Corporate tax frauds. They even do that when most don't even pay taxes! Oh, they can write off fines paid to the US Government.!
Here is A through H You tell me?
ABB
ABB Vetco Gray
ABB Vetko UK
2004
$5,900,000
$10,500,00
"Swiss engineering company ABB Ltd. and two of its subsidiaries agreed Tuesday to pay a total of $16.4 million to settle U.S. criminal and civil charges alleging they bribed government officials in Nigeria, Angola and Kazakhstan. The company paid more than $1.1 million through U.S.-based and foreign subsidiaries for the purpose of "obtaining and retaining business," federal officials claimed. U.S. authorities said ABB settled a civil suit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by agreeing to pay $5.9 million in "disgorgement and prejudgment interest" to the Securities and Exchange Commission and change its business practices. SEC officials said ABB notified the government of the violations and cooperated in the investigation. Simultaneously, subsidiaries ABB Vetco Gray, based in Houston, and ABB Vetco UK, based in Aberdeen, Scotland, appeared in U.S. District Court in Houston and agreed to pay a total fine of $10.5 million, the Department of Justice said. The fines came after each company was convicted of two counts of violating the bribery section of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act." (Feds fine ABB $16M in bribery case, By Leticia Williams, CBS.MarketWatch.com, July 6, 2004).
Abbott Laboratories
1999
$100,000,000
"[R]ecord fine of $100 million to the Food and Drug Administration to settle a long-running investigation into the company's manufacturing plant in Lake County, Ill. Abbott also agreed to remove 125 products from the market and stop making them. (Abbott to Pay $622 Million to Settle Inquiry Into Marketing, By Gardiner Harris, New York Times, June 27, 2003).
Abbott Laboratories
2003
$622,000,000
"Abbott Laboratories said yesterday that it planned to pay $622 million to settle an investigation into sales practices for liquids needed to feed the seriously ill. The company said in a statement that it would take a charge of 34 cents a share in the second quarter to cover a settlement of a "previously disclosed civil and criminal investigation" of its Ross Products division. Abbott earned $592.3 million, or 38 cents a share, in the second quarter of last year. Melissa Brotz, an Abbott spokeswoman, declined yesterday to discuss details of the investigation, which was disclosed in August 2001. At the time, news reports described it as focusing on marketing tactics in which the company gave tubes and pumps used to deliver liquid food directly into patients' digestive tracts in exchange for large orders of the liquids. Some of the hospitals and nursing homes that received the free equipment were suspected of billing Medicaid and Medicare, the government health insurance programs for the poor and the elderly, for the tubes and pumps, according to the reports." (Abbott to Pay $622 Million to Settle Inquiry Into Marketing, By Gardiner Harris, New York Times, June 27, 2003).
On Oct. 3, 2001, TAP Pharmaceutical Products, a joint venture of Abbott and Tadeka Chemical Industries, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and paid $875 million - still the record for a health fraud fine - to settle accusations related to its marketing of the cancer drug Lupron. TAP was accused of giving Lupron to doctors who the company knew would bill Medicaid and Medicare for the cost of the drug. SEE TAP PHARMACEUTICAL.
Abbott Laboratories
2005
$18,000,000
"Abbott Laboratories and Geneva Pharmaceuticals Inc. have agreed to a $30.7 million nationwide settlement to refund customers and third-party payers in 18 states who claimed that the two companies had conspired to engage in anticompetitive conduct selling a drug that treats hypertension and enlarged prostate. The settlement agreement, reached earlier this month, is still subject to final court approval. The commercial version of the drug, Hytrin, is manufactured by Abbott, which will pay $18 million in the case. The generic version, called terazosin, is made by Geneva... The settlement will benefit consumers who purchased terazosin products between Oct. 15, 1995 and March 7, 2005. Between 1999 and 2001, a number of consumers filed lawsuits against Abbott and Geneva. These cases were consolidated into a single lawsuit in federal court in the Southern District of Florida. According to the federal lawsuit, Abbott wrongfully paid Geneva to delay introduction of its generic version of Hytrin and took other steps to delay competition from lower-priced generic versions of its product, harming consumers." (CBS MarketWatch, March 31, 2005)
Abbott Laboratories Johnson & Johnson
Menarini Diagnosticos
Pharmaceutica Quimica
Bayer
2005
16 million Euros total
"Portugal's antitrust regulator said it had fined five major US and European drug companies a total of 16 mln eur for working together to artificially fix prices.
The five firms -- Abbott Laboratories and Johnson & Johnson of the United States, Germany's Bayer AG, Italy's Menarini Diagnosticos and Switzerland's Pharmaceutica Quimica -- formed a cartel during 36 bidding processes to supply 22 hospitals in Portugal, it said. The goal of the companies was to 'prevent, restrict or falsify in a significant way competition by fixing prices', the competition authority said in a statement.
Abbott Laboratories was hit with the largest fine, 6.8 mln eur, for 34 infractions while Johnson & Johnson, which cooperated with antitrust regulator in its investigation, received the smallest fine, it added. The firm will have to pay 360,000 eur for 36 infractions. The antitrust regulator opened its investigation after a public hospital in Coimbra, Portugal's third-largest city, complained that the five firms had all proposed the same price for the same drug." (AFX News Limited, Oct 14, 2005).
Abercrombie & Fitch
2004
$40,000,000
"Abercrombie & Fitch has agreed to pay $40 million to black, Hispanic and Asian employees and job applicants to settle a class-action federal discrimination lawsuit that accused the clothing retailer of promoting whites at the expense of minorities..." (AP/USAToday.com, Nov 16, 2004).
ABN AMRO Bank
2005
$80,000,000
U.S. bank regulators and supervisors announced Monday that ABN AMRO Bank N.V. will have to pay an $80 million penalty in connection with findings the bank failed to comply with U.S. anti-money laundering laws.
The Federal Reserve, New York and Illinois state bank supervisory agencies, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control said they had found defects in the bank's internal controls against money laundering in branches in New York and Chicago.
ABN AMRO, the largest Dutch bank, participated in transactions that violated U.S. sanctions laws and failed to report suspicious transactions, the agencies said in a statement.
The U.S. bank regulators and supervisors said De Nederlandsche Bank N.V., the regulator of Dutch banks, had also participated in issuing the consent order.
Regulators are also requiring ABN AMRO to improve compliance and risk management systems to ensure full oversight and compliance with U.S. laws. (Reuters / CNN Money, Dec 19, 2005)
Adelphia
2005
$715,000,000
Adelphia Communications said today that after months of negotiations, it had agreed to pay $715 million to settle fraud charges with the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
As the settlement is structured, the Rigas family, which once controlled Adelphia, will provide the government with roughly $1.5 billion in assets: largely cable systems that the family owned privately. John Rigas and his son Timothy were convicted last summer of looting Adelphia of $2.3 billion in assets and misrepresenting Adelphia's financial health to investors.
Now Adelphia will turn over $715 million to a victim's fund that will pay the money to Adelphia investors...
delphia declared bankruptcy three years ago. It then put itself up for sale and last week Comcast and Time Warner, the nation's largest and second-largest cable companies, agreed to buy Adelphia for $17.6 billion in cash and stock. Adelphia, with 5.3 million cable subscribers, is the nation's fifth-largest cable operator.
As the settlement is structured, investors get part of the funds, but the company, which was also misled by the Rigases, gets the balance of the $1.5 billion in assets that are being turned over by the family.. (New York Times, April 25, 2005).
Adest
subsidiary of MONY
2005
Fourteen brokerage firms are paying fines totaling more than $34 million in deals with industry regulators over payments they received to push certain mutual funds...
The firms include six subsidiaries of the embattled insurance company American International Group...
The companies have agreed to pay the civil fines in settlements with NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing organization. NASD accused the firms of receiving payments from mutual fund companies in exchange for preferential treatment for the funds, creating a potential conflict of interest.
The companies neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing in agreeing to pay the fines, which ranged from $286,415 for Advest Inc. to $6.6 million for Royal Alliance Associates Inc., one of the A.I.G. subsidiaries.
Advest is a unit of the MONY Group.
At issue are "shelf space" arrangements between fund companies and brokerage firms, under which the funds pay brokers for slots on lists of recommended buys for customers. (AP / New York Times, June 9, 2005).
Ahold
2005
$1,100,000,000
"Royal Ahold which owns the Stop & Shop and Giant supermarket chains in the United States along with other retail operations worldwide, said Monday it has agreed to pay $1.1 billion to settle a class action lawsuit brought by U.S. shareholders after its 2003 accounting scandal.
Peter Paul de Vries of the Dutch Shareholders' Association, which helped broker the deal, said the proposed settlement "was not of such a size that it will hurt Ahold" but it would help the company "leave a black chapter behind it."
Ahold's top lawyer Peter Wakkie said it is a coincidence that the amount of the settlement paralleled that of the scandal, in which Ahold overstated earnings by more than 1 billion euros in 1999-2002, mostly by inflating sales at its U.S. Foodservice subsidiary.
Ahold's former top management resigned in February 2003 after the company made the fraud known, and its shares lost two-thirds of their value overnight. The company eventually restated earnings for 2002 to a loss of 4.33 billion euros ($5.01 billion). It avoided bankruptcy by selling assets and by getting an emergency credit line from its banks.
The agreement requires approval from a court in the Baltimore district, where the case was filed, and from holders of at least 180 million shares out of around 800 million shares that qualify...
Ahold said the settlement represented the last "significant" civil cases it faces in the scandal. But Entwistle said he would push ahead with plans to sue Ahold's former accountants Deloitte & Touche for $2 billion to $3 billion for its actions...
Two former top managers at Columbia, Md.-based U.S. Foodservice pleaded guilty to fraud charges in the United States, while the former chief financial officer and chief marketing officer have pleaded innocent.
Former Ahold CEO Cees Van der Hoeven, former CFO Michiel Meurs and two other top executives are expected to face criminal charges in the Netherlands in May 2006. All have said they are innocent of wrongdoing." (AP / USA Today, Nov 28, 2005)
AIG
(American International Group)
2003
$10,000,000
A.I.G. Settles Fraud Charges With S.E.C. By REUTERS, New York Times, Sept 11, 2003. "U.S. market regulators on Thursday said insurer American International Group Inc. (AIG.N) agreed to pay $10 million to settle fraud charges stemming from its role in accounting violations at cell phone distributor Brightpoint Inc.The Securities and Exchange Commission said the fraud charges against AIG stemmed from its role in fashioning and selling what the agency referred to as an ``insurance'' product that helped Brightpoint overstate its earnings by 61 percent. In a statement, AIG said it consented to the SEC order to settle the matter but did not admit or deny the agency's findings. It said it acknowledges that mistakes were made in underwriting the policy in question and that it has taken steps to correct those mistakes. In a separate statement, Brightpoint said the complaint alleged that the company ``committed fraud through the purchase and use of a purported insurance policy to misrepresent Brightpoint's losses as insured losses.'' Brightpoint, based in Plainfield, Indiana, agreed to pay a $450,000 civil penalty.
Insurer Agrees to Pay Penalty in Fraud Case, By Joseph B. Treaster, New York Times, Sep 12, 2003.
AIG
2004
$126,000,000
"Insurance giant American International Group Inc., which is paying $126 million to settle federal authorities' allegations of aiding accounting fraud by other companies, has accepted an independent monitor but will avoid criminal prosecution. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department announced Tuesday that they had reached formal settlements with AIG, which disclosed last week it had agreed to make the payments. The insurer agreed to pay $46 million in an accord with the SEC to settle allegations of civil securities fraud over three 2001 transactions it made with PNC Financial Services Group Inc. that allegedly helped the regional bank artificially inflate its earnings. The money will go to shareholders injured by the alleged fraud. AIG also agreed to pay $80 million in an accord with the Justice Department that allows it to avoid prosecution and resolve an investigation into the PNC matter and one involving cell phone distributor Brightpoint Inc. New York-based AIG neither admitted nor denied the allegations in agreeing to pay the $126 million, which is comprised of fines, restitution and interest... AIG is said to have improperly sold insurance contracts to the companies to help them smooth earnings volatility from quarter to quarter. The relatively new practice, which is legal in principle and common in the insurance industry, has recently come under scrutiny by regulators for how it is executed..." (AP / ABCNews.com, Nov 30, 2004).
AIG
including subsidiary Royal Alliance Associates
2005
Fourteen brokerage firms are paying fines totaling more than $34 million in deals with industry regulators over payments they received to push certain mutual funds...
The firms include six subsidiaries of the embattled insurance company American International Group...
The companies have agreed to pay the civil fines in settlements with NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing organization. NASD accused the firms of receiving payments from mutual fund companies in exchange for preferential treatment for the funds, creating a potential conflict of interest.
The companies neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing in agreeing to pay the fines, which ranged from $286,415 for Advest Inc. to $6.6 million for Royal Alliance Associates Inc., one of the A.I.G. subsidiaries.
Advest is a unit of the MONY Group.
At issue are "shelf space" arrangements between fund companies and brokerage firms, under which the funds pay brokers for slots on lists of recommended buys for customers. (AP / New York Times, June 9, 2005).
