(404) 609-1696

ATLANTA,GA

(404) 341-5314

DULUTH, GA

Whistleblower Blog

With Treasury Reporting TARP Funds to More Than 200 Financial Institutions, Who–Besides Whistleblowers–Can Guard Against Fraud and Abuse?

The Treasury Department last week issued its December 2008 report to Congress on what it has done with the “bailout” funds through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and Capital Purchase Program (CPP). With more than 200 institutions receiving taxpayer money, an overriding question is how to prevent and redress the inevitable fraud and abuse of TARP and other taxpayer funds, through whistleblowers and other means.

Treasury reported that, as of December 31, 2008, it had invested $177.5 billion in more than 200 U.S. financial institutions. As discussed previously on the whistleblower lawyer blog, Treasury recounted its announced assistance to General Motors and GMAC, as part of the Automotive Industry Financing Program (AIFP).

Treasury also described its New Year’s Eve investment in Citigroup of $20 billion in preferred stock and warrants, as part of a new Targeted Investment Program (TIP). It also discussed reporting to Congress on the “Asset Guarantee Program,” an insurance program.

Treasury’s list of institutions receiving funds is reprinted below.

With abuses already being reported by TARP whistleblowers, we urge the government to act decisively to plan for and redress the inevitable abuses that will occur. Sen. Grassley has emphasized that the qui tam whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act be used to deal with TARP bailout fraud and abuse, as we have discussed previously. The IRS Whistleblower Rewards Program should also serve an essential role in protecting taxpayer funds, as well as rewarding whistleblowers.
(more…)

Continue Reading

Treasury Department Announces TARP Investment in GMAC

The TARP bailout funding continues, as the Treasury Department announced today that it will buy $5 billion in senior preferred equity with an 8% dividend from GMAC LLC.

Senator Charles Grassley has emphasized that TARP and other “bailout” funds must be protected through whistleblower protections and whistleblower laws such as the False Claims Act. The GMAC announcement today will present ample opportunities to test those premises on which Congress approved the bailout funding.

The Treasury announcement is reprinted below:
(more…)

Continue Reading

KPMG Tax Shelter Fraud Trial Ends With Three Tax Evasion Convictions for Accountants and Lawyer

Fraudulent tax shelters continue to be a target not only of IRS Whistleblower claims, but also of enforcement actions.

We have followed closely the KPMG tax shelter fraud case in this whistleblower lawyer blog. The trial of four defendants ended this week, with two former KPMG partners and one attorney convicted of multiple counts of tax evasion for their roles in the bogus tax shelters. Another lawyer defendant was acquitted.

Prosecutors alleged that KPMG officials offered wealthy clients illegal offshore tax shelters, and paid outside attorneys to give the bogus shelters the appearance of legitimacy. According to the government, the investments had no real risk, and generated “paper losses that allowed the accounting firm’s clients to offset income.

Through tax shelters with names such as BLIPS, FLIP and OPUS, the clients were able to claim falsely that they had taken sizeable loans to buy stock, according to the government. Clients allegedly paid fees equal to 7 percent of the amount of losses sought.

After a two month trial, former KPMG tax partner Robert Pfaff, former KPMG senior tax manager John Larson, and attorney Raymond J. Ruble were found guilty on multiple counts of tax evasion. Another former KPMG tax partner was acquitted on the five counts of tax evasion.

The accounting firm agreed two years ago to pay $456 million to resolve the allegations against the firm itself. Guilty pleas previously were entered by the government’s chief witness, David Amir Makov, former KPMG partner David Rivkin, and former HVB Group accountant Domenick DeGiorgio.
(more…)

Continue Reading

Qui Tam Whistleblower Recoveries under False Claims Acts (Federal and State) in 2008

Some recent significant recoveries under the False Claims Act–the nation’s primary tool for fighting fraud and false claims–are summarized below. This summary is part of a paper I submitted in connection with serving on the faculty (with some excellent attorneys) of the “Southeastern Health Care Fraud Institute” on December 18, 2008.

Health care attorneys will gather at the Institute to discuss developments under the qui tam provisions of the nation’s major whistleblower statute, the False Claims Act, as well as other issues relating to fraud in the health care industry.

