calculation and intended use of the $755,281.13 in restitution remain unexplained within this document, raising questions about transparency and the broader financial implications of such legal resolutions. The complexity of these issues suggests a need for clearer communication and understanding of financial penalties in legal contexts.