AIG
2006
$1,600,000,000
"[T]o settle allegations it engaged in securities fraud and bid-rigging and failed to make contributions to state workers' compensation funds...[I]ncludes $800 million the SEC will use to compensate investors deceived by alleged accounting violations that the company disavowed in a major restatement last year. Thirty-five states will share in $42 million in tax reimbursements on workers' compensation premiums... The settlement focuses primarily on a fall 2000 reinsurance deal that then-AIG Chief Executive Maurice "Hank" Greenberg allegedly initiated with Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary General Re to beef up AIG's long-term loss reserves and help prevent a fall in its stock price. Last week, federal prosecutors indicted three former top General Re executives and AIG's former head of reinsurance..." (Washington Post, Feb 10, 2006).
Ajinomoto
199?
$10,000,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Alabama Power Co
2006
$200,000,000
"The Alabama Power Company has agreed to pollution controls and other measures expected to cost more than $200 million to settle a case brought the federal government under the New Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act.
The U.S. Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency Wednesday announced the partial settlement of a case alleging violations of the against the Alabama Power Company James H. Miller, Jr. Plant, a coal-fired power plant near West Jefferson, Alabama.
Under the consent decree filed in federal court, Alabama Power is required to reduce emissions from the Miller plant of two harmful pollutants - sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) - by 28,000 tons per year." (Environmental News Service, April 26, 2006.
Alliance Capital Management Holding LP
$250,000,000
Fines and restitution to settle charges over improper trading,
Allied Clinical Laboratories
199?
$5,000,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Altria Group
see also Philip Morris
Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA)
199?
$3,750,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
AOL - America Online
2005
$1,250,000
"America Online, the world's largest Internet service provider, will pay $1.25 million in penalties and change some customer-service practices to settle an investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. About 300 consumers had filed complaints with Spitzer's office accusing AOL, a wholly owned subsidiary of Time Warner (TWX), of ignoring their requests to cancel service and stop billing. The company, with 21 million subscribers nationally, rewarded employees who were able to retain subscribers who called to cancel their Internet service. For years, AOL had minimum retention or "save" percentages that customer-service personnel were expected to meet, investigators said. An employee could earn tens of thousands of dollars in bonuses if he or she could dissuade half of callers from ending service..." (USA Today, Aug 24, 2005).
AOL - America Online
2006
$2,600,000,000
A judge has approved a $2.65 billion class-action settlement of claims that advertising revenue was counted in a fraudulent manner prior to the merger of America Online Inc. and Time Warner Inc. U.S. District Judge Shirley Wohl Kram signed a ruling approving the deal Thursday. She had given the settlement tentative approval in September 2005. The settlement resulted from lawsuits brought by shareholders who complained that AOL improperly accounted for dozens of advertising transactions, inflating revenue for 15 quarters between 1998 and 2002. AOL and Time Warner announced they were merging in early 2000. AOL's steadily declining dial-up subscriber base became a drain on Time Warner, though the Internet provider has risen in stature with the recent boom in online advertising. According to the deal approved by Kram, Time Warner will pay the bulk of the settlement while its auditor, Ernst & Young LLP, will pay $100 million... [Kram] said the settlement had received overwhelming support by nearly all of the estimated 600,000 claimants. The lead plaintiff was the Minnesota State Board of Investment, which manages the investment of retirement fund assets of the Minnesota State Retirement System, Teachers Retirement Association and the Public Employees Retirement Association. The Minnesota board, with total assets exceeding $50 billion, lost an estimated $249 million and had the largest financial stake in the litigation. (AP / Mercury News, April 8, 2006).
American Airlines
2004
$3,300,000
"American Airlines Inc. and Boeing Corp. agreed to pay more than $3.3 million in fines for violating federal aviation regulations, the Federal Aviation Administration said on Tuesday. American paid $2.5 million to settle FAA allegations that the airline and two of its carriers - American Eagle and Reno Air - violated rules governing flight operations and maintenance. The company didn't admit that it had done anything wrong..." (Government Settles With American, Boeing. Guardian (UK), June 1, 2004).
American Airlines
2004
$3,000,000
"American Airlines has agreed to pay a $3 million penalty to settle charges that it violated a 1994 consent decree with U.S. antitrust authorities, the Justice Department said Friday. The settlement bars American from using travel dates when either initiating or matching fare increases. (Reuters, Aug 6, 2004).
American Express Financial Advisors
2004
$3,700,000
"Fifteen brokerage firms accused of overcharging large-scale investors in mutual funds have reached settlements with regulators that will require them to pay civil penalties totaling some $21.5 million, the regulators announced Thursday. The settlements with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the National Association of Securities Dealers also will require the brokerages to make refunds to customers. The fines levied on the firms are equivalent to the estimated amount they overcharged customers over a two-year period, the regulators said. The firms include American Express Financial Advisors, which agreed to pay a $3.7 million fine; Raymond James Financial Services, which is paying $2.6 million; and Wachovia Securities, $4.8 million. The SEC and the NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing group, have found that brokerage firms - apparently inadvertently - often fail to give large-scale investors in mutual funds the discounts they are owed." (15 brokerages settle fund discounts case: Firms accused of overcharging agree to pay $21.5 million. Associated Press, MSNBC News, Feb 12, 2004).
American Express Financial Advisors
2005
some portion of $21,250,000
"... NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing organization, disclosed that Citigroup, American Express Financial Advisers and J. P. Morgan Chase & Company had agreed to pay a total of $21.25 million for reported violations in sales of mutual funds." (AP / New York Times, March 24, 2005).
American Express Financial Advisors
2005
$7,400,000
"New Hampshire regulators and American Express Financial Advisors Inc. have reached a record $7.4 million settlement over allegations that the company illegally rewarded its financial advisers who steered clients toward underperforming, in-house mutual funds. The New Hampshire Bureau of Securities Regulation had sought $17.5 million in penalties from the Minneapolis-based subsidiary of American Express Co. The bureau had alleged that in one sales contest, American Express Financial Advisors offered advisers who sold the most company funds a free one-year lease on a Mercedes Benz. State Securities Director Mark Connolly said in a statement Tuesday the settlement was the largest securities enforcement action in state history, surpassing the $5 million settlement reached with Tyco International in 2002... American Express has announced plans to spin off its financial advisory, probably later this year... In addition to $5 million in fines and penalties, the settlement requires American Express Financial Advisors to pay New Hampshire investors $2 million and to reimburse the bureau $375,000 for costs of the investigation." (ABC News, July 12, 2005).
AOL
see America Online
Aqua Leisure
1996
$6,000,000
Aqua Leisure & Simon Fireman [6mo house arrest] - US Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity (use of corporate funds and money laundering). http://www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_vce.exe
Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)
199?
$100,000,000
ADM paid a $100 million fine and three of its executives --- Mark Whitacre, Mick Andreas and Terrance Wilson --- were sent to prison for fixing the price of lysine, a feed additive for livestock and poultry. http://www.ea1.com/CARP/
Archer Daniels Midland
Cerestar Bioproducts
Hoffmann-La Roche
Jungbunzlauer
Haarmann & Reimer
2001
$120,500,000 total
"The European Commission fined Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Archer Daniels Midland Co (ADM), Jungbunzlauer AG, Haarmann & Reimer Corp and Cerestar Bioproducts B.V. a total of $120.5 million for participating in a price-fixing and market-sharing cartel in citric acid." (Corporate Crime Reporter, Dec 5, 2001).
Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)
2004
$400,000,000
to settle price-fixing suit (June 21, 2004).
Argenbright
(subsidiary of Securicor)
2000
$1,550,000
"Argenbright, a leader in the privatized airport security business in the United States. Argenbright controls roughly 40 percent of the market. Its employees screen passengers and carry-on bags for the airlines, which have been delegated these responsibilities by the federal government. ... [Argenbright] pled guilty to two counts of making false statements to federal regulators and paid $1.55 million in fines in connection with charges that it failed on a massive scale to do background checks on security screeners employed at Philadelphia International Airport, failed to provide them with required training, and then lied to federal authorities about it." (Multinational Monitor Dec 2001).
Arizona Chemical Co.
199?
$2,500,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Arthur Anderson
2001
$7,000,000
Penalty for helping Waste Management overstate its income in order to boost WM's value. WMX overstates pretax income by more than $1 billion for 1992 through 1996. Arthur Anderson did not admit or deny guilt in the settlement with the SEC and was never charged with violating auditor independence rules. (StopWMX website)
Arthur Andersen
2005
$65,000,000
"Arthur Andersen continued to deny wrongdoing Monday as it settled with WorldCom investors who had accused the company's former outside auditor of failing to protect them from WorldCom's historic $11 billion accounting fraud.
Details of the settlement were not immediately released. U.S. District Judge Denise Cote scheduled a preliminary approval hearing on the settlement for Tuesday and banned each side from discussing its details publicly. The deal interrupted a trial in its fifth week on the accusations contained in a class action lawsuit brought after WorldCom's 2002 collapse, the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history.
Before the trial, major investment banks agreed to pay more than $6 billion in settlements and a dozen former board members settled the case for $24.75 million, leaving Arthur Andersen as the sole defendant...
The plaintiffs maintained that WorldCom's annual financial statements for 1999, 2000 and 2001 contained false statements and that Arthur Andersen issued its audit opinions with an "intent to deceive, manipulate or defraud."
Arthur Andersen insisted through its lawyers that each of its audit opinions from 1999 through 2001 was generated in good faith and with no intent to deceive, manipulate or defraud.
To find against Arthur Andersen, the jury would have had to conclude that Arthur Andersen's conduct was "highly unreasonable" and that WorldCom's fraud was known to the auditor or was so obvious that Arthur Andersen must have been aware of it.
Last month, former WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers was convicted of fraud, conspiracy and false regulatory filings in the accounting scandal. He could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Five other former WorldCom executives have pleaded guilty in the fraud and are awaiting sentencing.
WorldCom, which collapsed when the accounting fraud to inflate earnings and hide expenses was revealed, has re-emerged as MCI Inc..." (Chicago Tribune, April 25, 2005).
"A federal judge gave preliminary approval Tuesday to a deal under which auditor Arthur Andersen LLP will pay $65 million to settle allegations it failed to protect investors from WorldCom's historic accounting fraud." (AP / USAToday.com, April 26, 2005).
AstraZeneca
2003
$355,000,000
AstraZeneca pleaded guilty [in June 2003] to a federal felony charge of health care fraud and agreed to pay $355 million to settle charges that it had encouraged doctors to defraud the federal government by billing it for drugs that AstraZeneca gave to doctors free. (Abbott to Pay $622 Million to Settle Inquiry Into Marketing, By Gardiner Harris, New York Times, June 27, 2003).
Banc One
2001
$1,800,000
"Banc One Capital Markets Inc., a bond dealer, agreed today to pay a $1.8 million fine to settle charges of poorly managing its accounting system. According to the consent agreement, in which Banc One neither admits nor denies the charges, the accounting irregularities caused a shortfall in the amount of capital the firm is required to have on hand to do business. The shortfall ranged at times from $520 million to $1.27 billion. The accounting problem also led Banc One to incorrectly compute the amount it was required to hold in a special reserve bank account that is designed to protect customers funds, by segregating them from those of the firm. The deficiencies in that account ranged from $380 million to $1.05 billion, according to a letter detailing the agreement. Although extremely technical in nature, the net capital requirement rule has been found by courts to be "one of the most important weapons in the [Securities and Exchange Commission's] arsenal to protect investors," the consent letter said." (Washington Post, April 6, 2001; p. E02).
Bank of America
2004
$675,000,000
"Bank of America Corp. and FleetBoston Financial Corp. reached a record $675 million settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer over illegal mutual fund trading. Bank of America will make $250 million in restitution and $125 million in penalties, while Fleet will make $70 million in restitution and $70 million in penalties, Spitzer's office said in a statement. Bank of America and Fleet also agree to cut fees by $160 million over five years. The penalty is the largest since Spitzer announced an investigation of the $7.5 trillion fund industry in September. Bank of America is buying FleetBoston for about $48 billion. ``Getting this out of the way will help them focus on merging the two companies together,'' said Robert Maneri, who helps manage about $50 billion, including Bank of America and FleetBoston shares, at Victory Capital Management in Cleveland. Bank of America Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis, 56, fired at least five executives and set aside $100 million for fines since Spitzer accused the Charlotte, North Carolina-based company of trading abuses in September. Spitzer and the SEC have filed civil complaints against eight firms in the biggest fund-trading probe ever. Eight members of Bank of America's Nations Funds board of directors ``will resign or otherwise leave the board in the course of the next year'' for approving a measure that allowed a hedge fund to conduct ``company sanctioned'' market timing in its funds, according to the agreement." (Bank of America, Fleet in Record $675 Mln Fund Pact., Bloomberg, March 15, 2004).