Recent Significant False Claims Act Recoveries
(as reported by www.taf.org)

Merck ($650 million settlement in February 2008, arising from allegations of nominal pricing fraud, and kickback and best price violations for the arthritis drug Vioxx, the cholesterol drug Zocor, the acid-reflux drug Pepcid, the hypertensive medication Cozaar, the bone loss drug Fosamax, the migraine medication Maxalt, and the asthma medication Singulair.)

Cephalon ($375 million settlement in November 2007 arising from alleged off-label marketing of narcotic lollipop Actiq (Afentanyl citrate@) as well as Gabitril (an epilepsy medication) and Provigil (a narcolepsy medication.)

Amerigroup ($225 million settlement in July 2008, which was the final settlement after jury trial over allegations that the defendant was Acherry-picking@ the healthiest patients to reduce Medicaid HMO liability/spending.)

Staten Island University Hospital ($88 million settlement in September 2008, based on allegations that the hospital fraudulently billed Medicaid and Medicare for inpatient alcohol and substance abuse detoxification treatment beds for which it did not have verification, fraudulently inflated its patient count, and fraudulently billed Medicare for stereotactic body radiosurgery treatment that was provided on an out-patient basis to cancer patients.)
(more…)

Continue Reading

Pharmaceutical Industry Hit by Layoffs

The country’s ongoing economic distress has produced layoffs in many industries, and pharma appears to be feeling the pain as well.

Recent layoffs reported in the drug industry include Sanofi (650 sales reps);Novartis (550 U.S. salespersons);Merck (8,000); Wyeth (2,440); GSK (1,000); Schering-Plough (5,500);and Boehringer Ingelheim (200).

Continue Reading

Whistleblowers, TARP, and Other Wall Street “Bailout” Measures–Why the False Claims Act and IRS Whistleblower Program Are More Essential Than Ever

On the same grey November day when President Bush visited Wall Street’s Federal Hall to address the ever-morphing “bailout,” I was in lower Manhattan meeting with IRS officials about an IRS Whistleblower matter. The tax evasion scheme we discussed was yet another that has cost taxpayers dearly.

As NYPD officers scurried about to help protect the President that day, I wondered who and what would protect our taxpayer funds–the hundreds of billions the government was now about to dole out–from fraud and abuse.

Fraud is rampant, as proven by the evidence brought to light by so many of our whistleblower clients under the qui tam statute, the False Claims Act, and now under the new IRS Whistleblower Program.

A few days later, Sen. Chuck Grassley hammered the same point in a November 17, 2008 letter to Treasury Secretary Paulson and Attorney General Mukasey. Grassley has insisted on effective oversight of the Troubled Asset Recovery Program (TARP) and the Capital Purchase Program (CPP), as well as on encouraging “whistleblowers” to come forward:

In the meantime, taxpayer dollars are at risk and I believe it is important to discuss alternative procedures and measures that can be taken to ensure taxpayers aren’t taken to the cleaners by unscrupulous individuals. One proven and effective method of overseeing taxpayer funds has been to support courageous whistleblowers who risk their jobs and livelihoods to bring forth allegations of fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayer monies. As a longtime supporter of whistleblowers, I can attest to the fact that whistleblowers are often the key to uncovering schemes to defraud the government. With their inside knowledge of how businesses, corporations, or government agencies operate they are often privy to information that is often the necessary component to piece together how a fraud is perpetrated. As such, I believe you should both work to ensure that all entities participating in the TARP and CPP are made aware that any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse will be treated seriously and properly referred to the Treasury Inspector General or the Attorney General for review until a Special Inspector General for the TARP is appointed.

Grassley also emphasized the importance of the False Claims Act, the nation’s primary civil weapon for combating fraud against taxpayer funds, in preventing and penalizing fraud in the bailout:

[E]ntities who receive federal funds under the TARP and CPP are subject to the provisions of the FCA should they use false or fraudulent submissions in order to obtain federal funds. For instance, any entity that submits false or fraudulent information in an application to Treasury in order to obtain federal funds available through the CPP would be liable to the Government under the FCA. Further, while it has been reported that the Treasury does not currently plan to utilize authority under the Act to use the TARP to purchase distressed assets either directly or indirectly, should Treasury exercise its authority to do so, any fraudulent statements or submissions made to induce the Government to purchase those assets would also subject the fraudfeasors to liability. As a result, these individuals and corporations could be subject to civil penalties and treble damages for committing fraud against the Government.

