Was Phil Mickelson targeted by Obama People?

Poor Phil- he should have JUST MOVED! to Florida- or some other low tax state-

Insider trading has nothing to do with what state you live in or what the tax rates are. It’s not about whether or not you paid taxes on the profit on any stock trade, rather it is whether you made trades based on “insider” information that was given to you in order for you to either buy or sell stock at an advantage that others did not have because the information had not yet been made public.

Unless the Feds can ‘prove’ that he knowingly used illegal information to make his decision, Phil can legally act on any tip he wants, be it from Icahn or anyone else.

No. Not really. For several years I worked for a publicly traded pharma in the finance department and even though I was only a lowly payroll manager/staff accountant, I was sometimes privy to very sensitive information. I had to take yearly SEC training on insider training conducted by our inside council/legal department and sign a pretty hefty and long legal confidentiality agreement and insider trading acknowledgement that was updated yearly.

In a nut shell, if I knew for instance that one of our drugs had failed to get FDA approval or that we were about to undergo a downsizing and lay off 30% of our workforce and I dumped the stock I held in the company before that was made public, I could go to jail. In fact we employees, from the top execs and board members all the way down to the janitorial staff were restricted from selling our stocks during such periods – a stock trade blackout period. And FWIW, I did hold stock in the company, as part of our bonuses were paid in stock and we had a employee stock purchase plan that I not only administered from a payroll perspective but also participated in. Likewise if I knew a new drug trial was going extremely well but that information had not yet been made public and I told my husband and he in turn told his best friend to buy our stock now while the price was low because it was about to go way up because his wife, who had “inside information” had told him so, I could go to jail, along with my husband for passing on this information AND his friend even though I hadn’t directly given that information to his friend.

Needless to say that scared the bejeezus out of me and I was pretty tight lipped about things going on at work outside of what I had for lunch on any given day. ; ),

The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Securities and Exchange Commission are examining whether Mr. Mickelson and Mr. Walters—an occasional golf partner of Mr. Mickelson’s—traded on nonpublic, potentially market-moving information

My thoughts are that the SEC is investigating, as they often do, looking at large or oddly timed stock trades that take place just before a big announcement is made that materially affects the stock price and looking to see of any of those who have made unusual trades have close relationships with persons who were privy to non-public information, in this case Icahn. The Feds might not (yet) have proof that any of Mickelson’s trades, if there were any, were based on insider information but they are probably putting pressure on Mickelson to “sing” and cut a deal and give up Icahn and Walters, if indeed Icahn was passing on this information and Walters and possible others were trading on this non-public insider information and Mickelson either knew it because that information was passed on to him, whether or not he acted on it.

He did nothing more than act on a stock tip from a friend.

It is one thing if a friend tells you that you should buy or dump a stock based on publically available information. It is even OK if your friend works for this company and tells you something along the lines of “this is a great company to work for” or in general terms something like, “we’ve got a lot of good things going on here”.

But it is something entirely different if your friend has non-public, inside information such as, “this is not public knowledge yet, but we are in final negotiations to do a major merger with XYZ company and when that goes public, our stock price is going to soar, so buy as much stock as you can today before the price goes up, you’ll make a killing” or “you know that stock you own in my company, well you better dump that before Friday because our quarterly earnings statements are coming out on Friday and the news is not good, in fact it’s really bad, so get out now before the price takes a nose dive”.

Is Mickelson being targeted by the Feds for statements he made regarding taxes? Possibly. But then again Phil has had a self admitted problem with gambling in the past and “allegedly” had previously racked up some pretty hefty gambling debts, although in all fairness, those are rumors and Phil denies it by refusing to talk about it.

But regardless, insider trading is something that needs to be taken seriously and prosecuted when it actually happens as undermines the integrity of the stock market. It is just as serious as companies like Enron and others that knowingly “cooked” their books to make their stock appear to be worth more than it actually was.

I would also add that Phil is smart not to talk to the Feds without his lawyer and in doing so, that does not indicate any guilt on his part.

That illegal information part is the interesting component. If Carl Icahn was talking about something more than ....hey, this is a great company....it gets really dicey for Phil. And no Phil can't act 'legally' on any tip he wants.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm

If he gets some information from someone that there will be a sale of a company or another company is going to be bought and the guy works for or has a reason to know what's going on....he is in trouble. Like I said....too early to tell on Phil.

I don't believe Mickelson's misrepresenting his tax rate, in fact he may be understating it.

Anyone who doesnt track the sum-total of taxes they pay in a year is probably paying alot more than they realize.

I'm not "rich" ... I'm not one of those in the top 1% or even one of the top 5% taxpayers. As I look at the tax tables, I'm within the top 10% of all wage earners.

I pay very careful attention to my taxes and do everything I can to minimize them. I buy as much on-line as I can (tax free, free shipping) limiting more local purchases to food and clothes and those necessities that can't wait (car repairs for example.)

I live in a high-tax state (Illinois) so we have a State Income Tax, State Sales Tax, and some of the highest Property/Real Estate taxes in the country.

Why, we even have taxes on taxes (gasoline is double-taxed here...)

My total tax burden between all state, federal, county, local, sales and property taxes is 58%.

That's right, 58% of every dollar I make goes to some form of tax, all for the privilege of living here in the United States of AmeriKa and the People's RepubliK of Illinois.

I cannot imagine California being any better for Mickelson and I imagine if he really looked at his taxes (and all the different state income taxes he pays) he's probably even worse off than he thinks.

BTW: YES, he's being targeted. Anyone who doesn't believe that has their heads up their backsides. That is the history and modus operandi of this Administration.

Go back and re-read my post. I pointed out that Phil had to act on ‘knowingly illegal information’ for it to be a crime. If I overhead someone on an airplane talking about about a company being purchased, I can legally act on that unless I ‘know’ that the person is illegally providing inside information.

If Icahn is providing him information about a company he is purchasing, then Phil would be ‘knowingly’ acting on insider information.

Maybe we are splitting hairs. I’m in the securities business and if I were on that airplane and heard a company was going to make a tender offer, I wouldn’t dare make that trade. I think it depends on what he heard. The term tender to me clearly indicates something others don’t know and I believe it to be illegal to act on an overheard conversation where a tender offer is being discussed.