Bank of America
2004
$10,000,000
"Bank of America Corp., the No. 3 U.S. bank, was fined a record $10 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission because it lied to the regulator during a probe into trading by the bank and a former employee. ``We cannot tolerate regulated entities not complying with their obligations under the law'' to cooperate with investigations, said Antonia Chion, the SEC enforcement official overseeing the case. The fine imposed on the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank is the largest ever levied by the SEC for failing to produce documents during an investigation, SEC spokesman John Nester said in an interview. Calls to CEO Kenneth Lewis and Chief Financial Officer James Hance weren't returned. The SEC's claims may undermine steps by Lewis to restore the bank's integrity after it was ensnarled in the collapse of Parmalat Finanziaria SpA and accused of improper mutual fund trading. ``The allegations you've seen don't represent the way Bank of America does business,'' Lewis said in September of the mutual fund investigation. ``This headline risk is a distraction and it takes management's time,'' said Hilary Hayes, who helps manage $4 billion, including 600,000 Bank of America shares, at Victory SBSF Capital Management in New York. `Hide and Seek' The fine stems from the SEC's probe into allegations that a senior Banc of America Securities LLC executive traded on unreleased research reports by the firm's own analysts. The bank failed to provide documents it requested and lied about their availability, the SEC said. Banc of America Securities wasn't part of the $1.4 billion global stock research settlement last year between Wall Street firms and regulators. ``Playing hide and seek with the government I don't think is ever a good strategy,'' said James Cox, a corporate and securities law professor at Duke University. ``Bank of America's approach in defending itself in this case was probably not a wise one and that is certainly being borne out.'' Bank of America, which expects to complete its $48 billion purchase of FleetBoston Financial Corp. next month, neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing, and neither the bank nor the SEC named the employee whose records were at issue. Bank spokeswoman Shirley Norton said in a prepared statement that the company ``believes the problems addressed by the SEC are isolated'' and that it has taken measures to prevent their recurrence. In December, the National Association of Securities Dealers fined former Banc of America analyst Andrew Hamerling $125,000 for publishing biased research on telecommunications companies such as SBC Communications Inc. and giving advance notice of his recommendations to favored clients. Hamerling settled the case without admitting or denying the allegations. Both the NASD and the SEC say their investigations are continuing. (Bank of America Fined Record $10 Mln in Trading Case. Bloomberg, Mar 10, 2004).
Bank of America
2005
$375,000,000
"Three Bank of America Corp. brokerage units agreed to pay $375 million to settle market timing charges, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said Wednesday. The SEC charged that Banc of America Capital Management LLC, BACAP Distributors LLC, and Banc of America Securities LLC entered into "improper and undisclosed agreements" that let favored large investors engage in rapid short-term, market timing and late trading in Nations Funds mutual funds. Separately, Bank of America's Fleet mutual fund unit agreed to pay $140 million to settle market timing charges, while five former executives were individually charged with market timing violations, the SEC said." (Reuters/New York Times, Feb 9, 2005).
Bank of America
2005
$460,500,000
"Bank of America has agreed to pay $460.5 million to settle with investors who bought Worldcom's stock and bonds before the telecommunications giant filed for bankruptcy in 2002. The settlement was struck between Bank of America and Alan G. Hevesi, the comptroller of New York state and trustee of the states' Common Retirement Fund. Mr. Hevesi is the lead plaintiff in the case and represents investors who lost billions when Worldcom collapsed. The bank said in a statement that it was in the best interests of its shareholders to put the litigation behind it. In settling, the bank denied that it had violated any law. Lawyers for the New York fund have argued that the banks that sold Worldcom securities to investors did not conduct appropriately thorough investigation into the company's financial condition before the securities sales. For example, Worldcom sold $12 billion in bonds in May 2001; just over a year later the company made the largest bankruptcy filing in history. The banks have said that they relied on financial statements vetted by Worldcom's auditor and were duped by an accounting fraud at the company that many experts missed. Bank of America is the second Worldcom bank to settle with the New York fund. Citigroup, Worldcom's lead banker, paid $2.65 billion to settle with the fund last May. Bank of America's settlement uses the same formula computed by Citigroup in its deal, even though Bank of America's securities unit was just one of many banks that helped to sell Worldcom's bonds to the public. The bank's desire to settle under the same terms agreed to by Worldcom's biggest supporter on Wall Street seems to indicate an eagerness by Bank of America to avoid a jury trial in the case..." (New York Times, March 3, 3005).
Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI)
1991
$200,000,000
For violating American banking laws, "part of a global investigation of fraud and money laundering." (Lockboxes, Iraqi Loot and a Trail to the Fed, By Timothy L. O'Brien, New York Times, June 6, 2004).
Banc One
2004
$50,000,000
$40,000,000
"Bank One agreed Tuesday to pay $90 million to resolve allegations over trading abuses in its mutual-fund unit, becoming the last of four firms originally implicated in the fund industry scandal to settle with state and federal regulators. The Chicago-based financial services giant said it would pay $50 million in investor restitution and fines to reconcile a case the Securities and Exchange Commission had brought. In addition, Mark Beeson, former CEO of One Group mutual funds, will pay $100,000 in civil penalties and is barred from the mutual fund industry for two years. He is also prohibited from serving as an officer and director of a mutual fund or investment advisor for three years, the SEC said. In a separate settlement with New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's office, Bank One agreed to reduce management fees over five years in a deal valued at $40 million. Bank One was one of the firms implicated last September in Spitzer's $40 million settlement with hedge fund Canary Capital Partners. According to the SEC, Bank One Investment Advisors Corp. allowed Ed Stern, head of Canary Capital, to engage in short-term trading of One Group funds..." (Bank One settles mutual fund probe, Agrees to $90 million in penalties over trading abuses, By Luisa Beltran, CBS.MarketWatch.com, June 29, 2004).
"In a settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Attorney General's Office, Bank One Investment Advisors, BOIA, the unit of Bank One that oversees One Group funds, agreed to pay a $40 million penalty and $10 million disgorgement in an administrative proceeding related to trading of One Group funds. In a separate settlement with the New York AG, Bank One Investment Advisors agreed to reduce management fees by at least $8 million per year over the next five years. BOIA neither admitted nor denied the findings in the SEC's report. Mark Beeson, the president and CEO of BOIA until October 2003, agreed to a $100,000 penalty and a three-year ban from the securities industry. One Group was one of four fund groups implicated in the ongoing mutual fund trading scandal revealed by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in September 2003. Prior to its merger with J.P. Morgan Chase on July 1, Bank One was the last of the four to settle." (Forbes Wall Street Fine Tracker).
Banker's Trust
199?
$60,000,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
BASF Aktiengesellschaft
199?
$225,000,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Bayer
2003
$250,000,000
"Pharmaceutical companies Bayer AG and GlaxoSmithKline have each agreed to pay Medicaid abuse settlements to resolve allegations they overcharged the government insurance program for the poor. Bayer will pay the government about $250 million and Glaxo will pay about $90 million for failing to give the Medicaid program the lowest price charged to any consumer, according to the agreement negotiated with the U.S. Attorney's office in Boston and Medicaid fraud investigators around the country... he Globe reported that Bayer is pleading guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act and paying a criminal fine of about $5 million for alleged overcharges involving its antibiotic Cipro and its high blood pressure drug Adalat, citing unnamed federal investigators and others familiar with the case. Glaxo, which was not accused of criminal wrongdoing, is paying a civil fine for overcharges involving its anti-depressant Paxil and nasal allergy spray Flonase. The investigation focused on allegations that the companies hid their lowest prices from Medicaid by repackaging or relabeling their drugs under a middleman's name. The middleman then sold the drug at a deep discount not reported to the government. By law, the companies are required to report all their prices and then pay Medicaid a rebate if they charge anyone less than the government... All 50 states will share the settlement money. A whistleblower who alerted federal officials will also receive a share." (AP, Drug Makers Settle Medicaid Overcharges, April 18, 2003.
"Some 20 lawsuits filed against two dozen pharmaceutical companies by citizens and states across the country have been consolidated into one case before a federal judge in Boston. The suit alleges that the companies inflated the prices the government paid for prescriptions for the elderly and disabled through the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The Boston investigation of Cipro unfolded at the same time that Bayer was selling 100 million Cipro tablets to the government to use in the wake of the anthrax bioterror scare in fall 2001. Prescriptions for the drug soared after the government said it was the best treatment for anthrax. Under a government threat to break Bayer's patent on the drug because of the national emergency, Bayer agreed to provide it at nearly half the usual government price." (Big Fines Seen in US Probe of 2 Drugmakers, By Alice Dembner, Boston Globe, April 16, 2003).
Bayer
2004
$66,000,000
"Germany's Bayer AG agreed to plead guilty and pay a $66 million fine as part of an ongoing U.S. investigation into price fixing of rubber chemicals, the Justice Department said on Wednesday. Bayer will plead guilty to one felony count under charges that it conspired to suppress competition for products sold between 1995 and 2001 and agreed to help the government in its ongoing probe, the department said. "The company charged today will provide valuable assistance in our continued investigation in the rubber chemicals industry," James Griffin, deputy assistant attorney general, said in a statement. The plea comes about four months after U.S. specialty chemicals maker Crompton Corp. agreed to plead guilty to price-fixing in the same market. The U.S. market for rubber chemicals is worth about $1 billion a year. The additives are used to improve the elasticity, strength and durability of rubber products, such as tires, outdoor furniture, hoses, belts, and footwear, the Justice Department said. Bayer took part in meetings and conversations in which companies agreed to raise and maintain prices of some rubber chemicals, and it exchanged information on the sale of rubber chemicals in the United States and elsewhere, the department said." (Bayer pays $66 million in price-fix case, Reuters, CNNMoney.com, July 14, 2004).
Price-Fixing Investigations Sweep Chemical Industry: "A two-year-old price-fixing probe that began in an obscure corner of the chemical industry has snowballed into a series of international investigations involving industry giants such as Dow Chemical Co, DuPont Co. and Bayer AG, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. The widening web of cases arose from aggressive use by prosecutors of amnesty grants for whistle-blowers, which has rivals competing to be first to report wrongdoing and avoid criminal penalties. U.S. and European investigators currently are looking into alleged conspiracies to fix prices in a half-dozen chemicals used in plastics, rubber and synthetic materials in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Japan. The commodities are used in industries from automobiles to furniture and flooring. At least four grand-jury investigations stemming from the investigations currently are under way in San Francisco. Among the latest markets under scrutiny are a widely used plastic, urethane, and a synthetic rubber known as neoprene, lawyers close to the case said. In pursuing the alleged conspiracies, U.S. and European prosecutors are showing that granting amnesty from criminal charges to the first company to blow the whistle on a conspiracy can be a potent weapon against cartels. Companies granted amnesty can escape huge fines and sometimes avoid jail time for executives.So far, the inquiry has resulted in one guilty plea and a $50 million fine for UniRoyal and its parent, Crompton Corp. of Middlebury, Conn., in the case that initially spurred the investigations. In a plea agreement announced in April, Crompton acknowledged conspiring with others to artificially boost prices of chemicals used to make rubber, a $1 billion annual market, between 1995 and 2001. It had been fingered for illegal conduct by a rival that had gone to the Justice Department." (Dow Jones Newswires, June 22, 2004).
Bayer
2004
$33,000,000
"Bayer AG's U.S. unit agreed to plead guilty and pay a $33 million fine for conspiring to fix prices of a chemical used to make plastic grocery bags, shoe soles and other consumer products.
The guilty plea by Bayer Corp. would be the first in a U.S. government investigation into price fixing for the chemical additive used in a variety of products, the Justice Department said in Washington. In July, Bayer AG, based in Germany, agreed to pay a $66 million fine to settle a U.S. charge it conspired to fix the price of chemicals used to make rubber products.
The latest scheme took place between 1998 and 2002 with another producer of aliphatic polyester polyols made from adipic acid, court papers said. The government didn't identify the other producer of the chemicals, which keep plastic bags from sticking and also are used to make automotive coatings, filters, belts, seals, gaskets, textiles, adhesives and sound-proofing material." (Bloomberg, Sept 30, 2004).
Bayer
Abbott Laboratories Johnson & Johnson
Menarini Diagnosticos
Pharmaceutica Quimica
2005
16 million Euros total
"Portugal's antitrust regulator said it had fined five major US and European drug companies a total of 16 mln eur for working together to artificially fix prices.
The five firms -- Abbott Laboratories and Johnson & Johnson of the United States, Germany's Bayer AG, Italy's Menarini Diagnosticos and Switzerland's Pharmaceutica Quimica -- formed a cartel during 36 bidding processes to supply 22 hospitals in Portugal, it said. The goal of the companies was to 'prevent, restrict or falsify in a significant way competition by fixing prices', the competition authority said in a statement.
Abbott Laboratories was hit with the largest fine, 6.8 mln eur, for 34 infractions while Johnson & Johnson, which cooperated with antitrust regulator in its investigation, received the smallest fine, it added. The firm will have to pay 360,000 eur for 36 infractions. The antitrust regulator opened its investigation after a public hospital in Coimbra, Portugal's third-largest city, complained that the five firms had all proposed the same price for the same drug." (AFX News Limited, Oct 14, 2005).