(more…)

Continue Reading

Offshore Tax Evasion Investigations by IRS and Justice Department Expand, As IRS Whistleblowers Continue to Come Forward

The Justice Department has announced that its investigation of offshore tax evasion will expand to include Europe’s largest bank, HSBC in London, and Credit Suisse in Zurich. The increasing scrutiny of illegal offshore tax schemes comes as the Wall Street bailout and turmoil in the banking and financial services industries generate more interest in IRS Whistleblower Program claims.

DOJ and IRS continue to investigate UBS, Switzerland’s largest bank. Last month saw the unsealing of the an indictment of Raoul Weil, a UBS senior
(more…)

Continue Reading

Justice Department Announces 2008 Fraud & “Qui Tam” False Claims Act Recoveries, with Medicare, Medicaid, and Other Health Care Fraud Alone Topping $1 Billion in Recoveries of Taxpayer Funds

Will Wall Street Bailout Produce the Next Round of Whistleblowers Reporting Fraud?

The U.S. Department of Justice this week announced its FY 2008 recoveries in fraud and False Claims Act cases, with more than $1 billion in health care fraud recoveries alone, and a total of more than $1.3 billion. (As explained below, we believe the $1.3 billion figure is low and understates the actual fraud recoveries this year.)

Cases brought by “relators” or whistleblowers under the nation’s primary whistleblower statute, the False Claims Act, accounted for 78% of the money recovered. Since the False Claims Act took its current form in 1986, this law has recovered more than $21 billion of taxpayer funds from those who defraud the government.

As health care costs have grown as a percentage of the federal budget, so have recoveries for health care fraud. Recoveries of federal dollars were made because of fraud not only in Medicare and Medicaid, but also other federal programs such as Tricare and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

The largest recoveries were from pharmaceutical companies–Cephalon Inc., Merck & Co. and CVS Caremark Corp. paid more than $640 million. Pharmaceutical fraud cases also repaid $430 million to state Medicaid programs.

DOJ also cited recoveries in cases of fraud affecting defense procurement contracts, disaster assistance loans and agricultural subsidies.

The actual recoveries were greater if you compare DOJ’s announcements of its settlements, as well as include dollars recovered under the various State False Claims Acts. (We have written extensively about why states are enacting their own State False Claims Acts to mirror the federal False Claims Act, given the federal law’s successes.)

With whistleblowers reporting fraud infecting in the Wall Street bailout funds (because no federal program is immune), it will be interesting to see how these billions of federal dollars show up in future statistics of fraud recoveries.

We have reprinted below DOJ’s “fact sheet” about its FY 2008 significant recoveries. We congratulate Justice on another very successful year in fighting fraud and false claims.
(more…)

Continue Reading

Tax Court Prepares for IRS Whistleblower Cases by Adopting New Proposed Amendments to Rules of Practice and Procedure

One of the hallmarks of the new IRS Whistleblower Rewards Program is that whistleblowers have an enforceable right to rewards, and can appeal the IRS Whistleblower Office’s rewards decisions to the U.S. Tax Court.

The Tax Court has taken a step forward in issuing new proposed amendments to its Rules of Practice and Procedure to prepare for IRS whistleblower cases. The amendments are reprinted below.

A critical improvement is that the Tax Court has listened to concerns expressed by whistleblower attorneys about the need to allow whistleblowers to proceed “anonymously” and not reveal their identity publicly. The explanation of New Rule 340 would allow anonymous filings to endeavor to preserve confidentiality:

“Pursuant to section 7461(b)(1), the Court may issue protective orders, upon motion by a party or any other person and for good cause shown, to prevent or restrict the disclosure of trade secrets and other information. See Tax Court Rule 103(a). As result of this authority, in appropriate cases, the Court may permit a petitioner to proceed anonymously and seal the record in that case. See, e.g., Anonymous v. Commissioner, 127 T.C. 89 (2006). The Court contemplates that these generally applicable statutory provisions, Rule 103, and related case law, while they do not require the Court’s records in all whistleblower actions to be sealed or require the Court to permit all petitioners in those cases to proceed anonymously, do provide authority for the Court to allow a petitioner to proceed anonymously and to seal the record when appropriate in whistleblower actions.”

