Whistleblower Blog

The Most Significant Recent Qui Tam Whistleblower Cases Under the False Claims Act

This is the final section of my article. It discusses the most significant recent qui tam cases under the False Claims Act (as of December 2006).

B. Recent Significant Recoveries Under the False Claims Act:

1. Health Care Industry

a. Tenet Healthcare Corporation: $900 million

In June 2006, Justice Department announced that Tenet Healthcare Corporation, operator of the Nation’s second largest hospital chain, had agreed to pay the United States more than $900 million for alleged unlawful billing practices.

According to the government, the settlement amount, which was based on the company’s “ability to pay” (a phrase that suggests the government’s calculation of damages was higher), included more than $788 million to resolve claims arising from Tenet’s receipt of excessive “outlier” payments (payments that are intended to be limited to situations involving extraordinarily costly episodes of care, resulting from the hospitals’ inflating their charges substantially in excess of any increase in the costs associated with patient care and billing for services and supplies not provided to patients); more than $47 million to resolve claims that Tenet paid kickbacks to physicians to have Medicare patients referred to its facilities; and that Tenet billed Medicare for services that were ordered or referred by physicians with whom Tenet had an improper financial relationship; and more than $46 million to resolve claims that Tenet engaged in “upcoding.” The Justice Department acknowledged that “several” of the issues arose from lawsuits filed by whistleblowers under the qui tam provisions of the Act.

b. Serona, S.A: $704 million

The Swiss corporation, Serona, S.A., with its U.S. subsidiaries and related entities, agreed to pay $704 million to resolve criminal and civil allegations in October 2005. According to the Justice Department’s announcement, these allegations were in connection with illegal schemes to promote, market, and sell Serostim, an AIDS drug. The civil portion of the settlement was $567 million, and Serona also agreed to pay a $136.9 million criminal fine. This was the third largest health care fraud recovery by the government at the time.

According to the government, Serona knowingly submitted false and fraudulent claims for Serostim that were not eligible for reimbursement because they were for unnecessary and/or for off-label use of Serostim, and because the claims were for prescriptions induced by kickbacks. The investigation began in 2000 because a former Serona Lab’s employee filed a qui tam action, which was followed by other whistleblower suits in other states. This Serona settlement was reportedly the largest civil drug settlement to date.

(more…)

The Growing Importance of the Qui Tam Whistleblower Cases Under the False Claims Act

This is part 4 of my article on the False Claims Act. This part discusses the huge increase in federal dollars recovered in the past few years:

IV. Recent Recoveries and Other Developments In Qui Tam Litigation

A. An Explosion of Federal Dollars Recovered Since 1986, Under the False Claims Act

Over the past 20 years since the modern False Claims Act was established through the 1986 Amendments, the federal government’s recoveries of dollars have grown astronomically. The Department of Justice statistics reprinted in Appendix 2 tell the story:

In 1987, the government’s recoveries in qui tam cases totaled zero, presumably because the 1986 Amendments had just taken effect; and total recoveries under the False Claims Act were just $86 million. The following year, qui tam and other False Claims Act settlements and judgments began a steady climb upward, exceeding $200 million by 1989, and $300 million by 1991. By 1994, the government’s recoveries broke the $1 billion mark for the first time, with $380 million of that amount attributable to qui tam case recoveries alone.51

In 2000, the government recovered more than $1.5 billion, of which $1.2 billion was derived from qui tam actions. In 2001, the government recovered more than $1.7 billion, with almost $1.2 billion of that amount from qui tam cases. With the exception of 2004, in each year since 2000 the government has recovered more than a billion dollars per year under the False Claims Act, and qui tam actions were responsible for the lion’s share of those recoveries. For example, in 2003, government recoveries exceeded $2.2 billion, of which $1.4 billion derived from qui tam cases. Similarly, in 2005, of the government’s total recovery of $1.4 billion, $1.1 billion of that amount derived from qui tam cases.