Bear Stearns
2002
$50,000,000
FOR MORE INFO SEE ENTRY: Citigroup - 2002 - $300,000,000
Bear Stearns
2003
$80,000,000
$1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled. "As part of the settlement, two former research analysts -- telecommunications expert Jack Grubman of Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Internet expert Henry Blodget of Merrill Lynch & Co. -- agreed to pay $15 million and $4 million, respectively, and be permanently barred from the securities industry. The $1.4 billion settlement amount is among the highest ever imposed by securities regulators, and Citigroup's $400 million share of that settlement is the highest ever imposed on an individual firm. It follows a nearly two-year investigation started by Spitzer and later joined by the SEC and other state attorneys general.... Adding to Citigroup's $400 million, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse First Boston will each contribute $200 million toward the global settlement. The other firms -- Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.; Goldman, Sachs & Co.; Lehman Brothers Inc.; J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.; Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.; UBS Warburg LLC; and U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray Inc. -- will pay between $125 million and $32.5 million. About $387 million will go toward a fund to benefit customers of the firms. Another $387 million will be paid to the states. In addition, the firms will pay some $433 million to fund independent research and $80 million to promote investor education. ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled, by Tamara Loomis, New York Law Journal, April 29, 2003). See also SEC Releases Brokerage Settlement Details. Associated Press, April 28, 2003.
"Six months after securities regulators and 10 of Wall Street's biggest banks signed a landmark $1.4 billion conflict-of-interest settlement, a federal judge approved the deal Friday, clearing the way for harmed investors to recoup $399 million... The SEC, industry self-regulatory groups and 25 other states eventually joined the investigation. Firms agreeing to settle included Merrill, Citigoup Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bear Sterns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Lehman Brothers, Piper Jaffray and UBS Warburg. Spitzer has gone on to lead regulatory probes into alleged trading abuses by mutual fund firms. In both the research and mutual fund cases, Spitzer seized on behavior long recognized by Wall Street but largely ignored by regulators. As part of the "global settlement," the firms were ordered to pay $894 million in penalties and disgorgement as well as $432.5 million to fund the purchase and distribution of independent research and $80 million to fund investor education programs." ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Approved: Federal Judge Accepts Conflict-of-Interest Deal. By Ben White, Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2003, p. E1).
The $1.4 billion settlement is divided so:
Citigroup/Salomon Smith Barney: $400,000,000
Credit Suisse First Boston: $200,000,000
Merrill Lynch: $200,000,000
Morgan Stanley: $125,000,000
Goldman Sachs Group: $110,000,000
Lehman Brothers Holdings: $80,000,000
J.P. Morgan Chase: $80,000,000
Bear Stearns: $80,000,000
UBS Warburg: $80,000,000
U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray: $32.500,000
Bear Wagner Specialists
2004
"Five New York Stock Exchange trading firms have agreed to pay $242 million to settle charges of violating federal securities laws and exchange rules, the NYSE and the Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday. The SEC, after a joint investigation with the Big Board, said the five firms -- Bear Wagner Specialists, Fleet Specialist Inc., LaBranche & Co., Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Specialists and Van der Moolen Specialists USA -- violated securities laws and exchange rules by executing orders for their accounts ahead of orders for the public between 1999 and 2003. The firms -- known as market "specialists" for their roles bringing together buyers and sellers at the exchange -- violated their basic obligation to match orders from the public with other similar orders, and not to fill the orders via trades from their own accounts, the SEC and NYSE said. The firms agreed to the settlement without admitting or denying the allegations, the SEC said, adding that the investigation will continue, possibly targeting individuals... Under the agreement, $87.7 million of the settlement may be distributed to customers hurt by the firms' actions, according the SEC. The rest of the fines will go to the SEC and NYSE..." (NYSE firms pay $242M in trading case. The SEC says five trading firms agree to settle allegations of improper trading activities. CNN/Money, March 30, 2004).
Beaulieu of America Inc
1998
$1,000,000
Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity. (PoliticalMoneyLine website)
Beverly Enterprises
2000
$175,000,000
"Beverly Enterprises, the nation's largest nursing home chain, will pay $175 million to resolve civil and criminal charges that it defrauded Medicare. Beverly agreed to plead guilty to mail fraud and false statement charges filed in federal court in San Francisco. In addition to the $175 million in payments, the company agreed to divest itself of 10 nursing homes. The $175 million represents the largest settlement ever in a nursing home case... Federal officials alleged that the Ft. Smith, Arkansas based company in 1992 began to charge Medicare improperly for the salaries of nurses caring for non-Medicare patients at 10 homes owned by Beverly-Enterprises-California and other Beverly facilities. Instead of recording the true time spent on Medicare patients, Beverly-California fabricated nursing cost figures based on set formulas designed to maximize profits while avoiding detection by Medicare auditors. The phony cost figures were backed by false documents, such as phony nurse sign-in sheets, that appeared to support Beverly's claims for payment. "By its conduct, Beverly victimized not only the Medicare program, but American taxpayers whose dollars fund government health care programs," says U.S. Attorney Robert Mueller III... While the company acknowledges that "errors were made by individual employees" in the submission of 10 cost reports to Medicare, it says that the 10 cost reports represent .8 percent of the 1,370 Medicare cost reports filed by Beverly subsidiaries in 1996 and 1997 and .2 percent of the 4,680 cost reports filed by Beverly subsidiaries for the period investigated by the government." (Multinational Monitor, March 2000)
Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Illinois
199?
$4,000,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Blue Shield of California
199?
$1,500,000
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm1999/99july-aug/crime1.html
Boeing
1998
$10,000,000
In 1998, Boeing was fined $10 million because it shared sensitive technologies without an export license with its Russian, Ukrainian, Norwegian and German partners in the Sea Launch space rocket joint venture. (Seattle Times, April 8, 2006).
Boeing
2001
$4,300,000
In 2001, Boeing was fined $4.3 million for technology transfer without an export license to Australia, Malaysia, Turkey and Singapore on its Wedgetail 737 Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft program. (Seattle Times, April 8, 2006).
Boeing
2001, 2000, 1999
$100,000,000 plus
More than $100 million government-related fines and settlements levied against Boeing in the past three years by the U.S. Departments of Justice, State, Defense and the Federal Trade and Securities Exchange commissions, for bribery, kickbacks, fraud, and military contract and export law violations. (SeattleWeekly)
Boeing
2003
$32,000,000
In 2003, Loral and Hughes Space and Communication were fined $32 million for illegal export of satellite technology to China. By then that Hughes division had been acquired by Boeing, though the violations happened before the acquisition. (Seattle Times, April 8, 2006).
Boeing
2004
up to $72,500,000
"Boeing has agreed to pay from $40.6 million to $72.5 million to settle a gender-discrimination lawsuit covering as many as 29,000 current and former female employees. U.S. District Court Judge Marsha Pechman approved the settlement this morning, ending more than four years of litigation. The lawsuit, which excluded executives and engineers, covers women who worked for Boeing's Puget Sound facilities after Feb. 25, 1997... [P]laintiffs... will receive at least $500 and possibly more depending on their salaries and length of employment. The class-action suit, filed in 2000, claimed that women employees at nearly all levels were denied equal pay and other job opportunities. Boeing has denied wrongdoing, but also has agreed to change its salary and performance review practices. .. " (Boeing to pay female workers up to $72.5 million in settlement, By Shirleen Holt, Seattle Times, July 16, 2004).
Boeing
2006
$15,000,000
[L]argest fine ever levied on a company for violation of the Arms Export Control Act, settling a dispute with the State Department over the unlicensed foreign sales of commercial airplanes carrying a small gyrochip with military applications. In addition to a $15 million fine, a consent decree signed March 28 imposes oversight requirements on Boeing because three previous settlements of similar alleged violations didn't result in full compliance with export controls...
The maximum fine was $43 million...
According to the State Department charges, between 2000 and 2003 Boeing shipped overseas 94 commercial jets with the QRS-11 gyrochip embedded in the flight boxes, including 19 to China. Export of listed defense items to China is specifically proscribed. The State Department had determined in 1993 that the chip, used in the guidance system of the Maverick missile, "has significant military utility." That put the devices on a list of products that require a license for foreign sales.
Boeing continued the exports even after the State Department told the company to stop. Boeing ignored those orders after its lawyers advised that the State Department "did not have jurisdiction" to regulate the exports. The dispute between Boeing and the State Department reached a head in the fall of 2003, when two 737 jets were released to China only after President Bush signed a last-minute waiver after a request from then-Chief Executive Phil Condit.
That produced a political settlement the following January in line with Boeing's view of the issue: QRS-11 chips remained on the list of military items but were reclassified as commercial items when integrated into commercial-jet flight boxes.
After that, export of the chips inside Boeing commercial jets was no longer an issue. The case remained alive because of Boeing's previous "blatant disregard" of the State Department. In addition to unauthorized export, State charged Boeing with misrepresentation of facts and false statements.
Boeing has violated arms-export-control rules on three previous occasions.
In 1998, Boeing was fined $10 million because it shared sensitive technologies without an export license with its Russian, Ukrainian, Norwegian and German partners in the Sea Launch space rocket joint venture.
In 2001, Boeing was fined $4.3 million for technology transfer without an export license to Australia, Malaysia, Turkey and Singapore on its Wedgetail 737 Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft program.
In 2003, Loral and Hughes Space and Communication were fined $32 million for illegal export of satellite technology to China. By then that Hughes division had been acquired by Boeing, though the violations happened before the acquisition.
In the March consent decree, the State Department points out that more than $9 million of those previous fines were returned to Boeing to fund remedial compliance measures that would avoid future violations.
Because that didn't work, the new settlement requires Boeing to appoint an independent external officer to oversee companywide export-control compliance for two years, as well as a senior manager internally. And it must retain an outside firm to audit implementation. (Seattle Times, April 8, 2006).
Boeing
2006
$615,000,000
Boeing has agreed to pay $615 million to settle the federal investigations into contracting scandals at the company, The Wall Street Journal reported online Sunday night.
Details in The Journal story were confirmed to The Seattle Times by a person familiar with the proposed settlement. A Boeing spokesperson declined to comment.
Boeing will pay what The Journal termed "the largest financial penalty ever imposed on a military contractor for weapons-program improprieties," but it will not face criminal charges or make any admission of wrongdoing.
The deal would bring to a close government investigations the company has faced on two fronts.
One involves contracts tainted by the illegal recruitment of Air Force procurement official Darleen Druyun, which led to the 2003 firing of both Druyun and Boeing Chief Financial Officer Michael Sears and the resignation of CEO Phil Condit. Druyun and Sears served prison time.
The other scandal involved Lockheed Martin documents improperly acquired by Boeing when the companies were competing for government rocket launches in the late 1990s.
In the pending settlement, The Journal said, prosecutors have agreed not to move against Boeing or executives as long as the company and senior management don't break the law in the next two years.
The agreement doesn't cover certain midlevel employees of Boeing's rocket-making unit.
The Journal story said Boeing and the Justice Department have agreed on major points of the settlement, though the details have not been formally approved yet.
Boeing, The Journal said, will acknowledge improper behavior by a few employees but won't acknowledge that prosecutors have evidence to justify seeking felony charges against the company. And the final agreement will not use the phrase "criminal penalty," but rather "monetary penalty."
Aside from ending a set of investigations that loomed over Boeing's federal contracting efforts, the settlement will make it more difficult for Lockheed to pursue its separate civil claims against Boeing.
Any admission of wrongdoing on Boeing's part would have benefited Lockheed's case, which is pending. And the federal settlement means the government won't be filing any more documents that could be useful to Lockheed's case. (Seattle Times, May 15, 2006).
Boise Cascade
2002 March
$4,350,000
Agreed to pay $4.35 million in civil penalties and spend $18 million to cut emissions from plywood and particle board plants.
Borden
199?
$4,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Bridgestone-Firestone
2004
$149,000,000
"A Texas state court judge Monday approved a $149 million settlement of 30 class-action lawsuits filed on behalf of tire owners against Bridgestone-Firestone North American Tire. The settlement, approved by State District Judge Donald Floyd, comes more than three years after the 2000 recall of 14.4 million Firestone tires amid safety concerns. More than 100 objectors had contested the settlement. The lawsuits resolved as part of the settlement include those filed by Firestone ATX, ATX II and Wilderness AT customers whose tires were among those investigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2000. The settlement calls for Firestone to pay an estimated $70 million to replace tires, $41 million to manufacture certain tires with materials that provide better high speed capacity, $15.5 million on a consumer education and awareness campaign and $19 million for attorneys fees. The company also has paid $3.5 million to notify class members of the settlement plan... The 45 named plaintiffs each could receive up to $2,500. Those who are not named but owned one of 22 brands of Bridgestone/Firestone tires between 1991 and 2001 qualify to have their tires replaced. The settlement could affect an estimated 15 million drivers and involve about 60 million tires..." ($149M Firestone Settlement OK'd, AP, CBSNews.com, March 15, 2004).
Bristol-Myers Squibb
199?
