dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1882
share rss forum feed


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7

Whistleblower goes to jail collects $104 Million

IRS pays $104 million to whistleblower
»www.washingtontimes.com/news/201···eblower/

Guess he passed "GO"
--
Gladiator Security Forum
»www.gladiator-antivirus.com/



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

Let's see... $104 million/$20 billion works out to... uhmm... 0.5%. As reward rates go, that's pretty stingy - though in absolute dollars, it's not too shabby.
--
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!" -- P.Henry, 1775



Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:12
reply to Name Game

 

Yes i guess so!!!

Good for him



rcdailey
Dragoonfly
Premium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA

1 recommendation

Yes, but he has a criminal record now, so he probably won't get to work for any bank anywhere again. He'll just have to live off of that $104 million as long as it lasts.
--
It is easier for a camel to put on a bikini than an old man to thread a needle.



Hank
Searching for a new Frontier
Premium
join:2002-05-21
Burlington, WV
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Poor fellow. It just shows that crime does pay.



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Name Game

Re: Whistleblower goes to jail collects $104 Million


Anyone see the hypocrisy in this?

On one hand they want to nail Assange and Manning, and on the other they are 'paying' for whistle blowers who are in fact crooks themselves?

I need 20 litres of white wash for the graffiti on the Internet these days.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Hank
Searching for a new Frontier
Premium
join:2002-05-21
Burlington, WV
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

With the cases you are comparing, somewhat. One relates to national security the other relates to civil crime. But I do agree that if you commit a crime you should not be able to profit from it. Remember the IRS is different and they will be the ones running your health care system in the near future.



Ian
Premium
join:2002-06-18
ON
kudos:3
reply to norwegian

said by norwegian:

Anyone see the hypocrisy in this?

On one hand they want to nail Assange and Manning, and on the other they are 'paying' for whistle blowers who are in fact crooks themselves?

Whistle-blowers who net the Government $800 million. And they did convict him of his crime. If Assange netted the Government of Sweden some money from his alleged crimes there, perhaps he'll get a chunk of that back too when he finishes serving his time if they have such a program. Assange isn't charged with anything in the US, or anywhere else.

Are we now going to bring Assange into any discussion about whistle-blowers from here on out?
--
“Any claim that the root of a problem is simple should be treated the same as a claim that the root of a problem is Bigfoot. Simplicity and Bigfoot are found in the real world with about the same frequency.” – David Wong


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7
reply to Hank

The Internal Revenue Service on Tuesday assured congressional lawmakers that agents would play no role in enforcing the controversial requirement that Americans buy insurance under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

"IRS revenue agents will not be involved. There will not be audits," IRS Deputy Commissioner Steven Miller told a subcommittee of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

The law, passed in 2010 and upheld by the Supreme Court, will charge individuals a fee, or tax, if they fail to buy insurance starting in 2014.

Opponents of the healthcare measure have focused on that requirement, with some Republicans saying they worry the IRS, the agency responsible for tax collection and tax law enforcement, will harass people who fail to buy insurance.

"In most cases, taxpayers will file their tax returns reporting their health insurance coverage, and-or making a payment, and there will be no need for further interactions with the IRS," Miller said.

»www.cnbc.com/id/48990224
--
Gladiator Security Forum
»www.gladiator-antivirus.com/


red2

@fastwebnet.it
reply to Ian

How would you plan on catching criminal activity unless you use other criminals to inform? Who else will have inside information on the systems used to deceive the IRS? While it might be nice to talk to Snow White, it's unlikely that she'll provide much useful information.

So while I have not read all the articles, nor do I know all the particulars on this guy, the government usually wants to work cases from the bottom on up, using the small fish to incriminate the bigger ones until they can get to the top. Inevitably, in order to get the smaller fish to talk, they have to provide incentive. That's how they got to Martha Stewart.

Often those who inform are offered a plea deal where they won't do time. This guy obviously wasn't so lucky. The money, while a big amount, is a minor issue.

As for Assange, the US government would have probably had little issue with his actions if he stuck to just exposing corporate corruption. But when it related to affairs of state, the issue became whether you let Assange or a private in the army make decisions about what is "corrupt" and what isn't. Perhaps if Manning had restricted himself to just one issue (like the My Lai Massacre exposed years earlier), and wasn't wearing a uniform (like Daniel Ellsberg) he'd have invoked greater public sympathy.