(more…)

How the Modern False Claims Act Works in Qui Tam Whistleblower Cases

This is part 3 of my article on how the False Claims Act works:

III. Brief Overview of How the Modern False Claims Act Works

A. Conduct Prohibited

The federal False Claims Act imposes civil liability under several different theories:

First, the Act makes liable any person who knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a “false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval” to the federal government.27 “Claim” is broadly defined to include not only submissions made directly to the federal government, but also “any request or demand . . . for money or property” made to a “contractor, grantee, or other recipient” if the federal government provides any portion of the money or property in question.28

Second, the Act creates liability for using a “false record or statement” to obtain payment of a false claim. It imposes liability on any person who “knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the government.”29

Third, the False Claims Act imposes liability under a “conspiracy” provision. Any person who “conspires to defraud the Government by getting a false or fraudulent claim allowed or paid” is also liable under the Act.30
Fourth, since the government also can be defrauded when a private entity underpays or avoids paying an obligation to the government, the modern Act contains what is known as a “reverse false claim” provision. It creates liability for any person who “knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to conceal, avoid, or decrease an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government.”31 For example, a company that is obligated to pay royalties to the government under an oil lease can be held liable if it uses false records or statements to pay less than what it owes.

(more…)

History of the False Claims Act

This is the second part of my article explaining the False Claims Act–it addresses the history of the Act:

II. Background of the False Claims Act
While the False Claims Act may be the best known qui tam statute, it is far from being the first. Qui tam actions date back to English law in the 13th and 14th Centuries. This tradition took root in the American colonies and, by 1789, states and the new federal government had authorized qui tam actions in various contexts.7
According to one writer, “[i]n the early years of the Nation, the qui tam mechanism served a need at a time when federal and state governments were fairly small and unable to devote significant resources to law enforcement. As the role of the Government expanded, the utility of private assistance in law enforcement did not diminish. If anything, changes in the role and size of Government created a greater role for this method of law enforcement.” 8

A. Birth of the False Claims Act
The Civil War prompted Congress to enact the original False Claims Act in 1863. As government spending on war materials increased, dishonest government contractors took advantage of opportunities to defraud the United States government. “Through haste, carelessness, or criminal collusion, the state and federal officers accepted almost every offer and paid almost any price for the commodities, regardless of character, quality, or quantity.”9 The original legislative proposal would have made contractors subject to martial law. A substitute bill provided for both civil and criminal penalties, and it authorized private individuals to sue on behalf of the United States. One senator explained how the qui tam provision of the Act was intended to work:

The effect of the [qui tam provision] is simply to hold out to a confederate a strong temptation to betray his co-conspirator, and bring him to justice. The bill offers, in short, a reward to the informer who comes into court and betrays his co-conspirator, if he be such; but it is not confined that class. . . . In short, sir, I have based the [qui tam provision] upon the old fashioned idea of holding out a temptation and setting a rogue to catch a rogue, which is the safest and most expeditious way I have ever discovered of bringing rogues to justice.10
The original Act provided for civil penalties of double the amount of damages sustained by the United States as a result of the false claim, plus a $2,000 forfeiture for each claim submitted.11 In the original Act, if a private citizen used the qui tam provision to file suit, the government had no right to intervene or control the litigation. The “relator” who was successful was entitled to receive one-half the amount of the final judgment in forfeiture and damages, with the United States receiving the other half.12

(more…)

Introduction to the False Claims Act and Qui Tam Whistleblower Cases

I wrote this article for a seminar to explain the False Claims Act to those who may not know about it. I hope it may be useful to those who are interested in the Act. I have divided it into several sections–this is the first section, summarizing how the False Claims Act came to be in the time of Abraham Lincoln, and how it has evolved since then:

I. Introduction

Fraud is perhaps so pervasive and, therefore, costly to the Government due to a lack of deterrence. GAO concluded in its 1981 study that most fraud goes undetected due to the failure of Governmental agencies to effectively ensure accountability on the part of program recipients and Government contractors. The study states:

For those who are caught committing fraud, the chances of being prosecuted and eventually going to jail are slim . . . The sad truth is that crime against the Government often does pay.1

Fraud–and allegations of fraud–plague government spending at every level. Today, as the federal and state governments struggle to fund the billions of dollars spent annually on health care through Medicare and Medicaid; the Iraq war and reconstruction effort; other Department of Defense procurement; Hurricane Katrina and other disaster relief; and government grants and programs of every description, there is no shortage of opportunities for fraud against the public fisc.

The federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 – 3733, has been the federal government’s “primary” weapon to recover losses from those who defraud it.2 The Act not only authorizes the government to pursue actions for treble damages and penalties, but also empowers and provides incentives to private citizens to file suit on the government’s behalf as “qui tam relators.”3 Over the past 20 years, recoveries for the federal government have grown dramatically since Congress amended the Act in 1986 to encourage greater use of the qui tam provisions, as part of a “coordinated effort of both the [g]overnment and the citizenry [to] decrease this wave of defrauding public funds.”4

The False Claims Act has unique procedural requirements that create many pitfalls for a lawyer prosecuting or defending cases under the Act. In addition, the law varies among the different federal circuits in ways that can determine the outcome of a False Claims Act case, depending on where it is filed.

——————————————————————————–

1 Legislative History to P.L. 99-562, False Claims Amendments Act of 1986, Senate Report No. 99-345 S. Rep. 99-345, 3, 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5266, 5268 (hereinafter “Legislative History”) (quoting 1981 GAO Report to Congress, “Fraud in Government Programs: How Extensive is it? How Can it be Controlled?”).

2 Legislative History, at 2, 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5266.

3 The term “qui tam” is derived from the Latin phrase, “qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur,” which means “who pursues this action on our Lord the King’s behalf as well as his own.” Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765, 769 N.1 (2000).

4 Senate Report No. 99-345 S. Rep. 99-345, *2, 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5266, **5267. Appendix 2 shows the growth in revenues, which is discussed in section IV infra.

(more…)

Hedge Funds Face Regulation & Oversight by SEC–Will There Be Another Compliance Tool in Addition to IRS Whistleblower Program?

When improprieties occur with hedge funds, the hedge funds’ lack of transparency and dearth of disclosure obligations make violations of the law difficult to uncover. Sometimes, persons in the hedge fund industry report those abuses through the IRS Whistleblower Program, as some of our IRS Whistleblower clients have done.

Nonetheless, the hedge fund industry remains cloaked in secrecy, frustrating experts who now seek to gauge the impact of hedge funds on the current financial crisis.

A new bill just introduced in the Senate, the “Hedge Fund Transparency Act,” would lift that cloak and create disclosure requirements for hedge funds and oversight of hedge funds by the SEC. This bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Chuck Grassley and Carl Levin modifies a prior approach to hedge fund scrutiny pressed by Sen. Grassley, after a whistleblower complained that SEC supervisors were impeding an investigation into a major hedge fund.

According to Sen. Grassley, “The bill contains four basic requirements to make hedge funds subject to SEC regulation and oversight. It requires them to register with the SEC, to file an annual disclosure form with basic information that will be made publicly available, to maintain books and records required by the SEC, and to cooperate with any SEC information request or examination.”

Until the Bear Stearns debacle, there seemed little political will for any serious oversight of hedge funds. The SEC in 2004 had issued a rule requiring hedge funds to register under the Investment Advisers Act, to comply with related regulations, and to provide basic information through a public disclosure form. In June 2006, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declared the rule invalid as incompatible with the Investment Advisers Act.

In hindsight, that absence of scrutiny may be seen as a grave error, one which may have helped create the current financial meltdown.

Since 1998, when the Federal Reserve acted to rescue Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM), a hedge fund with more than $125 billion in assets under management and a total market position of approximately $1.3 trillion, investments in hedge funds have grown dramatically.
(more…)

Whistleblower Protections Added to Economic Stimulus Bill Passed by House

When the Wall Street “bailout” grew with Congress’ creation of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), Sen. Chuck Grassley emphasized the importance of “whistleblowers” and the False Claims Act to protecting these taxpayer funds from fraud and abuse.