$3,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Bristol-Myers Squibb
2004
$300,000,000
Bristol-Myers Squibb has reached a $300 million settlement on a shareholder class-action lawsuit over accounting matters and its relationship with ImClone Systems, the company said Friday. Bristol-Myers, which admitted no wrongdoing in the case filed in U.S. District Court in New York, said it would make the payment out of reserves it already has set aside. "The proposed settlement does not resolve the pending governmental investigations and other private litigation related to wholesaler inventory issues and other accounting matters," the company said in a written statement. An increase in reserves for litigation by $320 million was disclosed earlier, the company said. Bristol-Myers is helping ImClone market its anti-cancer drug Erbitux in the United States. ImClone has been the target of federal investigations and was the stock at the center of the insider-trading scandal that ensnared Martha Stewart..." (CBS.MarketWatch.com, July 30, 2004).
Bristol-Myers Squibb
2004
$150,000,000
"Pharmaceuticals giant Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. today agreed to pay $150 million to settle government fraud charges for inflating revenues and earnings through an industry practice called "channel stuffing." The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the settlement — one of the largest ever for financial fraud — after probing the company's aggressive tactics to pump up sales figures by $1.5 billion in 2000 and 2001 to meet revenue and earnings forecasts. The scheme involved selling its wholesalers additional amounts of products before they were needed — a practice called "channel stuffing' — so New York-based Bristol-Myers could meet internal sales and earnings targets it had presented to investors. When earnings still fell below expectations, the government said the company improperly tapped into financial reserves to boost income." (Los Angeles Times, Aug 4, 2004).
"For several years, Bristol-Myers paid wholesalers to stockpile goods, which the company booked as legitimate sales. The practice is called channel stuffing.
The result of the deception, which went on from at least 1999 to 2002, was that Bristol's bottom line looked good. Investors got a rosy picture. But it could only continue for so long. There was a limit to how much wholesalers could store.
Ultimately, Bristol came clean and restated its earnings in 2002 and 2003, admitting it had inflated revenues by about $2.5 billion and profits by about $900 million during the period in question.
The end of that chapter in Bristol's 118-year history apparently is in sight, with an agreement being negotiated between Bristol-Myers, which is based in New York, and the United States attorney in Newark, Christopher J. Christie. Mr. Christie's office has been investigating Bristol-Myers for several years and is said to be close to a deferred prosecution agreement that will allow Bristol to pay about $300 million in fines..." (New York Times, June 7, 2005).
Browning-Ferris
199?
$1,500,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
2002
$2,200,000
Settlement with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. "The government had sued, saying the railroad tested, or sought to test, 36 of its employees, using blood samples, without their knowledge or consent. According to testimony, the company performed the tests in the hopes of claiming that the workers' arm injuries stemmed from a rare genetic condition instead of from work-related stress on muscles and nerves. The railroad denied that it violated the law, but agreed not to use genetic tests in future medical examinations." (New York Times, October 10, 2005).
C.R. Bard
199?
$30,900,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
2003
$80,000,000
"Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce will pay $80 million to settle charges it helped Enron Corp. in the fallen energy trader's massive accounting fraud, U.S. regulators said on Monday. The Securities and Exchange Commission also said it sued three current or former CIBC executives in the case. Two of them have settled and will pay a total of more than $600,000, the SEC said as it moved its wide-ranging Enron probe forward. The SEC said it charged CIBC, a major Canadian financial concern, and the three executives with "having helped Enron to mislead its investors through a series of complex structured finance transactions over a period of several years."... In a separate action, Canada's bank regulator and the U.S. Federal Reserve said they jointly settled with CIBC over Enron dealings... The $80 million payment to the SEC will consist of $37.5 million in repayment of ill-gotten gains, a $37.5 million penalty and $5 million in interest, the SEC said. Hunkin said CIBC's settlement agreement also resolved an investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. "The department has agreed not to prosecute CIBC with respect to certain transactions involving CIBC and Enron," CIBC said. In return, CIBC said, it agreed to continue cooperating with the Justice Department, to exit certain business activities and to adopt new policies and procedures. In July, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. agreed to pay more than $300 million combined to settle charges related to Enron. Merrill Lynch & Co. settled with the SEC in March for $80 million in an Enron case...." (Bank to pay $80 million on Enron: Settles charges it helped in fraud. By Kevin Drawbaugh, Reuters, Chicago Tribune, Dec 23, 2003).
Canary Capital Partners
2003
$40,000,000
Canary Capital Partners. The investigation into Canary concluded Wednesday morning with the firm, run by Edward J. Stern, has agreed to fork over $40 million related to illegal mutual fund trades. The trading tactics used by Stern guided the fund to market-beating returns from mid-1998 to the end of 2002. According to the complaint, Stern used prohibited "market timing" and "late trading" tactics to game certain mutual funds. But what comes as a surprise is the extent to which the evidence points to complicity by the asset managers and trade processors on the inner workings of each mutual fund. (Eliot Spitzer Finds His Canary, by Ari Weinberg, Forbes Magazine, Sept 3, 2003).
Cargill
2004
$24,000,000
"Cargill Inc., the largest private U.S. company, said Thursday it agreed to pay $24 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that sought billions of dollars and accused the company of fixing prices of a common food sweetener. The Minneapolis-based agribusiness conglomerate still denies the claims made in the lawsuit, filed in 1995 by 18 companies that manufacture soft drinks, canned good, baked goods and dairy products. "We agreed to settle only after assessing the costs of further litigation," Cargill said in a statement. "We did not engage in any illegal activity." That leaves co-defendants Archer Daniels Midland Co. and A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co., a unit of Britain-based Tate & Lyle Plc, to face a trial set to start in September on claims they fixed prices for high-fructose corn syrup. The lead attorney for the plaintiffs had said he would seek damages of $1.4 billion, an amount that could be tripled to $4.2 billion under federal antitrust laws for an alleged conspiracy that the plaintiffs say began in the late 1980s and ended in mid-1995. ADM and Staley officials were not immediately available for comment." (Cargill to settle suit for $24 million. ADM and Staley still facing $1.4B lawsuit charging they conspired to fix sweetener prices. Reuters, CNNMoney.com, March 11, 2004).
Case Corporation
199?
$1,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Cerestar Bioproducts
Hoffmann-La Roche
Jungbunzlauer
Haarmann & Reimer
Archer Daniels Midland
2001
$120,500,000 total
"The European Commission fined Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Archer Daniels Midland Co (ADM), Jungbunzlauer AG, Haarmann & Reimer Corp and Cerestar Bioproducts B.V. a total of $120.5 million for participating in a price-fixing and market-sharing cartel in citric acid." (Corporate Crime Reporter, Dec 5, 2001).
Chevron
199?
$6,500,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
ChoicePoint
2005
$15,000,000
"The Federal Trade Commission announced yesterday that it had reached a $15 million settlement with ChoicePoint Inc., the commercial data broker that disclosed last February that thieves had duped the company into turning over private data on more than 145,000 people. That revelation touched off a year of national debate over data privacy and security and generated a raft of tough new state laws on data security as well as several bills in Congress. The settlement includes $10 million in fines — the largest civil penalty ever imposed by the agency — as well as $5 million in consumer compensation, stemming from accusations that its handling of consumer data and its inadequate security procedures amounted to violations of consumer privacy rights and federal law. The company, based in Alpharetta, Ga., will also be required to overhaul its security program — something already well under way, the company said yesterday — and submit to independent audits of its procedures every two years for the next 20 years. The settlement does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing." (New York Times, Jan 27, 2006)
Citigroup / Salomon Smith Barney
2003
$400,000,000
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that J.P. Morgan Chase and Citigroup had agreed to pay a total of $255 million to settle S.E.C. allegations that they helped Enron, the collapsed energy-trading company, to fraudulently mislead investors on its financial condition. In addition, the two banking companies agreed to pay a total of $50 million to New York State and New York City to settle a similar allegations about their dealings with Enron, the Manhattan district attorney's office announced this afternoon. Without admitting or denying the commission's allegations, J.P. Morgan Chase agreed to pay $135 million and and Citigroup $120 million. The settlement also resolves the commission's charges stemming from the assistance that Citigroup provided to Dynegy, another energy-trading company, to manipulate its financial statements. "These two cases serve as yet another reminder that you can't turn a blind eye to the consequences of your actions - if you know or have reason to know that you are helping a company mislead its investors, you are in violation of the federal securities laws," Stephen M. Cutler, the director of the S.E.C.'s enforcement division, said in a statement. The S.E.C. said $236 million of the money would go to Enron investors who experienced losses because of the fraudulent finances, while $19 million would go to Dynegy investors. The Securities and Exchange Commission accused J.P. Morgan Chase and Citigroup of helping their clients to set up complex financial transactions to cover up what were in essence loans. These financial transactions, the S.E.C. said, enabled Enron and Dynegy to inflate reported cash flow from their operating activities, underreport cash flow from financing activities, and underreport debt. As a result, the S.E.C. said, Enron and Dynegy presented false and misleading pictures of their financial health and results of operations. The commission asserted that both financial institutions knew that Enron was engaging in these transactions specifically to allay concerns among investors, Wall Street analysts and credit-rating agencies about its cash flow from operating activities and outstanding debt. It also asserted that Citigroup knew that Dynegy had similar motives for its structured finance transaction. Under the agreement with the Manhattan district attorney's office, J.P. Morgan Chase and Citigroup will each pay $12.5 million to New York State and $12.5 million to New York City, as well as the costs of the investigation. As a result of these settlements, the Manhattan district attorney's office said it would not prosecute J.P. Morgan Chase or Citigroup or their employees for their involvement with Enron's financial transactions." (J.P. Morgan and Citigroup Settle Inquiries on Enron's Fraud, By Jack Lynch, New York Times, July 28, 2003).
"Six months after securities regulators and 10 of Wall Street's biggest banks signed a landmark $1.4 billion conflict-of-interest settlement, a federal judge approved the deal Friday, clearing the way for harmed investors to recoup $399 million... The SEC, industry self-regulatory groups and 25 other states eventually joined the investigation. Firms agreeing to settle included Merrill, Citigoup Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bear Sterns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Lehman Brothers, Piper Jaffray and UBS Warburg. Spitzer has gone on to lead regulatory probes into alleged trading abuses by mutual fund firms. In both the research and mutual fund cases, Spitzer seized on behavior long recognized by Wall Street but largely ignored by regulators. As part of the "global settlement," the firms were ordered to pay $894 million in penalties and disgorgement as well as $432.5 million to fund the purchase and distribution of independent research and $80 million to fund investor education programs." ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Approved: Federal Judge Accepts Conflict-of-Interest Deal. By Ben White, Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2003, p. E1).
The $1.4 billion settlement is divided so:
Citigroup/Salomon Smith Barney: $400,000,000
Credit Suisse First Boston: $200,000,000
Merrill Lynch: $200,000,000
Morgan Stanley: $125,000,000
Goldman Sachs Group: $110,000,000
Lehman Brothers Holdings: $80,000,000
J.P. Morgan Chase: $80,000,000
Bear Stearns: $80,000,000
UBS Warburg: $80,000,000
U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray: $32.500,000
Citigroup
2002
$300,000,000
"The nation's top brokerages agreed Friday to pay nearly $1.43 billion to resolve charges they gave biased ratings on stocks to help win investment banking business. It was one of the largest penalties ever levied by securities regulators. The settlement calls for 10 firms, including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse First Boston, to pay heavy fines, sever the links between research and investment banking, and fund independent stock research for investors that would complement their own analysts' work. In agreeing to the fines, the firms would neither admit nor deny charges that they had misled investors, even though authorities uncovered e-mails in which analysts privately derided stocks they were touting to the public. Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney brokerage unit will pay the heaviest fine: $300 million. But Citigroup CEO Sanford Weill won a guarantee he would not be prosecuted. Credit Suisse will pay $150 million. Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, Deutsche Bank and UBS Paine Webber will each pay $50 million, according to a joint statement by regulators. In May, Merrill Lynch, the nation's largest brokerage firm, agreed to a settlement that included a $100 million fine and the separation of its analysts from investment banking. In addition to the $900 million in fines, the 10 firms also will pay $450 million over five years to pay for independent research for investors and $85 million for a nationwide investor education program. The amounts were based on evidence collected against the firms, officials said." (Michael Gormley, Brokerages Settle Conflict Allegations, Associated Press, Dec 20, 2002).
"Under terms of the settlement with state and federal regulators, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse First Boston and eight other brokerages agreed in principle to strengthen separation of research analysts and bankers working on underwriting deals, pay $900 million in fines and restitution, $450 million to fund independent research and $85 million for investor education.... Separately, Jack Grubman, the former telecommunications analyst for Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney, agreed to a $15 million fine and a lifetime ban from the securities industry. As part of the broad settlement, stock analysts like Grubman will be shut out of investment road shows and deal pitches, or meetings where brokers recommend deals to potential clients. So-called spinning, directing shares of lucrative initial public offerings to favored clients, will also be banned. "This agreement will permanently change the way Wall Street operates," said New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who led regulators in the settlement talks along with officials from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the stock exchanges and securities regulators from other states. But some who wished for more draconian measures against the brokerages will be disappointed by the terms of the settlement and the amount that the brokerages will have to pay. Citigroup, for example, averaged about $65 million in profit each business day in the third quarter, meaning one good week would cover its entire payment. Under the settlement, about half of the $900 million will go to the states, while half will go to the SEC. The commission is working on setting up a restitution fund for investors, said sources familiar with the matter." (Kevin Drawbaugh and Brian Kelleher, Brokerages to Pay $1.4 Bln in Settlement, Reuters, Dec 20, 2002).