Hank
Searching for a new Frontier
Premium
join:2002-05-21
Burlington, WV
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to Name Game

said by Name Game:

The Internal Revenue Service on Tuesday assured congressional lawmakers that agents would play no role in enforcing the controversial requirement that Americans buy insurance under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

"IRS revenue agents will not be involved. There will not be audits," IRS Deputy Commissioner Steven Miller told a subcommittee of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

The law, passed in 2010 and upheld by the Supreme Court, will charge individuals a fee, or tax, if they fail to buy insurance starting in 2014.

Opponents of the healthcare measure have focused on that requirement, with some Republicans saying they worry the IRS, the agency responsible for tax collection and tax law enforcement, will harass people who fail to buy insurance.

"In most cases, taxpayers will file their tax returns reporting their health insurance coverage, and-or making a payment, and there will be no need for further interactions with the IRS," Miller said.

»www.cnbc.com/id/48990224

Lets see what really happens.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Ian

said by Ian:

Are we now going to bring Assange into any discussion about whistle-blowers from here on out?

No, it was a recent case, no more.

I was trying to initially bring to the conversation that being a whistle blower can theoretically mean 2 totally different things, and morality or ethics may have very little to do with which side of the fence you find yourself.

This case is about money, more and more decisions about legal affairs are about money and big corporation, than actually what is right or wrong. He should not have received a cent. Am I to now think I can do wrong and find ill gains from that exposé?
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Hank


So we are to become lenient and forgive wrongs because it will benefit us personally in the long run? We are obviously thinking the same way, but we should not bend our morals and allow 'bad' to be forgiven over possibly gains for our own selves, singularly or entity.

Does blackmail suddenly become a good thing for example?
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Hank
Searching for a new Frontier
Premium
join:2002-05-21
Burlington, WV
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

said by norwegian:

So we are to become lenient and forgive wrongs because it will benefit us personally in the long run? We are obviously thinking the same way, but we should not bend our morals and allow 'bad' to be forgiven over possibly gains for our own selves, singularly or entity.

Does blackmail suddenly become a good thing for example?

I am not sure where you are coming from. Who said anything about forgiving wrongs for personal benefit. I live by my core values and I do not modify them to fit the situation. I will not vote for someone if their core values differ from mine, I do not support anyone who's core values differ. So no where did I mention about ignoring any value system to support blackmail in any form.


Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
reply to red2

said by red2 :


The money, while a big amount, is a minor issue.

What are the larger issues?


Ian
Premium
join:2002-06-18
ON
kudos:3
reply to norwegian

said by norwegian:

I was trying to initially bring to the conversation that being a whistle blower can theoretically mean 2 totally different things, and morality or ethics may have very little to do with which side of the fence you find yourself.

I think it's much simpler than that. The person engaged in two distinct activities. Committing an illegal act, for which he was tried and convicted, and helping the IRS recover punitive damages, for which he was entitled to compensation under the existing laws. Disagree with the law? ok.

But again, it has nothing whatsoever to do with Assange's very real raping troubles in Sweden, or even with any entirely hypothetical espionage charges made against him.
--
“Any claim that the root of a problem is simple should be treated the same as a claim that the root of a problem is Bigfoot. Simplicity and Bigfoot are found in the real world with about the same frequency.” – David Wong

Secyurityet
Premium
join:2012-01-07
untied state
reply to Name Game

Gee, when we play Monopoly at home, you can't get the money in Free Parking when you're in jail...

And even if you roll doubles, if they aren't 5's, you're screwed...



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Hank

said by Hank:

said by norwegian:

So we are to become lenient and forgive wrongs because it will benefit us personally in the long run?

I am not sure where you are coming from. Who said anything about forgiving wrongs for personal benefit.

That comment was not specific to you and me, it was about the general public as a whole, should society bend to allow these behaviors on the premise that we get more money back from the whistle blower by rewarding him.

said by Hank:

said by norwegian:

We are obviously thinking the same way

But I do agree that if you commit a crime you should not be able to profit from it

This is where we thinking the same.