The full text is as follows:
(more…)

Continue Reading

IRS Addresses Deductibility of Payments by Defendants to Settle False Claims Act Cases

In our former life as lawyers defending False Claims Act cases, our defendant clients had to consider whether the payments made to settle qui tam cases under the False Claims Act were deductible for tax purposes, and to what extent.

The IRS recently issued a paper on the subject: whether a defendant’s payment to the Department of Justice to resolve False Claims Act allegations is “deductible in its entirety as a section 162(a) ordinary and necessary business expense, or includes non-deductible penalty amounts under section 162(f).”

This paper, LMSB-4-0908-045, is reproduced below:
(more…)

Continue Reading

Search

Topics

Our Other Blog

Health Care Industry and 2009-2010 Changes to False Claims Act

The health care industry is adjusting to major changes to the nation’s major “whistleblower” law, the False Claims Act.

Both in 2009 and 2010, Congress has removed obstacles to whistleblowers’ use of this anti-fraud statute to address Medicare and Medicaid fraud, as well as fraud affecting every other federal program. As we have written about previously, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (“FERA”) overruled key judicial decisions that had undermined the the False Claims Act’s effectiveness.

This year, the landmark health
(more…)

Continue Reading

Offshore Tax Evasion Scheme to Defraud IRS Alleged in Indictment of Miami Beach Developers

A high priority for IRS Whistleblower cases is the abuse of offshore “tax havens” or offshore financial centers to conceal income from the IRS that is subject to U.S. taxation. Over drinks in Miami Beach recently with IRS agents who worked the massive UBS matter, I discussed some of the recent announced cases the IRS has made involving offshore abuses.

Using shell corporations and “nominee” entities established in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland, or a host of other countries that market “secrecy,” those looking to conceal income from the IRS, or assets from potential creditors, have made offshore tax havens a booming business.

An interesting example of allegations of offshore tax violations was described in the Justice Department’s announcement yesterday of the indictment of two Miami Beach hotel developers. Mauricio Cohen Assor and his son, Leon Cohen-Levy. They were charged with conspiring to defraud the United States and filing false tax returns. The government alleged as follows:

According to court documents, the two men and their co-conspirators used nominees and shell companies formed in tax haven jurisdictions, including the Bahamas, the British Virgin Islands, Panama, Liechtenstein and Switzerland to conceal their assets and income from the IRS. In order to further conceal their assets and income from the IRS, court documents state the men also provided false and forged documents to banks, opened bank accounts in the name of nominees, titled their personal residences and luxury vehicles in the name of shell companies, filed false and fraudulent tax returns, failed to file other tax returns, suborned perjury in a civil matter pending before the New York Supreme Court by directing individuals to testify falsely under oath, and induced other individuals to make false statements to federal law enforcement agents.

Both defendants are permanent resident aliens who, in 2000, received approximately $33 million from the sale of the New York Flatotel, according to the government. They transferred the proceeds using various Swiss bank accounts in the names of foreign nominee entities, including at least one “bearer share” corporation.

When bearer shares are used, the corporation’s records do not list its owners, as the owners are whoever has physical possession of the stock certificates. As IRS Special Agent Scott Johnson testified by affidavit, “[b]earer share corporations are often used to hide the true ownership of assets because ownership records are not maintained and nominee officers and directors are often used to control the affairs of the corporation.’

Later, the defendants allegedly transferred the funds to accounts of nominee companies at that bank’s New York location, and later to the escrow account of a Florida attorney. The government also alleged that defendants used the money to “fund a luxury lifestyle for themselves and for their family members.”

Offshore tax abuse remains a great priority of the IRS, and thus is a major focus of many IRS Whistleblower claims. The new IRS Whistleblower Program recognizes that whistleblowers have an enforceable right to 15-30% of what the IRS recovers based on information whistleblowers provide.