Citigroup
2002
$215,000,000
Citigroup paid $215 million to resolve U.S. Federal Trade Commission charges that its subsidiary The Associates engaged in systematic and widespread deceptive and abusive lending practices (Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman, 10 Worst Corporations of 2002 http://www.multinationalmonitor.org )
Citigroup
2003
$1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled. "As part of the settlement, two former research analysts -- telecommunications expert Jack Grubman of Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Internet expert Henry Blodget of Merrill Lynch & Co. -- agreed to pay $15 million and $4 million, respectively, and be permanently barred from the securities industry. The $1.4 billion settlement amount is among the highest ever imposed by securities regulators, and Citigroup's $400 million share of that settlement is the highest ever imposed on an individual firm. It follows a nearly two-year investigation started by Spitzer and later joined by the SEC and other state attorneys general.... Adding to Citigroup's $400 million, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse First Boston will each contribute $200 million toward the global settlement. The other firms -- Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.; Goldman, Sachs & Co.; Lehman Brothers Inc.; J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.; Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.; UBS Warburg LLC; and U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray Inc. -- will pay between $125 million and $32.5 million. About $387 million will go toward a fund to benefit customers of the firms. Another $387 million will be paid to the states. In addition, the firms will pay some $433 million to fund independent research and $80 million to promote investor education. ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled, by Tamara Loomis, New York Law Journal, April 29, 2003). See also SEC Releases Brokerage Settlement Details. Associated Press, April 28, 2003.
Citigroup
2004
$70,000,000
"Citigroup Inc. announced today that it had reached a settlement in an investigation of its lending practices and that it was selling its holdings in a Saudi bank. Citigroup, the world's biggest financial services company, announced in London that it intends to sell its remaining 20 percent stake in Samba Financial Group, ending a presence in Saudi Arabia that began in 1955. In Washington, the Federal Reserve said that Citigroup has agreed to pay $70 million to settle accusations that its CitiFinancial Credit Company subsidiary had violated federal fair lending laws and attempted to mislead bank examiners. In a three-paragraph statement, the Federal Reserve said CitiFinancial was required to pay restitution to some subprime and home mortgage borrowers... Citigroup said the civil money penalty and restitution amounts would have "no material" impact on the second quarter earnings of its consumer group. The sale of Citigroup's remaining 20 percent stake in Samba to the Saudi government's Public Investment Fund will have a positive effect on earnings, the company said. In a statement, the bank said that as a result of the sale, it will realize an after-tax gain of $760 million, or 15 cents a share, in the second quarter. The sale of Citigroup's remaining 20 percent stake in Samba, formerly known as Saudi American Bank, comes as no surprise. Citibank first established a branch in Saudi Arabia in 1955 when it opened a bank in the Red Sea port of Jeddah. In 1966, it opened a branch in Riyadh, the capital. It operated autonomously in the country until 1980... At that point, Saudi law changed, and required that foreign banks sell 60 percent of the business to Saudi nationals. At that point, the name of the bank was changed to Saudi American Bank. Citi held a 40 percent stake in Samba until the early 1990's, when it sold off an additional 10 percent to Saudi nationals. That percentage held until 1999, when Samba acquired two local Saudi banks, diluting Citi's holding to 22.8 percent. In October 2002, Citigroup sold off 2.8 percent of its remaining share. Even though it was a minority shareholder, Citigroup maintained managerial control of Samba until last October, when its management contract lapsed. Last month, a Citigroup spokeswoman said Citigroup was considering seeking a charter for a new bank in Saudi Arabia. Despite the end of its direct ties in Saudi Arabia, Citigroup continues to have widespread relationships with the country and its citizens. The company's biggest individual shareholder, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, is a Saudi... " (Citigroup Agrees to Pay $70 Million to Settle Lending Inquiry, By Kenneth N. Gilpin, New York Times, May 27, 2004).
Citigroup
2004
$10,900,000
"U.S. prosecutors on Thursday said Citigroup Inc. and UnitedHealth Group Inc. agreed to pay $20.6 million to settle charges they overbilled the government for reimbursements on Medicare expenses. At issue were charges that Citigroup's (C: Research, Estimates) Travelers Insurance Co. and UnitedHealth's (UNH: Research, Estimates) United Healthcare Insurance Co. submitted false figures to the government during a 12-year period, overcharging the Medicare program for reimbursements such as processing claims by physicians. Under the settlement, Travelers will pay $10.9 million and United Healthcare will pay $9.7 million. Neither company admitted to any of the charges as part of the settlement." (Reuters/CNNMoney.com, Aug 12, 2004).
Citigroup
2004
$2,650,000,000
"Bank of America has agreed to pay $460.5 million to settle with investors who bought Worldcom's stock and bonds before the telecommunications giant filed for bankruptcy in 2002. The settlement was struck between Bank of America and Alan G. Hevesi, the comptroller of New York state and trustee of the states' Common Retirement Fund. Mr. Hevesi is the lead plaintiff in the case and represents investors who lost billions when Worldcom collapsed. The bank said in a statement that it was in the best interests of its shareholders to put the litigation behind it. In settling, the bank denied that it had violated any law. Lawyers for the New York fund have argued that the banks that sold Worldcom securities to investors did not conduct appropriately thorough investigation into the company's financial condition before the securities sales. For example, Worldcom sold $12 billion in bonds in May 2001; just over a year later the company made the largest bankruptcy filing in history. The banks have said that they relied on financial statements vetted by Worldcom's auditor and were duped by an accounting fraud at the company that many experts missed. Bank of America is the second Worldcom bank to settle with the New York fund. Citigroup, Worldcom's lead banker, paid $2.65 billion to settle with the fund last May. Bank of America's settlement uses the same formula computed by Citigroup in its deal, even though Bank of America's securities unit was just one of many banks that helped to sell Worldcom's bonds to the public. The bank's desire to settle under the same terms agreed to by Worldcom's biggest supporter on Wall Street seems to indicate an eagerness by Bank of America to avoid a jury trial in the case..." (New York Times, March 3, 3005).
Citigroup
2005
$20,000,000
"Citigroup will pay a civil fine of $20 million and Putnam Investments will pay $40 million to resolve federal regulators' accusations that they kept from customers the fact that brokers had been paid to recommend certain mutual funds, creating a conflict of interest.
The settlements were announced by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Citigroup and Putnam, a unit of the Marsh & McLennan Companies, neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing as part of the agreements. The S.E.C. also accused Citigroup of selling a type of mutual fund shares known as Class B shares to certain large-scale customers who could have earned a higher return from another type of shares.
In a related move, NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing organization, disclosed that Citigroup, American Express Financial Advisers and J. P. Morgan Chase & Company had agreed to pay a total of $21.25 million for reported violations in sales of mutual funds." (AP / New York Times, March 24, 2005).
Citigroup
2005
some portion of $21,250,000
"... NASD, the brokerage industry's self-policing organization, disclosed that Citigroup, American Express Financial Advisers and J. P. Morgan Chase & Company had agreed to pay a total of $21.25 million for reported violations in sales of mutual funds." (AP / New York Times, March 24, 2005).
Citigroup
2005
$2,000,000,000
Citigroup Inc., the world's largest financial services company, on Friday said it will pay $2 billion to Enron Corp. investors who accused it of helping engineer a massive accounting fraud at the energy trader. The class-action settlement is one of the largest in corporate history, though it is less than the $2.58 billion that Citigroup agreed to pay WorldCom Inc. investors in 2004. The settlement may put pressure on a series of other major banks to settle with Enron investors... Other financial institutions facing claims for their role in Enron's December 2001 collapse include JP Morgan Chase and Co., Barclays Plc, Credit Suisse First Boston, Merrill Lynch, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Toronto Dominion Bank, Royal Bank of Canada, Deutsche Bank AG and the Royal Bank of Scotland... Two other banks previously reached settlements with Enron investors. Lehman Brothers agreed to a $222.5 million settlement, while Bank of America agreed to pay $69 million... (Reuters / New York Times, June 10, 2005).
Citigroup
2005
$25,000,000
Citigroup Inc., the world's biggest bank, will pay 13.9 million pounds ($25 million) to settle an investigation by the U.K. securities regulator into a series of European government bond trades that roiled markets last year. The bank must forfeit the 9.96 million pounds in profit made from the Aug. 2 bond trades and pay a 4 million-pound penalty.. Citigroup has apologized for the August trades, when it bought European government bond futures on the Eurex AG derivatives exchange before flooding the MTS SpA electronic-trading platform and other cash markets with 12.9 billion euros ($15.6 billion) of bonds within seconds. The bank then bought some back for a profit... Chief Executive Officer Charles Prince pledged last October to restore Citigroup's reputation after the bond scandal, the forced closure of the company's private bank in Japan and allegations Citigroup helped businesses to defraud investors. The bank said June 10 it would pay investors $2 billion in the largest settlement of a lawsuit against Enron Corp. investment bankers... (Bloomberg, June 28, 2005).
Coca-Cola
2001
$192,500,000
"Agreed to pay $192.5 million to resolve a federal [race discrimination] lawsuit filed in April 1999 by African-American employees... The settlement requires Coca-Cola to pay the class $58.7 million in compensatory damages, $24.1 million in back pay, $10 million for promotional bonuses and $43.5 in pay equity adjustments, as well as make sweeping programmatic reforms costing another $36 million. http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2001/01december/dec01corp1.html
Colonial Pipeline
199?
$7,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
ConAgra
199?
$4,400,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Conseco
2004
$15,000,000
"Two insurance companies will pay $20 million in a settlement that ends an investigation into charges that the companies allowed improper trading of annuities... Conseco and its successor in the variable annuities business, Inviva, agreed to the settlement with New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Regulators accused the companies of allowing some favored investors to engage in rapid trading of mutual funds linked to variable annuity products... The SEC called the settlement the first enforcement action charging insurance companies with securities fraud for allowing market time of mutual funds. The insurance companies misled investors by saying the annuities were "not designed for professional market timing organizations," according to the firms' prospectuses. But the companies marketed and sold the annuities to professional market timers anyway, according to the SEC... Conseco was accused of allowing certain hedge fund managers to do rapid, short-term trading of its mutual fund sub-accounts from 2000 through April 2003. Inviva, which bought Conseco's variable annuities business in 2002, was accused of continuing the preferential treatment for a year... Conseco will pay $15 million in restitution and Inviva will pay $5 million. Inviva will also hire a monitor to make sure the firm is complying with reforms to prevent market timing of trades of variable annuities, which provide annuities payments, a death benefit and the option to invest in the stock market through separate mutual fund accounts."
Consolidated Edison
199?
$2,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Consolidated Rail (Conrail)
199?
$2,500,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Copley Pharmaceutical
199?
$10,650,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Coral Energy Resources LP
2004
$30,000,000
"Coral Energy Resources LP, Shell's Houston-based energy trader, will pay $30 million to settle charges by federal regulators that it submitted false gas price data to index publishers in an attempt to manipulate markets." (Bloomberg, July 29, 2004).
Cosco & Safety 1st
2001
$1,750,000
Penalty for not reporting product defects. (AP / MSNBC.com, March 21, 2005).
Costain Coal
199?
$3,750,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Credit Suisse
2002
$150,000,000
FOR MORE INFO SEE ENTRY: Citigroup - 2002 - $300,000,000
Credit Suisse Group
2001
$100,000,000
"Few Wall Street players profited more from the technology-stock bubble than Credit Suisse First Boston. During the height of the boom, in 1999 and 2000, the powerful securities unit of Zurich's Credit Suisse Group reaped more than $700 million in fees for helping bring tech upstarts public -- far more than any rival. Now the big securities firm is paying the price. CSFB has agreed to pay $100 million to resolve a federal investigation into alleged abuses in its distribution of shares of initial public offerings of stock, according to people familiar with the matter. The proposed settlement marks the biggest regulatory crackdown on the excesses of the dot-com stock boom of the 1990s. And it foreshadows the issuance of new rules that could help level the playing field for small investors. The pact grows out of an 18-month probe of whether CSFB gave favored investors larger shares of IPO stocks. In exchange, these clients allegedly kicked back part of their quick profits on IPOs to CSFB, in the form of inflated commissions on other stock trades... Wall Street firms, including CSFB, face more than 1,000 lawsuits seeking class-action status, brought on behalf of investors in 263 companies that went public during the boom. The suits typically allege that the firms manipulated IPO shares in deals benefiting preferred investors. The potential tab in these cases could be steepest for CSFB, the leader in the tech-securities business. CSFB and the other Wall Street firms have denied the allegations in the suits... That prong of the probe, which is at an earlier stage, focuses on Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and the Robertson Stephens unit of FleetBoston Financial Corp... The settlement is large but won't crush CSFB. The $100 million compares to $717.5 million the firm earned in fees for underwriting tech IPOs in 1999 and 2000, according to Thomson Financial. As part of the settlement, CSFB is expected to avoid civil securities-fraud charges. Instead, regulators are likely to allege that CSFB committed other violations of securities laws, including a prohibition against Wall Street firms sharing in the IPO profits of its customers. Unlike some other major regulatory cases, none of the $100 million -- which includes civil fines and disgorgement of profits -- will go toward a fund for aggrieved investors. Rather, it will go into the U.S. Treasury and the NASD's coffers..." (Wall Street Journal, Dec 11, 2001).
