Sunday, February 8, 2009

Tax Shelter Criminal

"A financial adviser pleaded guilty to conspiracy for his role in selling allegedly abusive tax shelters designed by accounting firm Ernst & Young LLP [E&Y]. Charles Bolton, who ran several financial advisory firms in Memphis, Tenn., was indicted last year, along with another financial adviser and four former partners of [E&Y] for their role in designing and selling allegedly fraudulent tax shelters that brought millions of dollars in fees to the accounting giant", Jesse Drucker at the WSJ, 23 January 2009.

Why wasn't E&Y indicted?


whistlewhat said...

KPMG and FTB do you know about this? On May 24, 2000 at 3:33pmpst one of your high level tax shelter lawyers, Mike Hamersley sent an email to Vera Ellich of KPMG, advising her that their KPMG client had substantial authority to take a sham paper loss if the client sold stock of a subsidiary to the client’s lawyer for one dollar. This was outright tax fraud. Further, on June 12, 2000 at 10:18ampst, Vera Ellich sent an email to Mike Hamersly containing copies of the documents effecting Hamersley’s fraudulent plan back to 1999 for his review, a classic case of backdating a fraudulent transaction. Also, February 9, 2003, at 1:18 pm Richard Smith of KPMG sent Steve Gremminger of KPMG an email stating that Mike Hamersley had disseminated confidential information to his wife, who worked at Latham and Watkins in clear violation of Section 7216, a criminal statute. In the recent KPMG case, it was also confirmed that Hamersley violated Sections 7216 and 7212 by illegally disclosing confidential information to various parties. Ask Hamersley for all his emails which he illegally late at night obtained in violation of KPMG protocol and stole many for his any personal gain when he sued KPMG (or ask KPMG for the emails, they all still exist). As an aside, Hamersley’s fraudulent activities did not stop there, when he obtained his KPMG settlement based on all his lies and theft, Hamersley failed to report the settlement as income under a twisted analysis of Section 104 (or at a minimum conspired to do so as he discussed doing so with several witnesses). How can the FTB employ Hamersley in their tax shelter division when he did not even bother with legal tax shelters but rather engaged in outright fraud and likely continues this sham life of being a crusader? Much more evidence against Hamersley exists related to his fraudulent activities and will likely be disseminated over time.

Printfaster said...

This brings to mind the beacon role that Andersen had in forming the profession of accounting, from Wiki:

"In 1913 at the age of 28, he entered into business for himself under the firm name of Arthur Andersen & Co. In 1915, ... From 1912 to 1922, he was a professor of accounting at Northwestern University where he was the first to design courses that forced accounting students to deal with practical operating problems of business organizations.

Andersen had an unwavering faith in education as the basis upon which the new profession of accounting should be developed. He created the profession's first centralized training program and believed in training during normal working hours. He was generous in his commitment to aiding educational, civic and charitable organizations. "

I hate to say it, but I view accounting as a means to obscure business practices, not to shed light on them.

Brings to mind the old saw: "If you want two and two to equal four you hire a bookkeeper. If you want two and two to equal five, you hire an accountant".

I hate to say it, but business and the public would be better served with less professionalism and more clarity. Accounting, as we can see by the latest proposal to allow mark to fiction in bank accounting, is becoming a sewer.

Accounting needs to eliminate all the training, legerdemain, and exalted professionalism in the name of obscurity and high salaries. Never mind, regulatory capture, ie Sarbox.

tax partner said...

Whistlewhat, please help me out here. I am a bit confused by your statements about Hamersely. I read Travails in Tax and personally observed Hamersley's testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. He seems like an exceedingly honest guy to me. Didn't KPMG say Hamersely had absolutely no involvement or knowledge of tax shelters in its press release to the Senate Finace Committee after Hamersley testified in October 2003? I read that KPMG press release on the PBS Frontline website.

I Concur with Tax Partner said...

Whistlewhat (aka Angry Citi Investor, Angry Citi Shareholder, Thoreau, Whistlefraud, etc.–I have to admit it is difficult to keep track of all the aliases you are using to post identical comments while appearing to be different bloggers.):

Your comments about Hamersely just don’t make any sense at all. I too am highly skeptical that your bold statements about Hamersley could be based on any reliable evidence at all. I too read Travails in Tax and personally observed Hamersley’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. He seems like an exceedingly honest guy to me too. Yeah, isn't it a fact that KPMG said Hamersely had absolutely no involvement or knowledge of tax shelters in its press release to the Senate Finace Committee after Hamersley testified in October 2003? I read that KPMG press release on the PBS Frontline website.
See also Hamersley Senate Finance Committee Testimony 003 TNT 204-35 online at

Are you suggesting Hamersley and KPMG are in cahoots? Wow, that would be a bold strategy seeing as Hamersley sued the crap out of them. Case No. BC 297209, Los Angeles Superior Court (June 23, 2003.), also reported in Tax Notes Today full copy of complaint 2003 TNT 124-5

LATXMAN said...

Thoureau, Whistlewhat, numerous other blogger alias (all of which are David Greenberg, the former KPMG tax shelter promoter):

David, what are you going to do when Hamersley finds out that it is you who have been posting all of these false, delusional, and defamatory statements about him just like the ones you have been posting under a number of other aliases on other blogs? It shouldn't take him too long since you are saying exactly the same things about me and other former KPMGers in emails and in telephone conversations. Taking shots at others does not diminish the magnitude of one's dastardly deeds.

Tax Partner said...

David Greenberg finally exposed, AGAIN! I was wondering who this whistlewhat clown is. This guy has some serious issues.