Blab Tech
Huawei Faces Racketeering Trial in New York Over Alleged Trade-Secret Theft and Sanctions Violations
On September 8, 2026, a federal racketeering conspiracy trial opened in the Eastern District of New York against Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., the Chinese multinational that supplies wireless‑network equipment worldwide. Federal prosecutors accused the company of a decade‑long scheme that included stealing technology from U.S. firms, violating U.S. sanctions on Iran, and committing wire and bank fraud. The case is the first time Huawei has faced criminal charges in the United States.
The indictment, filed in 2019, alleges that Huawei engaged in a coordinated effort to obtain U.S.‑origin technology for its Iranian subsidiary, Skycom, and to move money out of Iran through the international banking system. Prosecutors say the company used a variety of tactics, including the use of multiple passports by its chief financial officer and the procurement of embargoed goods through a network of subsidiaries. The charges cover the period from 1999 to 2020 and include 13 counts of racketeering, wire fraud, bank fraud, and violations of the U.S. sanctions regime.
During the opening statements, Department of Justice attorney Taylor Stout presented the government’s case, arguing that Huawei’s actions constituted a “racketeering conspiracy” that harmed U.S. businesses and national security. Stout described a pattern of repeated illegal conduct that spanned two decades. In contrast, defense attorney Brian Heberlig dismissed the allegations as “a smattering of anecdotes” and emphasized that the company’s 200,000 employees in 170 countries are not a monolithic criminal enterprise. Heberlig highlighted that the prosecution’s evidence is limited to isolated incidents involving a few employees.
The first witness for the prosecution was Parham Baheshti, an Iranian‑born U.S. citizen who worked for a small internet‑access company in Iran in 2009. Baheshti testified that he learned about Huawei while trying to bring broadband service to remote Iranian towns. He said he later discovered that Huawei was interested in “analyzing the people and their behavior online” and that the company had a “different agenda.” He left Iran in 2011 after being told he was under investigation. The defense argued that Baheshti’s testimony was based on personal experience and did not establish a company‑wide conspiracy.
The trial also examined evidence that Huawei supplied surveillance equipment to Iranian authorities during the 2009 protests in Tehran. Prosecutors claim the equipment was used to track protesters, violating U.S. sanctions that prohibit the export of certain technologies to Iran. The defense has not yet presented a counter‑argument in the courtroom, but it has indicated that it will challenge the reliability of the evidence and the interpretation of the sanctions.
Huawei’s legal team has repeatedly stated that the company is innocent of all charges. The company’s public statements emphasize that it operates under the laws of the countries where it does business and that it has no ties to the Chinese military. In 2022, the Federal Communications Commission banned the sale or import of Huawei equipment in the United States on national‑security grounds, and several other Western allies have imposed similar restrictions. The trial is part of a broader U.S. effort to curb Huawei’s global influence amid concerns that its equipment could facilitate espionage. The case also reflects the ongoing tension between the United States and China over technology competition, sanctions enforcement, and intellectual‑property protection. As of now, the trial is ongoing. No verdict has been reached, and the court has not scheduled a final hearing. The case remains a key focal point for U.S. regulators, industry stakeholders, and international observers who are watching how the legal system will address allegations of corporate espionage, sanctions violations, and financial fraud.
The indictment, filed in 2019, alleges that Huawei engaged in a coordinated effort to obtain U.S.‑origin technology for its Iranian subsidiary, Skycom, and to move money out of Iran through the international banking system. Prosecutors say the company used a variety of tactics, including the use of multiple passports by its chief financial officer and the procurement of embargoed goods through a network of subsidiaries. The charges cover the period from 1999 to 2020 and include 13 counts of racketeering, wire fraud, bank fraud, and violations of the U.S. sanctions regime.
During the opening statements, Department of Justice attorney Taylor Stout presented the government’s case, arguing that Huawei’s actions constituted a “racketeering conspiracy” that harmed U.S. businesses and national security. Stout described a pattern of repeated illegal conduct that spanned two decades. In contrast, defense attorney Brian Heberlig dismissed the allegations as “a smattering of anecdotes” and emphasized that the company’s 200,000 employees in 170 countries are not a monolithic criminal enterprise. Heberlig highlighted that the prosecution’s evidence is limited to isolated incidents involving a few employees.
The first witness for the prosecution was Parham Baheshti, an Iranian‑born U.S. citizen who worked for a small internet‑access company in Iran in 2009. Baheshti testified that he learned about Huawei while trying to bring broadband service to remote Iranian towns. He said he later discovered that Huawei was interested in “analyzing the people and their behavior online” and that the company had a “different agenda.” He left Iran in 2011 after being told he was under investigation. The defense argued that Baheshti’s testimony was based on personal experience and did not establish a company‑wide conspiracy.
The trial also examined evidence that Huawei supplied surveillance equipment to Iranian authorities during the 2009 protests in Tehran. Prosecutors claim the equipment was used to track protesters, violating U.S. sanctions that prohibit the export of certain technologies to Iran. The defense has not yet presented a counter‑argument in the courtroom, but it has indicated that it will challenge the reliability of the evidence and the interpretation of the sanctions.
Huawei’s legal team has repeatedly stated that the company is innocent of all charges. The company’s public statements emphasize that it operates under the laws of the countries where it does business and that it has no ties to the Chinese military. In 2022, the Federal Communications Commission banned the sale or import of Huawei equipment in the United States on national‑security grounds, and several other Western allies have imposed similar restrictions. The trial is part of a broader U.S. effort to curb Huawei’s global influence amid concerns that its equipment could facilitate espionage. The case also reflects the ongoing tension between the United States and China over technology competition, sanctions enforcement, and intellectual‑property protection. As of now, the trial is ongoing. No verdict has been reached, and the court has not scheduled a final hearing. The case remains a key focal point for U.S. regulators, industry stakeholders, and international observers who are watching how the legal system will address allegations of corporate espionage, sanctions violations, and financial fraud.