Credit Suisse First Boston
2003
$200,000,000
$1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled. "As part of the settlement, two former research analysts -- telecommunications expert Jack Grubman of Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Internet expert Henry Blodget of Merrill Lynch & Co. -- agreed to pay $15 million and $4 million, respectively, and be permanently barred from the securities industry. The $1.4 billion settlement amount is among the highest ever imposed by securities regulators, and Citigroup's $400 million share of that settlement is the highest ever imposed on an individual firm. It follows a nearly two-year investigation started by Spitzer and later joined by the SEC and other state attorneys general.... Adding to Citigroup's $400 million, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse First Boston will each contribute $200 million toward the global settlement. The other firms -- Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.; Goldman, Sachs & Co.; Lehman Brothers Inc.; J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.; Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.; UBS Warburg LLC; and U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray Inc. -- will pay between $125 million and $32.5 million. About $387 million will go toward a fund to benefit customers of the firms. Another $387 million will be paid to the states. In addition, the firms will pay some $433 million to fund independent research and $80 million to promote investor education. ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Unveiled, by Tamara Loomis, New York Law Journal, April 29, 2003). See also SEC Releases Brokerage Settlement Details. Associated Press, April 28, 2003.
"Six months after securities regulators and 10 of Wall Street's biggest banks signed a landmark $1.4 billion conflict-of-interest settlement, a federal judge approved the deal Friday, clearing the way for harmed investors to recoup $399 million... The SEC, industry self-regulatory groups and 25 other states eventually joined the investigation. Firms agreeing to settle included Merrill, Citigoup Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bear Sterns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Lehman Brothers, Piper Jaffray and UBS Warburg. Spitzer has gone on to lead regulatory probes into alleged trading abuses by mutual fund firms. In both the research and mutual fund cases, Spitzer seized on behavior long recognized by Wall Street but largely ignored by regulators. As part of the "global settlement," the firms were ordered to pay $894 million in penalties and disgorgement as well as $432.5 million to fund the purchase and distribution of independent research and $80 million to fund investor education programs." ($1.4 Billion Wall Street Settlement Approved: Federal Judge Accepts Conflict-of-Interest Deal. By Ben White, Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2003, p. E1).
The $1.4 billion settlement is divided so:
Citigroup/Salomon Smith Barney: $400,000,000
Credit Suisse First Boston: $200,000,000
Merrill Lynch: $200,000,000
Morgan Stanley: $125,000,000
Goldman Sachs Group: $110,000,000
Lehman Brothers Holdings: $80,000,000
J.P. Morgan Chase: $80,000,000
Bear Stearns: $80,000,000
UBS Warburg: $80,000,000
U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray: $32.500,000
Crompton
(UniRoyal unit)
2004
$50,000,000
"Crompton Corp. says it has reached agreements with the U.S. Justice Department and Canadian authorities regarding criminal charges of price fixing in rubber chemicals. The investigations began in late 2002 in both countries, along with a similar investigation in Europe. The agreement with Justice calls for Crompton to plead guilty to "participating in a combination and conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition by maintaining and increasing the price of certain rubber chemicals sold in the U.S. during the period 1995 to 2001." In Canada, the company agreed to plead guilty to one count of "conspiring to lessen competition" in rubber chemicals. Crompton agreed to pay a $50 million fine in the U.S., payable in six annual installments without interest, beginning this year. It has agreed to a $7 million fine in Canada under similar terms. The agreements must be submitted to courts in the U.S. and Canada for approval before the investigations will be resolved. Crompton says it has completed its own internal investigation, strengthened its training and compliance programs, and taken personnel actions where appropriate. But the firm is not yet out of the litigation woods. The European Commission continues a civil investigation of price fixing in rubber chemicals in Europe. And there are civil class-action lawsuits pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The firm also is named in civil suits in U.S. federal courts regarding price fixing in ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM), plastics additives, and nitrile rubber. It won amnesty from federal prosecution in those cases by cooperating with authorities." (Chemical & Engineering News, March 22, 2004).
Crompton
(UniRoyal unit)
2004
$9,000,000
OTTAWA - "An international plot to fix the prices of chemicals used in rubber production has drawn a $9-million fine for U.S.-based Crompton Corp. Crompton, a global marketer of specialty chemicals, polymer products and processing equipment, pleaded guilty under the Competition Act in Federal [Canada] Court, the Competition Bureau announced Friday. The company confessed that "it participated with other rubber chemical suppliers in an international conspiracy to increase the price of certain rubber chemicals" used in products such as tires, car bumpers and hoses, the bureau said. It also said that from mid-1995 through 2001 Crompton executives participated in meetings and other communications with other producers and agreed to co-ordinate price increases. "Canadian consumers purchase products made from these rubber chemicals every day," said Denyse MacKenzie, senior deputy commissioner of competition. "Crompton has agreed to co-operate with the Competition Bureau in its ongoing investigation into this price-fixing cartel." Under the price-fixing section of the Competition Act to which Crompton pleaded guilty, the maximum fine is $10 million. The company, based in Middlebury, Conn., had first-quarter sales of $624.3 million US, with net earnings of $60.4 million after paying $4.1 million in antitrust costs." (CP, Canoe Money, May 28, 2004).
Price-Fixing Investigations Sweep Chemical Industry: "A two-year-old price-fixing probe that began in an obscure corner of the chemical industry has snowballed into a series of international investigations involving industry giants such as Dow Chemical Co, DuPont Co. and Bayer AG, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. The widening web of cases arose from aggressive use by prosecutors of amnesty grants for whistle-blowers, which has rivals competing to be first to report wrongdoing and avoid criminal penalties. U.S. and European investigators currently are looking into alleged conspiracies to fix prices in a half-dozen chemicals used in plastics, rubber and synthetic materials in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Japan. The commodities are used in industries from automobiles to furniture and flooring. At least four grand-jury investigations stemming from the investigations currently are under way in San Francisco. Among the latest markets under scrutiny are a widely used plastic, urethane, and a synthetic rubber known as neoprene, lawyers close to the case said. In pursuing the alleged conspiracies, U.S. and European prosecutors are showing that granting amnesty from criminal charges to the first company to blow the whistle on a conspiracy can be a potent weapon against cartels. Companies granted amnesty can escape huge fines and sometimes avoid jail time for executives.So far, the inquiry has resulted in one guilty plea and a $50 million fine for UniRoyal and its parent, Crompton Corp. of Middlebury, Conn., in the case that initially spurred the investigations. In a plea agreement announced in April, Crompton acknowledged conspiring with others to artificially boost prices of chemicals used to make rubber, a $1 billion annual market, between 1995 and 2001. It had been fingered for illegal conduct by a rival that had gone to the Justice Department." )Dow Jones Newswires, June 22, 2004).
Crop Growers Corp
1996
$2,000,000
Independent Counsel civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity (illegal political contributions and fraud). http://www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_vce.exe
CSX Transportation
2005
$1,000,000
"Calling federal regulation of the railroad industry "an abject failure," New York's attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, said on Monday that the railroad giant CSX Transportation Inc. had agreed to pay $1 million to settle state charges that it violated safety laws by failing to report and promptly fix hundreds of warning-signal malfunctions at grade crossings across the state.
As part of the settlement, one of the largest enforcement actions against a railroad, CSX also agreed to improve the way it reports, inspects and repairs broken warning signals, some of which it had taken up to five months to fix, Mr. Spitzer said. CSX will also set aside up to $500,000 to pay for sending local police officers to direct traffic at crossings with broken signals.
The Federal Railroad Administration is the nation's primary overseer of rail safety, and it is highly unusual for a state government to take such sweeping action against a railroad. But Mr. Spitzer, who forged a national reputation with his investigations of Wall Street's business practices, said he had been motivated to begin a state inquiry of CSX after the death of an elderly couple last year at a Rochester-area crossing with a broken signal. Even when the railroad found signals to be malfunctioning or broken, Mr. Spitzer said, CSX did not always inform the police so they could help protect motorists at those crossings.
"Where has the F.R.A. been?" Mr. Spitzer asked. "Why has it failed to look at issues of critical importance to the safety of the public?"
On Monday night, the agency issued a statement through the federal Department of Transportation, saying that it could not comment on the details of the investigations, since Mr. Spitzer had not previously shared his findings with the F.R.A. "We hope Mr. Spitzer will elect to share with us those details in the interests of improving rail safety," the statement said.
Mr. Spitzer's investigation found that on 321 occasions from January 2002 to March 2004, CSX took more than one day to fix signal problems. On 24 of those occasions, state figures show, CSX took a month or more to fix the problems, a length of time that Mr. Spitzer said he found "astonishing."
The attorney general said federal rules specify only that signal problems should be fixed without undue delay, but in Mr. Spitzer's view, 24 hours is sufficient time to fix the problem or to at least inform the local police of the danger..." (New York Times, March 8, 2005).
Cumberland Packing Co
1995
$2,000,000
Cumberland Packing Co & Joseph Asaro/Eisenstat and five officers. US Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal action relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity. http://www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_vce.exe
Daiwa Bank
199?
$340,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Damon Clinical Laboratories
199?
$35,200,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Datran Media
2006
$1,100,000
A company accused of using unauthorized personal data "mined" by other firms from about 6 million e-mail addresses nationwide has agreed to reform its practices under a $1.1 million settlement... Datran Media Corp. of New York City, a leading e-mail marketer, used e-mail addresses and other personal data it obtained from several companies... The Internet "customer acquisition" companies proclaimed on their Web sites that they wouldn't lend or sell the information provided.
Consumers were often enticed to reveal their names, addresses and financial data in exchange for free iPods and DVD movies... Datran [was accused] of knowing of the companies' pledges, but spamming those consumers with unsolicited e-mails anyway, advertising discount drugs, diet pills and other products." (AP, March 14, 2006).
DeBeers
2004
$10,000,000
"De Beers pleaded guilty in a 10-year-old price-fixing case Tuesday and was fined $10 million fine as part of an agreement that would clear the way for the diamond giant to resume selling diamonds directly in the lucrative U.S. market. The company admitted conspiring to fix prices in the $500 million industrial diamond market. Industrial diamonds are used to make cutting and polishing tools for a variety of manufacturing and construction equipment. De Beers has sold diamonds in the United States only through intermediaries since shortly after World War II, when it was first charged with price fixing. The company was charged along with General Electric Co. in 1994. A judge later dismissed the charges against GE, saying the government had failed to prove its case. U.S. District Judge George Smith accepted the plea in the case, in which the Department of Justice charged De Beers with keeping prices in the worldwide industrial diamond market artificially high. The case was filed in Columbus because GE’s industrial diamond business was headquartered in suburban Worthington. Smith did not order any restitution, saying a separate settlement of a civil case resolved that issue. He also did not put the company on probation. Smith said the company must operate under the regulations of the European Union and will be subject to the jurisdiction of courts in the United States if it decides to do business directly in the United States. De Beers general counsel Glenn Turner entered the plea on behalf of the company. He declined to make a statement in court but said afterward that De Beers was happy to have the case resolved. Turner said resolution of the case makes De Beers legally compliant in all parts of the world where it operates. He said, however, that the company has no plans to directly enter the U.S. retail market. De Beers has stores in Tokyo and London. "It doesn’t make a big difference in the way we do our business," Lynette Hori, spokesman for De Beers in London, said before the hearing. "We operate a selling system to our clients from London and Johannesburg, and we have no plans to change that." De Beers had sales of $5.5 billion and earnings of $676 million in 2003. The company spends $180 million on advertising. The United States represents half of the worldwide diamond market. Prosecution of De Beers has been difficult because U.S. officials have no jurisdiction over the company, which is based in South Africa. But the case also has hindered De Beers from doing business in the United States, said antitrust lawyer John Majoras, a partner with the law firm Jones Day in Washington. Corporate officials trying to enter the United States run the risk of being stopped by authorities, he said. "That’s a pretty big market to give up and not be actively involved in," he said. On the down side, Majoras said the deal could expose De Beers to more lawsuits from plaintiffs who now think it is easier and less costly to sue the company." (De Beers pleads guilty in price fixing case (Diamond seller fined $10 million, will resume selling in U.S., Associated Press, MSNBC.com, July 13, 2004).
Deloitte & Touche
2005
$50,000,000
Deloitte & Touche, the country's third-largest accounting firm, has agreed to pay $50 million to settle charges that it should have detected the fraudulent bookkeeping at Adelphia Communications, the cable television company that subsequently filed for bankruptcy. The settlement, announced today by the Securities and Exchange Commission, is the largest ever by an accounting firm and includes a record penalty of $25 million. It came a day after the Rigas family, which founded Adelphia, settled a federal fraud case by agreeing to pay $715 million to investors who lost money when the company collapsed. (New York Times, April 26, 2005).
