APPLICABILITY OF LAW: The simple and quick answer is: Yes, the law applies only to U.S. dating services and companies owned and operated in the U.S., (even if they have a matchmaker subsidiary or sub-division abroad.) It would likely be very difficult at best to enforce this law on a “foreign company”, IF IT IS TRULY FOREIGN-BASED, meaning with full operations abroad and all staff abroad and owners living abroad (or a U.S. owner who is living and operating abroad), and so on.

But before foreign owners celebrate their “free pass”, there are some important complications and caveats. For example, please note that the law’s definition of IMB is NOT limited to a U.S. company. [It says ANY company WHETHER OR NOT organized under U.S. law. See Section 833(e)(4)(A)].

“Foreign national client” and “United States client” definitions are also NOT limited to those who deal with a U.S. company only. What about a foreign company which advertises in the U.S., and displays a website hosted by a U.S. server with a U.S. URL? Or which otherwise actively solicits U.S. customers and derives most of their revenue from U.S. customers? Or who use a U.S. payment processor such as PayPay, partnered with Wells Fargo Bank (U.S. bank)? Or who have a U.S. P.O. Box or U.S. address on their website or who use an authorized sales agent or sales rep. in the U.S.? What about the applicability of federal mail fraud and wire fraud laws to overseas companies under “long-arm” statutes?

ENFORCEMENT OF LAW: One knowledgeable person I spoke with takes this view: In a special or "shock" case where it may be warranted, this law can POSSIBLY be enforced on a foreign owner (or a U.S. owner living overseas) as follows: A citation is issued for a known broker violation to the owner, and he is convicted in “absentia”, with the record so noted. When he tries to visit or re-enter the U.S., USCIS officers at Port of Entry enforce the conviction on him by apprehension. Further, U.S. authorities may also try to DISCOURAGE the IMB's U.S. customers or U.S. website host server or U.S. payment processor from continuing to do business and paying the IMB by serving notice on them that the IMB owner is wanted on a broker violation conviction.

PROBLEM OF CONSULAR INTERVIEW: Another problematic issue for the foreign owner (or U.S. owner living overseas) is the Consular Interview for the visa. Under this law, the Officer is required to ask the lady if they met through an IMB (as broadly defined in that law to include a foreign-based IMB). IF the answer is YES, he MUST ask if the IMB provided the lady with all the background client information on the U.S. client and secured her signed written release before the couple communicated. If NOT, then the Officer presumably, as part of his wide discretion to issue the visa or not, MAY choose to DENY issuance of the visa or at least place the case into "ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW" because of the broker violation (even though it was a foreign-based company).

The rationale for a denial or administrative review of the case could be that there might be a fair doubt regarding the sincerity of the couple's relationship, a qualifying requirement for the K Visa. Such a doubt might exist because the lady applicant was denied the opportunity to start or continue the relationship with the gentleman, based on the information and documents about the gentleman's criminal past that she should have known about from the very beginning from the IMB.

In fact, as a practical matter, some lady fiancees may choose to terminate the visa application and end her relationship with the gentleman, if she finds out for the first time at the Embassy from the Consular Officer's government background security check of her suitor's criminal past, such as for example a series of ex-wife abuse convictions. (Many background checks are not black or white but gray. In other words, the gentleman's record might not be bad enough to deny the visa, but might be "bad enough" in the lady's eyes to terminate her relationship and cancel the visa request.)

We know that many people find it difficult to believe, and may even be amazed to hear, that there is any possibility or risk that the lady's visa at the Embassy could actually be in jeopardy because of a broker violation. Some ask how can that be if she "qualifies" for the visa. Some ask would not the Consular Officer simply document the broker violation and create a list of broker violators for future investigation, without penalizing the lady's visa.

Certainly, the Consular Officer CAN choose this course. The issue is does he have to?

Our point is NOT that the Consular Officer could not or even would not issue the visa under this circumstance, only that the Consular Officer does not have to do so. In other words, the Consular Officer is never bound to or required to issue a visa anyway even under normal circumstances, but especially not if there is a legal violation in the record as part of the visa case. In short, there is a risk which exists, and it's better to know about that risk rather than to ignore it or pretend it does not exist.

END
_________________
Web: www.garybala.com
E-Mail: gb@garybala.com
Tel: 610-446-(VISA) 8472