Sorry for the confusion, sometimes words over the airwaves do not come come out as expected.

--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Ian

said by Ian:

I think it's much simpler than that. The person engaged in two distinct activities. Committing an illegal act, for which he was tried and convicted, and helping the IRS recover punitive damages, for which he was entitled to compensation under the existing laws. Disagree with the law? ok.

Yes I do then, it's documented now. He could have theoretically been planning all this knowing the final out come - to me that is worst than the act itself.

As for the second part, I'm not going there to keep this all on topic, but the fact remains a whistle blower should do it out of moral duties, not funds and rewards. That is basically where I stand.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Insight6

join:2012-08-25
reply to Ian

said by Ian:

said by norwegian:

Anyone see the hypocrisy in this?

On one hand they want to nail Assange and Manning, and on the other they are 'paying' for whistle blowers who are in fact crooks themselves?

Are we now going to bring Assange into any discussion about whistle-blowers from here on out?

Just the Assange fanbois, just the fanbois! LOL!


red2

@fastwebnet.it
reply to Snowy

said by Snowy:

said by red2 :

The money, while a big amount, is a minor issue.

What are the larger issues?

I thought I made that clear in the first part of that very paragraph:
said by red2 :

Often those who inform are offered a plea deal where they won't do time. This guy obviously wasn't so lucky.

So are we basically making money into an issue when the government offers plea deals all the time with criminals WALKING so they can obtain testimony to get to bigger fish? If you take issue with deals being made, are you suggesting that money is a bigger issue than letting criminals walk?


Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable

said by red2 :

said by Snowy:

said by red2 :

The money, while a big amount, is a minor issue.

What are the larger issues?

I thought I made that clear in the first part of that very paragraph:
said by red2 :

Often those who inform are offered a plea deal where they won't do time. This guy obviously wasn't so lucky.

I'd call the guy very lucky not to mention very wealthy.
40 months Federal with $104 million on the other side?
That's a great deal, shit, I'd take that deal in a heartbeat & I'm not even guilty.
I wouldn't do that for free though so yeah, the money must be the issue.


red2

@fastwebnet.it

said by Snowy:

I'd call the guy very lucky not to mention very wealthy.
40 months Federal with $104 million on the other side?
That's a great deal, shit, I'd take that deal in a heartbeat & I'm not even guilty.
I wouldn't do that for free though so yeah, the money must be the issue.

So what. To you money is the overriding factor. While to others of us freedom is a lot more important and has no price.

Are you also against the practice of paid informants? You seemed to be focused solely on the amount not on the concept. So if he only got paid $10,000, then it would be ok?

The money was decided by the IRS when they instituted this program, and my understanding is that it was independent of his conviction. He didn't turn himself in to get the money (which I'd take issue with), but informed on the bank. That's somewhat different than a mass murderer writing a book about HIS OWN exploits for profit.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

Just the Assange fanbois, just the fanbois! LOL!

I mentioned it once as a way to gauge a difference between whistle blowers, but not be specific, next time I'll use another example.

So we understand Wikileak principles means nothing as a whistle blower because of a charge in Sweden, but a paid informant is okay? I didn't want to even continue on this path, so can we get back to the topic of people being paid as whistle blowers possibly for their own ends, and even possibly caressed into making the decision?

Although the Wikipedia [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Birkenfeld]entries seem conflicting?

