Posted on 07/26/2002 10:18:45 PM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:55:58 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
House Republican leaders, heading home to face voters anxious over retirement security, announced yesterday they will introduce legislation to seize the mansions and yachts of corrupt corporate executives.
"We need to do more to strip corrupt corporate kingpins of their ill-gotten gains," said House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, Texas Republican. "We're taking the mansion. We're draining the accounts. And we're coming after the yacht."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
And they should. This is what they did to the S&L crooks a decade ago. I remember specifically the case of the CenTrust chief who got stripped of his loot this way.
But if I was Mr. DeLay, I would be talking equally strongly about jail time. Some of these guys need to go to real jail.
However, isn't it a little dangerous to expand the scope of asset forfeiture solely to score some political points?
From 1913-1915, taxpayers only paid 1% tax on income up to $363,000 (inflation adjusted to 2002 dollars, sources for tax rates and for CPI data ) while the "super-rich" paid 7% tax on income over $9,000,000 (2002 dollars).
Unfortunately, before too long everyone was in the same boat as the "super-rich" and in fact much worse off, as our present day tax rates clearly indicate.
Once we start sliding down that slippery slope, we don't seem to be able to get back up where we began, and sometimes by the time we're done we've impacted groups of people that we never would have envisioned.
A rat is a rat is a RAT.
In strict usage that would be true, however in common usage I find it to used to define those who are merely accused.
If I misread you intent in the statement I offer my apology.
But keep in mind that the IRS was just a bunch of geeky accounts also until one of them figured out that the tax laws could be used to go after Capone.
Quick indictments, no bail, orange jump suits. Maybe even a GITMO for these white collar terrorists?
Seriously, things got this way, because the perps figured the worse case would leave them set up for life, even if it meant fighting lawsuits for years. When they ponder the worst case in the future, the consequences need to convince them to serve the shareholders, employees, customers with old time integrity.
I was for years a senior staff guy, in a major public corp. My take is that the CPA firms haven't done their traditional jobs, and the Boaards are now made up by too many figureheads of diversity, who know little about business.
Between the corrupt CPA firms, and the inept boards, the dirty managements knew it was easy to run these scams.
Advice: Read the footnotes to financial statements in annual reports. Watch for "SPEs" and "QSPEs" which are shorthand for off-balance sheet debt financings. Read executive compensation plans.
So far a few big companies have been found out, but many smaller instances will continue to occur. The (so-called) audit profession was allowed to self-regulate; via AICPA, FASB, etc.
They basically set down guidelines for when and how the scams could pass their muster. Now we reap the fruit of it all, which will mean more government involvement.
Sad to say, self-regulation didn't work, or maybe I am off base?
Current law allows the Securities and Exchange Commission to collect civil fines and other penalties for corporate malfeasance and distribute that money to aggrieved investors. Total collections in 2001 exceeded $500 million, and Rep. Richard H. Baker, Louisiana Republican, said that total "will likely go up rather dramatically."The SEC budget for 2001 was $422,800,000. It too, will likely go up dramatically (supposedly by $100 million).
Don't be amazed. They're the same people who feel it's win at any cost. They're indistinguishable from the people on the left who behave the same way. They all stand for nothing.
That's not necessarily an argument against it, considering how the corporate shield can be (and has been) used to conceal and shelter commercial wrongdoing. However, before you give your support to such an idea, remember this: limited liability is the basis of all corporation law in the United States. To undo it at a stroke would throw American enterprise into such a convulsion that a continent-wide Richter 10.0 earthquake might not do as much damage. It's the exact opposite of a conservative measure.
Remember also how much the Left would love a new group of high-profile free-enterprise sacrifices to crucify, the better to spearhead their charge against economic freedom. If leftists can persuade people generally to tear down the capitalist edifice because there's something in it for them, we're all doomed.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com
I agree with you. Try these executives, determine if they're guilty of anything, and mete out appropriate punishments according to the law.
I also see the potential for this new crackdown to be applied unequally, with more charges being levied on those out of political power. A lot of this money was earnend legally...are they going to go after people for looking too rich? I'm also uncomfortable when residences are involved...these people have families and lives that will be affected.
New laws or restrictions always make me uncomfortable, because someday, somehow, they might be applied against me, by some unintended application.
This probably goes beyond that. How do we know how much of someone's assets derive from their corporate involvement?
Can anyone tell me what actual EXISTING LAWS any of these CEOs have broken? If we try them, what will we charge them with?
I know what they have done is wrong, immoral, whatever BUT..what laws did they break?
For example, we know what a POS Ken Lay is but to date (correct me if I'm wrong) there are no "legal" charges against him. The guys from Adephia that they led off in cuffs...apparently they actually have evidence of them raiding and siphoning off the company assets so I assume they have a legal charge for that.
But again, the rest of the POS's, what do they get CHARGED with?
Legal begals out there...anyone, anyone...Bueller?
Large cases like Enron require tons of investigation and the mountain of documents to wade through is enormous. To prosecute successfully, one must move deliberately and thoroughly, which means it's not going to happen overnight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.