Following his guilty plea conviction for food stamp fraud, wire fraud, and operating an illegal money transmitting business, Ali Ugas Mohamud received concurrent sentences of 57 months in prison, to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release. In calculating the sentence, the district court concluded that Mohamud was not entitled to a reduction for acceptance of responsibility because he had failed to provide complete and accurate financial information to the probation officer. On appeal, Mohamud argues that he was entitled to an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, given his guilty plea and his admission to the conduct underlying his offense and in light of his explanations for the omissions. The district court did not, and was not required to, accept Moha-mud’s explanation for failing to provide full and accurate financial information. Moha-mud has not established that the denial of the reduction was “without foundation.” United States v. Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 211 (5th Cir. 2008). Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.