Here he was employed to do the job?
quote:
In October 2001, Birkenfeld began working at UBS in Geneva, Switzerland as a private banker. His principal job responsibility was to solicit wealthy Americans to invest in the bank and thus avoid paying U.S. taxes. Although UBS was not permitted to give investment advice in the U.S., the bank instructed Birkenfeld and other similar employees to lie about the purpose of their trips to the U.S. Birkenfeld advised American clients how to avoid IRS scrutiny, including placing cash and jewels in Swiss safe deposit boxes. One of Birkenfeld's wealthiest clients was a California real estate developer, Igor Olenicoff. In 2001, Olenicoff and Birkenfeld met in Geneva, the result of which was a transfer of $200 million to UBS accessible by credit cards supplied by Birkenfeld.
Now there is a morality issue?
quote:
According to Birkenfeld, in 2005, he learned that UBS's dealings with American clients violated an agreement between the bank and the IRS. He resigned from UBS in October 2005 and complained to UBS compliance about the bank's "unfair and deceptive business practices".
And here takes advantage of the system?
quote:
In 2007, Birkenfeld decided to tell the DOJ what he knew about UBS's practices. At the same time, he wanted to take advantage of a new federal whistleblower law that could pay him up to 30% of any tax revenue recouped by the IRS as a result of Birkenfeld's information. Birkenfeld also wanted immunity from prosecution for his part in UBS's transactions.
I understand it is hard to take wikipedia on it's words and sometimes can be factual and sometimes can stretch the story due to the input sources, and I'm not allowed to specifically say he did or didn't, but the Internet can weave all sorts of stories, true or false, but if half of that is true, over a few years he decided to 'repent for his sins' and accept payment too? Hard to understand really....but that is the joys of journalism isn't it? What is fact and what is not?
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Snowy
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Kailua, HI
kudos:6
Reviews:
·Clearwire Wireless
·Time Warner Cable
reply to red2

said by red2 :

So what. To you money is the overriding factor. While to others of us freedom is a lot more important and has no price.

Trading 40 months Federal for $104 million isn't a bad deal.
The $104 million would be an offset against my shallowness.

said by red2 :

Are you also against the practice of paid informants?

I'd pay for information.
IM me if you've got anything good.
said by red2 :

You seemed to be focused solely on the amount not on the concept.

What concept?
said by red2 :

So if he only got paid $10,000, then it would be ok?

What would be OK?


JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net
reply to Name Game

I remember this story from 60 minutes a couple years ago.

Here's the story that aired from January 3, 2010:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=l312_qj6quQ


-Jim


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback


So he admitted to being guilty, thought he was covered by ratting, had a gaol sentence and Cone decided to help his client and his pocket by suggesting that an award is due....same as blackmailing a thief and then gaining funds from the adventure....

I'm out of here.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



rcdailey
Dragoonfly
Premium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA
reply to norwegian

If I recall correctly, the IRS has been rewarding those who turn in tax cheats for a long time. You don't necessarily have to be a criminal to get a reward. You could turn in your neighbor and you might get some money. The difference here is the sheer size the the reward and the circumstances. I'm not sure about hypocrisy, but there does seem to be irony in this case.
--
It is easier for a camel to put on a bikini than an old man to thread a needle.



red2

@fastwebnet.it
reply to Snowy

said by Snowy:

Trading 40 months Federal for $104 million isn't a bad deal.

Snowy, I'll try one last time, then I'll leave you to your interpretation.

There was NO deal. They were two INDEPENDENT events. He got paid for providing info on the bank not reporting its income. Independent of that, he was convicted for what I imagine was a lesser white collar offense while working at that bank.

He could have been paid and been innocent (though unlikely he'd have insider info on a bank's dealings without being part of it) or be guilty and collect nothing.

You state that "I'd pay for information.". PRECISELY. That's what the IRS program is all about, independent of who you are, and it's been in place for some time. This is news solely because of the size of the corruption and therefore the size of the payout.

You take issue with the amount that this guy received, but that is directly related to the tax revenue he helped collect. If the bank hid $100 billion, he'd have gotten even more.

Informants on the street are paid all the time. They are often not 'clean" but their crimes are considered far less important that the ones that they provide info on. THAT is the concept.

It isn't always a black and white world, and sometimes compromises are made. Now, whether you agree with that concept or not, I'll leave you to your interpretation of events.


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7

Would he have been what we so fondly call "whistle blowing"..if there was no monetary gain ? I am glad it took him 4 years to figure out it was illegal then 2 more years before he went to the DOJ..but I call that a crock of shit..6 years.

1. the DOJ does not consider him to be a whistleblower.
2. He left his job over a dispute about a bonus
3.He smuggled diamonds for one of his customers.
4. Even after "whistleblowing". he still advised some of his personal clients to hide money from the IRS.
Read even more here..

»www.time.com/time/business/artic···,00.html

Maybe the DOJ will fine him $104m.
--
Gladiator Security Forum
»www.gladiator-antivirus.com/