Tonight, the House added to the bailout by passing the economic stimulus package, HR 1, and approved an amendment adding whistleblower protection for federal employees.

The stimulus bill reportedly provides for $523 billion in spending, and $275 billion in tax cuts. It originally lacked protection for federal employees who are whistleblowers. An amendment by Reps. Todd Platts, R-Pa., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. added those protections from last year’s thwarted Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, which cleared the House but not the Senate.

The history of government spending programs proves beyond doubt that the vast majority of fraud and abuse can only be revealed by whistleblowers. Protecting taxpayer dollars means protecting and rewarding whistleblowers. As Sen. Grassley observed in a November 17, 2008 letter about TARP:

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.

Both the False Claims Act and the IRS Whistleblower Program will be important in stopping fraud and misuse of taxpayer funds. When there is fraud, there is often an IRS violation as well.
(more…)

With TARP and Wall Street Bailout, Securities Fraud and Accounting Fraud Are Targeted by New Supplemental Anti-Fraud Enforcement (“SAFE”) Markets Act

Financial fraud is a frequent topic of whistleblower cases and of this whistleblower lawyer blog, especially with TARP and the Wall Street “bailout” dominating headlines.

Senators Chuck Shumer and Richard Shelby have proposed a bipartisan bill to bolster federal resources to combat securities fraud and accounting fraud, the Supplemental Anti-Fraud Enforcement (“SAFE”) Markets Act.

Here are excerpts from the Senators’ announcement:

“Our white collar crime divisions are under-staffed, under-funded, and overwhelmed,” Schumer said. “When a wave of violent crime sweeps through a city,
(more…)

Will Wall Street Bailout Help Firms That Are “Tax Dodgers” and Hide Income in Offshore Tax “Havens”? And Will the IRS Whistleblower Program Provide a Remedy?

As our government hemorrhages its taxpayers’ funds to “bail out” firms that made poor decisions–such as American International Group (AIG), Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and American Express–a just-issued report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) raises a disturbing question: have many of the same firms already been avoiding paying their “fair share” of U.S. taxes by using offshore tax “havens”?

If so, whistleblowers will be performing a civic duty by reporting any tax evasion and noncompliance through the IRS Whistleblower Program.

“This report shows that some of our country’s largest companies and federal contractors, many of which are household names, continue to use offshore tax havens to avoid paying their fair share of taxes to the U.S. And some of those companies have even received emergency economic funds from the government,” said Sen. Byron Dorgan. “I think we should take action to shut down these tax dodgers and we will be introducing legislation to do just that.”

GAO’s findings included that:

Eighty-three of the 100 largest publicly traded U.S. corporations in terms of 2007 revenue reported having subsidiaries in jurisdictions listed as tax havens or financial privacy jurisdictions and 74 of the 83 had federal contracts in fiscal year 2007. For the 74 corporations, the amount of the federal contract obligations ranged from $12,000 to over $23 billion.

Several insurance companies, including American International Group Inc., Hartford Financial Services Group, Travelers Cos. Inc., Allstate Corp. and Berkshire Hathaway Inc. reportedly have subsidiaries in tax havens or financial privacy jurisdictions such as Bermuda and Switzerland.

With a “tax gap” of more than $350 billion each year–the amount owed but not paid in federal taxes–it is galling to most taxpayers to see any company that avoids paying its fair share now receive billions more in a “bailout” through the TARP program.

The GAO report did not state that any of the listed firms utilizing tax “havens” were necessarily violating current law. Sen. Dorgan did say that he planned to introduce legislation to “shut down these tax dodgers.”
(more…)

Offshore Tax Evasion Case: Former UBS AG’s Raoul Weil Declared a Fugitive

Offshore tax evasion and international tax avoidance schemes have been priorities of the IRS and its IRS Whistleblower Program, as our whistleblower lawyer blog has followed repeatedly.