The government’s full press release is below:
(more…)

Continue Reading

More Details of UBS Whistleblower Birkenfeld’s Prosecution Explained in Washington Post

The Sunday, May 15, 2010 Washington Post will include more details on a perplexing question we have written about: how did UBS whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld get himself prosecuted for a felony, and earn a prison sentence, while he sought to become an IRS whistleblower?

The story by David S. Hilzenrath explains more of the “dance” between Birkenfeld and prosecutors as he apparently partially told the government what he knew about wrongdoing at UBS.

Birkenfeld blew an opportunity to avoid prosecution for his
(more…)

Continue Reading

Should SEC Whistleblowers Have Right to Share in Recoveries That They Cause?

Congress is at a crossroads in deciding whether there will be a meaningful SEC Whistleblower Program–for the first time.

At this morning’s Offshore Alert conference in Miami, we heard from the SEC Chair’s Senior Advisor Stephen Cohen on this subject, as well as insight from IRS Whistleblower Office Director Steve Whitlock on how the IRS Whistleblower Program is now designed to encourage whistleblower claims.

As we have observed previously about the bills that would create an SEC Whistleblower program, past experience shows that an enforceable right to a meaningful reward is essential to cause whistleblowers to come forward.

The SEC apparently resists guaranteeing whistleblowers a minimum percentage of dollars recovered, as evidenced by the House version of the bill that lacks this feature. The SEC’s Steve Cohen explained that the SEC does not wish to commit funds that might otherwise go to harmed investors. He nonetheless contended that the SEC’s proposal may be better for whistleblowers because it pays from a special fund designated for this purpose, based on sanctions imposed, not collected.

Compare the experiences of the Justice Department and the IRS, however. When each had whistleblower statutes that provided no meaningful right to a reward, whistleblower claims were small and few. We have written extensively about the dramatic successes of the False Claims Act since its rewards increased to meaningful levels in 1986.

Likewise, IRS Whistleblower Office Director Steve Whitlock described again today how large whistleblower claims have exploded since December 2006, when Congress doubled rewards to whistleblowers to 15-30%, and created an enforceable right to those rewards.

History proves that most whistleblowers simply will remain silent, without a right to meaningful rewards. The SEC will be dividing a small pie unless Congress again embraces this principle.

To protect investors, those with information about fraud must have every incentive to speak up–as early as possible–and to be heard. The Madoff debacle proved that point.

In our experience in representing whistleblowers in the financial industry, the Senate’s version of the SEC whistleblower changes is highly preferable. It creates a right to awards of 10-30%.

There are still glaring deficiencies, such as the provisions excluding auditors who have tried unsuccessfully to call attention to fraud within the organizations and auditing firms involved. It will be an interesting next few weeks as Congress debates the final result.
(more…)

Continue Reading

State False Claims Acts Must Be Updated to Include New False Claims Act Changes, Grassley Warns

Senator Chuck Grassley is making sure that the States take advantage of important, recent improvements to the federal False Claims Act–with the help of financial incentives. In doing so, Grassley highlighted a defect in Oklahoma’s False Claims Act that should disqualify any state with a similar defect from these financial incentives.

As we have discussed at length, in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Congress recognized how effective the False Claims has been in recovering money for fraud against the government, by creating financial incentives for states that enact equally effective versions of the federal False Claims Act.

“Weaker” state versions of the False Claims Act do not qualify for the incentives, however. The Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services must approve a state’s False Claims Act before the incentives are available. So far, the IG has approved fourteen state FCAs, while disapproving six other state acts.

Since then, Congress has closed loopholes in the False Claims Act exploited by those who steal taxpayer funds. The 2009 Fraud Enforcement Recovery Act made significant improvements to strengthen the nation’s major whistleblower law, as we have summarized before. In March 2010, Congress modified the False Claims Act’s “public disclosure” and “original source” provisions as part of the major health care overhaul, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

This week, Grassley asked the Inspector General and Attorney General to review existing state False Claims Acts to ensure that they comply with these recent improvements to the federal False Claims Act.

