Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
VIRGINIA
Credit Suisse AG Agrees to $2.6 Billion Resolution of Offshore Tax Conspiracy Charges
Following its earlier guilty plea on May 19, 2014 ' for conspiracy to aid and assist U.S. taxpayers in filing false income tax returns (and other documents) with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ' Swiss corporation Credit Suisse AG (Credit Suisse) was sentenced on Nov. 21 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia by the Court's Chief Judge, Rebecca Beach Smith. The plea agreement is the principal component of a larger, multi-billion dollar settlement with several state and federal agencies that breaks down as follows: a $1.136 billion criminal fine (to be paid to the DOJ's Crime Victims Fund); a $715 million payment to the New York Department of Financial Services; $666.5 million in restitution to the IRS; approximately $196 million in civil penalties, disgorgement, and interest to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); and a $100 million payment to the Federal Reserve. In addition to the financial components of the plea agreement, Credit Suisse also received cease and desist orders from the Federal Reserve and State of New York that require the company to conduct several remedial steps. Finally, as part of its Nov. 21 plea, Credit Suisse also made future commitments to: 1) share information with authorities relating to account information (including information on other financial institutions that transacted with the hidden offshore accounts); 2) close non-compliant accounts; and 3) develop and apply compliance policies for related U.S. laws, such as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.