Summary
The applicant, a 38-year-old native-born American of Iranian ancestry, faced security concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and F (Financial Considerations). The applicant admitted to having foreign family ties but demonstrated strong connections to the U.S. and minimal contact with foreign relatives. Additionally, she resolved her past tax issues and is current with her tax filings. The judge found that the applicant mitigated the security concerns, granting her eligibility for a security clearance.
Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline F (Financial Considerations), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant’s Iranian-born mother immigrated to the United States in April of 1975, more than 40 years ago. She became an American citizen in 1989. Her second husband, Applicant’s father, passed away in May of 1999. Applicant’s mother is a dual national with Iran, and last visited Iran “a little over five years” ago to attend a wedding. She is a “retired . . . Sales Associate,” having worked for a department store, and was also a real estate agent. Her current husband is 93 years old, an American of Swedish ancestry (1.a). Applicant has a brother, and two half-brothers, all of Iranian ancestry. The oldest is a 48 year-old half-brother. He is a dual national with Iran, as their mother applied for Iranian citizenship on his behalf when he was a child, although he was born in the United States. He lives in the United States, and is the manager of a supermarket. The younger half-brother is a citizen and resident of Iran. He is a medical doctor in private practice. Applicant has contact with him is about “once a year,” and she last spoke to him about “three years ago.” He has no connection with the Iranian government. Her full biological brother is the youngest of Applicant’s siblings. He is a native born American. Like her other American born half-brother, he became an Iranian citizen through the actions of his mother, when he was a child. He lives in the United States, where, as a businessman, he owns bars (where alcohol is served). In his letter of support, he describes his sister “as American as Apple Pie,” a trait which she consistently exhibited at her hearing (1.b). Applicant has a cousin who is a citizen and resident of Iran. Her husband is a businessman who owns textile companies. Applicant sees this cousin “every five years or so,” when she and her family visits the United States. She describes her relationship with her cousin as “casual” to “non-existent.” (1.d). Applicant admits that she met a citizen and resident of China, when she visited China about “13 years ago.” She denies that she maintains “contact with him.” She has deleted him from her “Face Book” account. There is no evidence that he has any connection with the Chinese government (1.e). Applicant admits that initially, she did not file her Federal income tax return for tax year 2011. She does excuse her lack of action, but couches it in the following terms: I am not good at doing my own taxes. And so, at that point in time, I was doing my own business and I didn’t know how to do business taxes. When you’re running your own business, how do you equate - - how do you do a tax for an independent business? Who knows? You know, so, in a sense, I’m at fault for not finding a CPA sooner. So, it took me a bit of time to find a CPA. But, in reality, I knew I didn’t owe any money. And I was under the impression that as long as you don’t owe money, you’re okay. You know, once you owe money, you’re in the doghouse. (TR at page 64 lines 6~15.) Applicant filed her 2011 tax return in January of 2014, and received a refund of $223, as evidenced by her Internal Revenue Service Form 1040. (AppX G at page 4.) Applicant is current with her income tax filings. (TR at page 113 line 10 to page 116 line 19.) (2.a).
The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 7(a), AG ¶ 19(g). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 20(d). The decision turned on the following: The applicant is a native-born American with strong ties to the U.S; She has minimal contact with foreign relatives, reducing the risk of foreign influence; The applicant resolved her tax issues and is current with her tax filings.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant is a native-born American with strong ties to the U.S.
- She has minimal contact with foreign relatives, reducing the risk of foreign influence.
- The applicant resolved her tax issues and is current with her tax filings.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 7(a)raisedForeign Influence - Contact with Foreign Family Members
- AG ¶ 19(g)raisedFinancial Considerations - Failure to File Tax Returns
- AG ¶ 8(a)appliedForeign Influence - Nature of Relationships with Foreign Persons
- AG ¶ 20(d)appliedFinancial Considerations - Good-faith Effort to Resolve Debts
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedNov 25, 2015
- Answer filedMar 2, 2016
- Hearing heldAug 22, 2016
- Decision dateSep 12, 2016
Cite For
- Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Minimal Contact with Foreign Relatives
- Resolution of Financial Issues as a Mitigating Factor
- Whole-person Concept Applied in Security Clearance Decisions