“Updated information will help states fine tune existing state laws and state-level proposals, in order to be eligible for the federal incentive and beef up fraud-fighting efforts,” Grassley said. “This kind of effort at the state and federal level is more important than ever as Medicaid programs are expanded and face new burdens and growing fiscal challenges. Every dollar lost to fraud is one less dollar for those who depend on the program and harms the sustainability of the Medicaid program.”
(more…)

Continue Reading

IRS Whistleblower Office Announces Important Changes, New Procedures for IRS Whistleblower Program

IRS Whistleblower Office Director Steve Whitlock announced important, long-awaited developments in the new IRS Whistleblower Program yesterday at the Second Annual “IRS Whistleblower Boot Camp” in Washington.

First, Director Whitlock finally announced how the IRS will share information that will allow whistleblowers to understand the Whistleblower Office’s decisions about what awards are made to whistleblowers.

A year ago in my interview with the IRS Whistleblower Office Director, Mr. Whitlock discussed the need to solve the vexing question of how the IRS can share this information with whistleblowers and their attorneys, while also complying with legal requirements for confidentiality of taxpayer information under section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code.

The new procedures described yesterday for what will happen with IRS Whistleblower claims–once the IRS has recovered money as a result of a whistleblower claim– are as follows:

1. After the Whistleblower Office receives a report from the IRS Operating Division that handled the matter, the Whistleblower Office Analyst will review the files and recommend an award to the whistleblower.

2. That recommendation then will go to the Whistleblower Office Director for review and approval.

3. A summary of the award recommendation then will be provided to the whistleblower and the whistleblower’s attorney for comment. That summary will identify:

(a) the amount of money collected by the IRS based on information provided by the whistleblower;

(b) the recommended award percentage to the whistleblower (15-30% of the funds recovered, unless an exception under the statute applies to lower the percentage);

(c) the factors considered by the IRS Whistleblower Office in reaching the recommended percentage;

(d) the recommended award amount; and

(e) the whistleblower’s options upon learning of this recommendation.

In welcome news to whistleblower attorneys, the IRS Whistleblower office also will make available a “detailed” award recommendation to whistleblowers and their attorneys who sign a confidentiality agreement. The whistleblower and counsel then may review in person (but not copy) the documents in the IRS administrative file that are the basis of the award recommendation, and comment to the Director about the award. Violation of the confidentiality agreement will lead to reduction of the award.

The new procedures are to be published in the Internal Revenue Manual in June 2010, and later will be included in regulations, with an opportunity for notice and comment.
(more…)

Continue Reading

New IRS Whistleblower Program Developments Discussed This Week at “IRS Whistleblower Boot Camp”

On Tuesday, April 27, 2010, the Second Annual “IRS Whistleblower Boot Camp” will convene in Washington, D.C., sponsored by Taxpayers Against Fraud.

Representatives of the IRS Whistleblower Office will discuss the latest developments in the IRS Whistleblower Program, though which tax whistleblowers can receive up to 30% of recoveries by the IRS. Other IRS and DOJ representatives will take part as well, as they analyze what lawyers representing IRS whistleblowers should know in pursuing these claims.

Like last year’s program, this one is a sell-out. I am looking forwarding once again to moderating a panel discussion, this time on “Protecting IRS Whistleblowers from Criminal and Civil Liability.”

Among the important new developments to be discussed is the “clarification” issued in February 2010, on what contacts the IRS may have with whistleblowers (or “informants”) who are current employees of taxpayers who are the subject of whistleblower claims. (The full notice is reprinted below.)

We expect there may be other major new developments to report at this year’s IRS Whistleblower Boot Camp. We will update you upon returning from D.C. this week.
(more…)

Continue Reading

SEC Charges Goldman Sachs With Fraud in Synthetic CDO Tied to Subprime Mortgages

As Congress finally works to establish a more meaningful SEC whistleblower program, the SEC has just announced that it has charged Goldman Sachs and one of its vice presidents with fraud, in connection with a “financial product tied to subprime mortgages, as the U.S. housing market was beginning to falter.”

Often maligned for failing to protect investors before the recent financial crisis, the SEC now charges that Goldman structured and marketed a “synthetic collateralized debt obligation” (CDO) like those that “contributed to the recent financial crisis by magnifying losses associated with the downturn in the United States housing market,” and then violated the federal securities laws in connection with that product.

