No, as he is a shareholder, not a board member (from what I understand) but it would be hard to believe that he would pass the "fit and proper" test should he wish to be re-appointed in any board position in the future.
I can't see how. The charges brought against him were for a period before he owned the club. Nothing that he is charged with relates to Birmingham City in any way. I suppose you could say he bought the club with ill-gotten gains. I think I'll stop there before pointing that same finger elsewhere.
I read something that they could be worried because he owns more than 30% and could also have a influence over the club
I doubt if he'd pass a fit and proper person's test now (although you never know with our FA) but he wasn't subject to these charges when he bought the club and had no previous, so there was nothing amiss at the time. I believe, since then, he's stood down from the board, so again the FA can do very little. They can have a say on who runs the club, who sits on the board of directors, but not on who owns shares. Once your company issues shares any scroat can buy them and there's little any authority can do about it. I would imagine those with connections to Birmingham City aren't too happy that a convicted fraudster owns 30%+ of the shares, but other than buy them off him there's not a lot they can do, unless the courts in Hong Kong decide to seize his assets, but that may be even worse.
even if they had a max points deduction which I think is 20 tops we would still go down, what we need is three teams to be deducted ALL their points as that's the only way we have a remote chance of staying up.