This week, the U.S. prosecution of the former head of UBS AG’s wealth management business, Raoul Weil, took a strange turn as he failed to surrender himself and was declared a fugitive. Weil allegedly conspired to help 17,000 American taxpayers conceal approximately $20 billion of assets in Swiss accounts, to avoid payment of U.S. taxes.

Weil is not the only person to try to conceal himself from the many ongoing DOJ and IRS investigations into tax fraud, tax evasion, and other tax cheating and fraud. In June, former hedge fund manager Samuel Israel III reportedly tried to fake his own death, rather than face a 20-year prison sentence for defrauding investors out of $400 million. (He later turned himself in to authorities.)

Of course, these disappearances raise questions about Bernard Madoff’s actions while not incarcerated as he faces the music for what is apparently perhaps the largest known fraud scheme in history.
(more…)

Treasury Department Announces $14 Billion in TARP Funds to More Than 40 “Local” Banks

Continuing the “bailout,” the Treasury Department has just announced the release of $14.77 billion in TARP funds to what it refers to as 43 “local” banks (listed below).

“Local” may be a misnomer, as the list includes $10 billion to Bank of America Corp., and more than $3 billion to American Express Company.

Let’s hope that Congress and the Treasury Department make good on the promise to protect these taxpayer funds through effective oversight, meaningful restrictions, and whistleblower protections, and that Sen. Grassley’s prediction that the qui tam whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act will be used vigorously to redress any fraud or abuse with TARP funds comes true.

Below are today’s announced recipients of the funds:
(more…)

More IRS Whistleblower Procedures Announced by IRS Large and Midsize Business Division (LMSB)

The IRS Large and Midsize Business Division (LMSB) has published a new memorandum on how it will handle IRS Whistleblower claims, the process for citizens to report tax fraud, tax evasion, and other tax noncompliance–and share in the government’s recovery of money. (https://www.irs.gov/pub/foia/ig/lmsb/lmsb-4-1108-052.pdf).

The LMSB Division has responsibility over corporations, subchapter S corporations, and partnerships with assets greater than $10 million. This IRS Division is divided by industry groups, including (1) Communications, Technology, and Media; (2) Financial Services; (3) Heavy Manufacturing and Transportation;
(more…)

Fraud and Abuse in Underpayment of Royalties from Oil and Gas Leases–The False Claims Act Provides A Solution

As hundreds of billions in taxpayer funds flow to TARP bailout recipients, the government must make doubly sure to stop or minimize fraud and abuse in every federal program.

One area that cries out for attention is the underpayment of royalties owed to the government under oil and gas leases. The qui tam whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act provide a basis for taxpayers to recover damages–and the whistleblower to receive a share of the recovery–when obligations to the government are underpaid.
(more…)

TARP Fund Restrictions Are Proposed in New Legislation

Much criticism has flowed from how the first $350 billion in TARP “bailout” funds are being used. Thus far, the need for additional restrictions to prevent and penalize fraud and abuse of TARP money remains unmet.

In response, yesterday House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank proposed legislation establishing greater limits on use of TARP funds, among other things.

The “TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009” (HR 384) would require quarterly reports from recipients on their use of TARP funds, restrict the use of
(more…)

IRS on Tax Preparer Fraud: Report Illegal Tax Schemes to IRS Whistleblower Office

With tax season approaching, the IRS has alerted the public to “tax preparer fraud” by issuing issued a “fact sheet” (at https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=202123,00.html). The IRS also has attached information about reporting abusive tax schemes through the IRS Whistleblower Program, which provides rewards to whistleblowers.

Interestingly, the IRS has included descriptions of some of the tax fraud and tax evasion schemes that have caused courts to issue “more than 290 permanent injunctions against abusive tax scheme promoters and abusive return preparers since 2001.”

The summary by the IRS is reprinted below:
(more…)