BIS Publishes Case Briefs on Export Violations Leading to Convictions

March 13, 2026 by Leave a comment

Do you ever wonder whether anyone gets prosecuted for export violations? Well, now you can read about who is getting prosecuted for export crimes and what the sentences tend to be! The U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Export Enforcement, publishes a book entitled Don’t Let This Happen to You, which provides case briefs on criminal prosecutions related to violations of U.S. export control law.

The are multiple cases described that involve aircraft parts. Here is a summary of few of them:

  • Stefan Gillier was sentenced to 84 months in prison, three years of probation, $3,509,916 in restitution and an $800 special assessment after he was found in connection with a scheme to fraudulently obtain aircraft parts from Honeywell and export them through Turkey to Iran.
  • Joyce Eliabachus was sentenced to 18 months in prison, one year of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. She pled guilty to allegations that she conspired smuggle over $2 million worth of aircraft components from her NJ company to Iran, through intermediaries in the UAE and Turkey.
  • David Levick was sentenced in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to 24 months in prison, 12 months of supervised release, a $199,227 forfeiture, a $400 special assessment, and deportation upon completion of his sentence. He pled guilty to a scheme in which he would order aircraft parts from the United States to his business in Australia and ship them to the Malaysian facilities of an Iranian buyer, from where they would make their way to Iran.
  • Erdal Akova was sentenced to 36 months in prison and a $200 special assessment for a scheme involving the shipment of military-grade epoxy (through his facility in Turkey) for use on aircraft in Iran.
  • First Call International agreed to a civil penalty of $439,992 for shipments using the STA license exception when it was not applicable. The exports included shipments of defense aircraft through Australia (to make it seem like STA applied) when the ultimate consignee was actually in Malaysia.
  • Brothers Issam and Usama Hamade were sentenced to 26 months and 42 months respectively, as well as $100 special assessments, post-incarceration deportation, and ten-year post-conviction denial orders. They were convicted of exporting inertial measurement units, digital compasses, a high-performance jet engine, and various other aircraft parts and avionics. They falsely claimed the goods were destined for South Africa when they were actually being shipped to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
  • William Vanmanen was sentenced to 30 months in prison and 24 months of supervised release for a scheme involving false documentation, false designation of value, and exporting aircraft parts to Hong Kong without the required licenses.
  • Ali, Marjan and Arash Caby were sentenced two years, one year and one day, and two years in prison, respectively. Other elements of the sentences included supervised release, criminal fines and forfeiture. The three plead guilty to selling aircraft parts to Syrian Arab Airlines.
  • Muhammad Mohsin Raja was sentenced to 24 months in prison and one year of supervised release after he was found guilty of transmitting payments in connection with the purchase of aircraft antenna for a denied entity in Pakistan.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , ,

BIS Applies Existing Sanctions to Partially-Owned Affiliates; TGB Aviation Added to Sanction List

October 8, 2025 by Leave a comment

NOTE: Implementation of this rule has been postponed by one year. For more details click here.

A new rule will apply Bureau of Industry and Security [“BIS”] sanctions to “affiliates,” and thus the sanctions will be expanded to include certain non-listed companies. This will create a de facto increased obligation for exporters to collect data and perform due diligence on export transactions.

As most of you know, State Department sanctions “flow-down,” meaning that if a company is sanctioned and it controls another company, the sanctions apply to the controlled company as well, even though the controlled company might not be listed as a sanctions-target.

The new BIS rules will apply a similar “flow-down” approach to any transaction that is subject to the jurisdiction of the BIS (which is most transactions in civil aircraft parts). If the potential partner is owned by a business or person that is restricted under Commerce or Treasury regulations, then the restrictions may “flow-down” to the potential partner. The rule is published in multiple parts, so here is a summary of the relevant parts:

  • If the parent entity is sanctioned under the BIS Entity List, and the parent entity owns 50% or more of the child business, then the child business is treated as if it were a BIS-sanctioned business as well (new language in 15 C.F.R. § 744.11(a)(1)).
  • If the parent entity is sanctioned as a military end user (“MEU”) under the BIS rules, and the parent entity owns 50% or more of the child business, then the child business is treated as if it were a BIS-sanctioned business as well (new language in 15 C.F.R. § 744.11(a)(1)).
  • If the parent entity is sanctioned as a Treasury Department Specially Designated National (SDN), and the parent entity owns 50% or more of the child business, then the child business is treated as if it were a BIS-sanctioned business as well (new language in 15 C.F.R. § 744.8(a)(2)).
  • For purposes of these rule, ownership will include direct or indirect ownership; if two or more restricted entities own 50% or more of a business, then their ownership will be aggregated for purposes of identifying whether the rule applies.
  • Generally these restrictions will not (yet) flow-down from the unlisted entities. Thus if an unlisted child entity is restricted by these rules, then its own 50%-owned subsidiaries (grandchildren) will typically not be affected by the restrictions until (1) the child-owner is listed or (2) the grandchild is listed.
  • The child business who is affected by these rules can request that it be specifically excluded from its parent listing. If this is successful, then parent entity’s listing (on the Entity List) would be modified to exclude the child business (new language in 15 C.F.R. §§ 744.16(e); 744.21(b)(2)).

This is an interim final rule, which means it became effective immediately, backdated to September 29, 2025. The government has opened comments on this interim final rule, through October 29, and if any reader sees ways to improve the rule, please let us know so that we can make sure your comments are received.

Compliance diligence remains important. We can see this from the latest addition to the Entity List. Tomorrow, the U.S. government plans to add TGB Aviation to the BIS sanctions list (it will be effective as of today). TGB Aviation is a parts distributor in Turkey and they are accused of shipping U.S.-origin aircraft components into Iran.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Russia-Sanctions Aimed at Aviation Businesses

March 9, 2022 by Leave a comment

Today, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published its new additions to the sanctioned entities list. Note that even though it was published today (March 9), it is effective as of March 3, 2022! We reported on this last week, so you should have had a little notice. That list includes aviation as one of the target industries.

Tomorrow, the Federal Register is scheduled to print new Treasury Department Sanctions against Russia. These sanctions include an A340-300 aircraft (MSN 955; registry # M-IABU). Other sanctioned aircraft include a Gulfstream G650 (MSN 6207; registry LX-MOW).

Last week, the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) updated their lists of Specially Designated Nationals to include aviation maintenance facilities, like JSC 558 Aircraft Repair Plant and airlines, like JSC Transaviaexport Airlines. Both of these companies are in Belarus. OFAC also added SDNs that have not yet been published in the Federal Register – these companies are listed in the SDN list, so they will appear in the government’s consolidated screening list; however the announcement was made in an OFAC press release rather than a Federal Register notice (these are just highlights):

  • ALTITUDE X3 LTD
  • AVANFORT OOO
  • AVIASTAR-SP AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISE
  • IRKUTSK AVIATION PLANT
  • IZHMASH-UNMANNED SYSTEMS COMPANY
  • JSC NOVOSIBIRSK AIRCRAFT PRODUCTION ASSOCIATION PLANT
  • KOMSOMOLSK-ON-AMUR AVIATION PLANT
  • ALL-RUSSIAN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF AVIATION MATERIALS

Remember, if you have property that belongs to any person or entity that has been blocked under the new OFAC Russian sanctions (pursuant to Executive Orders 14024 and 14065), then that property is blocked. The fact that the property is blocked means it may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in under U.S. law. If, for example, you are managing a U.S. repair for a Russian business who gets added to the OFAC list of Specially Designated Nationals (under the authority of the Executive Order), then you may not return the part to the sanctioned party, nor may you participate in a work-around designed to circumvent the sanctions.

For most members of the ASA community, the BIS prohibitions on unlicensed exports to Russia will put a stop to unlicensed export transactions. But even if you get a BIS license, if your business partner is on the SDN list or is otherwise subject to the limitations of the Russia-related and Ukraine-related Executive Orders then you may also need a license from OFAC, as well.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,