The SEC’s Complaint alleges a “securities fraud action against Goldman, Sachs & Co. (“GS&Co”) and a GS&Co employee, Fabrice Tourre (‘Tourre’), for making materially misleading statements and omissions in connection with a synthetic collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”) GS&Co structured and marketed to investors. This synthetic CDO, ABACUS 2007AC1, was tied to the performance of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) and was structured and marketed by GS&Co in early 2007 when the United States housing market and related securities were beginning to show signs of distress.”

The Complaint further charges:

Undisclosed in the marketing materials and unbeknownst to investors, a large hedge fund, Paulson & Co. Inc. (“Paulson”), with economic interests directly adverse to investors in the ABACUS 2007-AC1 CDO, played a significant role in the portfolio selection process. After participating in the selection of the reference portfolio, Paulson effectively shorted the RMBS portfolio it helped select by entering into credit default swaps (“CDS”) with GS&Co to buy protection on specific layers of the ABACUS 2007-AC1 capital structure. Given its financial short interest, Paulson had an economic incentive to choose RMBS that it expected to experience credit events in the near future. GS&Co did not disclose Paulson’s adverse economic interests or its role in the portfolio selection process in the term sheet, flip book, offering memorandum or other marketing materials provided to investors.

In sum, GS&Co arranged a transaction at Paulson’s request in which Paulson heavily influenced the selection of the portfolio to suit its economic interests, but failed to disclose to investors, as part of the description of the portfolio selection process contained in the marketing materials used to promote the transaction, Paulson’s role in the portfolio selection process or its adverse economic interests.

The full SEC anouncement is reprinted below.
(more…)

Continue Reading

SEC Whistleblower Program–The SEC Inspector General’s Report

Post-Madoff, we have followed the legislative efforts to help establish an effective SEC whistleblower program. We know that the Senate Banking Committee in particular has worked hard in attempting to devise the best overall arrangement to encourage and reward whistleblowers who report fraud within the SEC’s jurisdiction.

Shortly before Congress authorized the first meaningful IRS Whistleblower Program in December 2006, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration issued its report on many of the changes needed for the IRS to use whistleblowers effectively.

Now, the SEC’s Inspector General David Kotz has issued his report, “Assessment of the SEC Bounty Program.” No one is surprised that it concludes that the SEC has not effectively encouraged, used, or rewarded whistleblowers over the past decades. Perhaps this report will pave the way for something meaningful–like the TIGTA report that preceded the now-promising IRS Whistleblower Program, which rewards whistleblowers with 15-30% of the government’s tax recoveries.

The SEC report recommends adopting the “best practices obtained from DOJ and the IRS into the SEC bounty program.” The SEC Inspector General’s report states as follows:

Although the SEC has had a bounty program in-place for more than 20 years for rewarding whistleblowers for insider trading tips and complaints, our review found that there have been very few payments made under this program.
Likewise, the Commission has not received a large number of applications from individuals seeking a bounty over this 20-year period. We also found that the program is not widely recognized inside or outside the Commission. Additionally,
while the Commission recently asked for expanded authority from Congress to reward whistleblowers who bring forward substantial evidence about other significant federal securities law violations, we found that the current SEC bounty program is not fundamentally well-designed to be successful.
(more…)

Continue Reading

Well Worth a Read: SEC Whistleblower Harry Markopolos’ “No One Would Listen: A True Financial Thriller”

After meeting with the Department of Justice in Washington recently to discuss another whistleblower case, I picked up Harry Markopolos’ recent book, “No One Would Listen: A True Financial Thriller.” It is a fun and engrossing read, with humor that I did not expect to find in this subject.

We have written previously to applaud Harry Markopolos’ work in figuring out Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, and then in trying to get the SEC’s attention for years. In an era when fraud is being exposed in so many industries through the courage of whistleblowers, his book shows just how paper-thin our government’s resources can be in recognizing and stopping the next huge fraud scheme.

Neither I nor my law firm has any financial interest in recommending this book, and no one has asked me to mention it, but I do believe that any thinking person will enjoy it.
(more…)

Continue Reading