Deutsche Bank
2002
$50,000,000
FOR MORE INFO SEE ENTRY: Citigroup - 2002 - $300,000,000
Deutsche Bank
2004
$87,500,000
"Deutsche Bank Securities will pay $87.5 million and Thomas Weisel Partners will pay $12.5 million to settle conflict-of-interest securities research charges with government regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission said Thursday. The settlements follow similar pacts reached in April 2003 between 10 other investment banks and the SEC, state securities regulators, the NASD and the New York Stock Exchange over allegations that the investment banks had undue influence on securities research at brokerage firms. In addition to paying penalties, both banks must separate their research and investment banking departments, restructure how research is reviewed and supervised, prohibit analysts from receiving compensation for investment banking activities, and make independent research available to investors, the SEC said in a statement... The SEC alleges that, from mid-1999 through mid-2001, the firms' investment banking units influenced their research analysts, creating conflicts of interest and supervisory deficiencies. The SEC also said the firms issued unsound research reports... Of the total to be paid by Deutsche Bank, $7.5 million is a fine for obstructing the SEC's investigation into its business practices, said the SEC statement." (CNN/Money, Aug 24, 2004).
Dexter Corporation
199?
$4,000,000
Multinational Monitor, July/August 1999
Dial
2003
$10,000,000
Dial OKs $10M Deal in Harassment Case. Dial Corp. agreed Tuesday to pay $10 million to settle a federal civil suit charging that its female workers were groped, forced to see pornography and called names at a soap-making plant near Chicago. Lawyers for the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based company and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced the agreement a day after the case was scheduled to go to trial. Associated Press, May 1, 2003.
DirecTV
2005
$5,340,000
DirecTV will pay $5.34 million to settle charges that its telemarketers called households listed on the national do-not-call registry to pitch satellite TV programming... The proposed settlement, if approved by a federal judge in Los Angeles, would be the commission's largest civil penalty in a consumer protection case. In all 17 previously settled no-call cases, the agency assessed only $808,500 in penalties... If the proposed settlement is approved, the agency said it would end litigation against five defendants, including DirecTV and two of the five telemarketing firms, Communication Concepts and American Communications. The two firms will pay civil penalties of $25,000 and $50,000. Litigation continues with seven other defendants. Allen Hile, acting associate director of marketing practices for the agency, said the agency arrived at the $5.34 million penalty by multiplying the $11,000 maximum it can assess per call by the 485 days between the beginning of complaints about DirecTV and when the company entered settlement talks. (New York Times, Dec 13, 2005).
Dominion Virginia Power
2003
$1,200,000,000 settlement
$5,300,000
fine
Dominion Resources Inc. agreed to spend $1.2 billion to reduce air pollution at eight power plants in Virginia and West Virginia in the largest such settlement ever under the federal Clean Air Act, company and state officials said yesterday. The company will spend the money over the next 10 years, installing scrubbers and making other pollution control improvements at its plants, gradually reducing sulfur and nitrogen emissions and thus eliminating major sources of acid rain and smog from the Washington region, Richmond and the Chesapeake Bay, officials said. Dominion's agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Justice Department and five states including Virginia resolves an EPA investigation begun in 1999, directed at Dominion's power plant in Mount Storm, W.Va., and a separate civil lawsuit by New York state, which complained of far-reaching environmental damage from the power plant's emissions. West Virginia, Connecticut and New Jersey also are parties to the agreement. In 2000, Dominion, which is based in Richmond and operates Virginia's largest power company, reached a preliminary settlement with the EPA and various state regulators. Negotiations on a final agreement slowed during the transition from the Clinton to the Bush administrations, then picked up again. The agreement is expected to be signed next week, officials said... Dominion also will spend about $14 million on environmental projects, including $2 million to protect land in the Cheat River Gorge in West Virginia and $1 million for hybrid vehicles in Shenandoah National Park. The company will also pay a $5.3 million federal fine to settle the original Clean Air Act issues at the Mount Storm plant." (Utility to Spend $1.2 Billion to Cut Pollution, By Peter Behr, Washington Post, April 19, 2003).
Doyon Drilling
199?
$1,000,000
Multinational Monitor July 1999
DuPont
2005
$14,000,000
"An oyster fisherman who claimed chemicals from a DuPont factory caused his rare blood cancer was awarded $14 million in actual damages in the first of 1,996 lawsuits involving the plant. A jury found DuPont DeLisle at fault Friday for Glen Strong's multiple myeloma. Strong's wife received $1.5 million for loss of "love and companionship." The jury will meet again Monday to decide on punitive damages...
Strong and 1,995 other plaintiffs filed lawsuits claiming releases of dioxins from the plant caused a variety of health problems. The chemical company is defending each case individually. DuPont DeLisle, about five miles from Strong's home, makes titanium dioxide, a white pigment used in paint, plastics, toothpaste and other products..." (AP/cbsnews.com, Aug 28, 2005).
DuPont Dow Elastomers
2004
$36,000,000
DuPont Dow Elastomers LLC, a joint venture of DuPont Co. and Dow Chemical Co., the two largest U.S. chemical companies, agreed in June to pay a $36 million fine to settle civil claims it overcharged customers for neoprene, a synthetic rubber." (Bloomberg, Sept 30, 2004).
DuPont
2005
$107,600,000
In February [2005], DuPont settled a class-action lawsuit for $107.6 million brought by Ohio and West Virginia residents in 2001, alleging the Wilmington, Del.-based company intentionally withheld and misrepresented information concerning the nature and extent of the human health threat posed by C8 [perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA]. (USAToday.com, Nov 29, 2005).
Dynegy
2004
$1,500,000
"Two Dynegy Inc. subsidiaries and the four companies comprising West Coast Power, Dynegy's joint venture with NRG Energy Inc., have agreed to pay $3 million to settle charges from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that they violated power market trading rules during the Western energy crisis in 2000 and 2001.Under terms of the settlement announced Tuesday, Dynegy and West Coast Power will put the $3 million into a fund established at the U.S. Treasury for the benefit of California and Western electricity consumers. Each company will pay $1.5 million of the total. The FERC must still give final approval to the deal. Neither Dynegy nor West Coast Power admitted or denied violating rules or tariffs of the California Independent System Operator when the state experienced high prices and rolling blackouts. Houston-based Dynegy manages fuel procurement and trading activities on behalf of West Coast Power. The Dynegy subsidiaries involved in the settlement are Dynegy Power Marketing Inc. and Dynegy Power Corp. The settlement will close the FERC's litigation regarding trading strategies in Western energy markets noted in a "show cause" order issued to Dynegy in June. The order compelled Dynegy to present evidence that the company didn't violate California's market rules for electricity trading, as state officials alleged. Other energy companies also investigated in the aftermath of California's crisis received the same order.Other settlement amounts include $836,000 from Reliant Resources Inc.; $45,240 from American Electric Power; and $857,089 from Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc. The settlement doesn't include the pending refund proceedings involving Dynegy Power Marketing and West Coast Power..." (Dynegy Reaches Proposed $3M Settlement With FERC, Tyler Morning Telegraph, Jan 20, 2004).
Eastman Chemical
199?
$11,000,000
Multinational Monitor July 1999
Eastman Kodak
199?
$1,000,000
Multinational Monitor July 1999
eBay [executives]
2005
$3,000,000
"Three current and former eBay executives, including Chief Executive Meg Whitman, have agreed to pay $3 million to settle a lawsuit that they inappropriately accepted shares in scores of lucrative IPOs from investment-banking firm Goldman Sachs Group. Whitman, along with eBay founder and Chairman Pierre Omidyar and former President Jeffrey Skoll, will pay the money into a fund controlled by the company. Goldman Sachs will also make a payment of $395,000, part of the settlement with eBay shareholders. Investment banks have previously paid millions of dollars in penalties for their handling of initial public offerings of stock. But executives who received hot IPO shares, allegedly in return for their companies' banking business, have largely avoided any legal repercussions. The payments by the eBay executives -- who are essentially giving their IPO profits to eBay shareholders -- appear to be the first by Silicon Valley executives and among just a handful nationwide... State and federal regulators frowned on spinning, which one agency characterized as the payment of improper ``gratuities'' to corporate executives. Regulators sought to end the practice in 2003 when they reached a $1.4 billion settlement with 10 investment banks that were accused of a litany of improper stock-market activities during the tech bubble..." (Mercury News, April 30, 2005).
Eklof Marine
199?
$7,000,000
Multinational Monitor July 1999
Eli Lilly
2005
Eli Lilly and Co. said... it has entered into an agreement in principle to settle about 8,000, or 75%, of the claims against the company related to its schizophrenia medication, Zyprexa. When finalized, the agreement will also result in the dismissal of claims against physicians and other health care professionals named as co-defendants in any cases covered by the settlement... Most of the lawsuits claimed that before September of 2003, the information in the medication label, which listed the risk of hyperglycemia and diabetes as an infrequent adverse event since 1996, was not adequately displayed, according to the drug company. Eli Lilly will establish a $690 million fund for the settlement... The agreement involves claimants who asserted they developed diabetes-related conditions from their use of Zyprexa. Claimants not covered by the final settlement are those represented by attorneys who are not participating in the agreement in principle. Lilly said it is prepared to continue its vigorous defense of Zyprexa in the remaining cases. (MarketWatch, June 9, 2005).
Empire Sanitary Landfill
(now USAWaste Service Inc)
1997
$8,000,000
US Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity. Political Money Online
Enron
2004
$35,000,000
$35 million civil penalty to settle charges the company manipulated natural gas prices in July 2001 (Commodity Futures Trading Commission. news release, July 19, 2004).
Enron
2004
$85,000,000
"Enron's human resources committee and several outside directors agreed pay $85 million from fiduciary insurance policies to former Enron employees who lost billions of dollars in the shares and stock options." (USAToday.com, Sept 13, 2004).
Enron
2004
$321,000,000
"Enron will pay $321 million from the proceeds of its sale of its pipeline arm to finance pension plans for thousands of former employees... The $321 million, from the $2.45 billion sale of Enron's U.S. pipelines operations, will fully finance four defined-benefit pension plans... Those do not include the 401(k) or stock option plans that made up the bulk of retirement packages for employees of the energy company... [The Public Benefit Guaranty Corp. had sued Enron in federal court in Houston in June to take over operation of four pension funds covering 17,000 Enron employees..." (USAToday.com, Sept 13, 2004).
Enron
2005
$1,520,000,000
"More than four years after rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity bills shook California and the rest of the West Coast, the Enron Corporation finally settled claims that it played a major role in the energy crisis of 2000 and 2001.
Enron, the former highflying energy trader now operating under bankruptcy protection, announced yesterday that it had reached an agreement to pay as much as $1.52 billion to the State of California and other parties.
But actual payouts are likely to be only a fraction of that amount. Under the bankruptcy plan, Enron will pay unsecured claimants - and California is one of them - about 20 cents on the dollar on average, said Jennifer Lowney, a spokeswoman for Enron.
Enron and other power companies are accused of gouging consumers by artificially inflating electricity prices during the California energy crisis. The crisis led to billions of dollars of surcharges for consumers and businesses on the West Coast.
One of the fastest-growing companies in America in the 1990's and a star on Wall Street, Enron collapsed into bankruptcy in December 2001 amid accusations of widespread financial irregularities and fraud. It is now facing an estimated $65 billion in claims from investors, consumers, employees and government agencies it defrauded. Against that, the company's estate is valued at about $13 billion, and Enron has so far paid out $580 million to claimants in other cases...
The parties that entered into the agreement are the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Southern California Edison Company, the San Diego Gas and Electric Company, the California Department of Water Resources, the California Electricity Oversight Board, and the attorneys general of California, Oregon and Washington...
With this latest agreement, total settlements stemming from the energy crisis that hit the Western states have reached nearly $6 billion, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission...
The latest Enron agreement includes $47.3 million in cash, $875 million in unsecured claims for the parties in California, and a $600 million penalty for the three states that were hit by the power cuts.
But the exact amount Enron will pay under the settlement will not be known until its Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding is completed and secured claims are paid out. Under its bankruptcy plan, Enron plans to pay 22.8 cents on the dollar in the case against Enron Power Marketing Inc., the subsidiary that was the target of the California power claim.
The agreement is still subject to the approval of the energy commission, the California Public Utilities Commission and the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, where Enron filed for protection four years ago.
Enron has agreed to settle government and employee claims against its retirement plans for $356.25 million, the Labor Department said on Monday. There, too, actual payouts will probably be far less. The deal on the retirement payout did not cover claims against Mr. Lay or Mr. Skilling." (Settlement Is Reached With Enron, By Jad Mouawad, New York Times, July 16, 2005).
E-Systems Inc.
199?
$2,000,000
Multinational Monitor July 1999
Ernst & Young
2004
$1,500,000
"Accounting firm Ernst & Young agreed to pay the government $1.5 million to settle claims that it gave bad advice that led nine hospitals to overbill Medicare, federal prosecutors announced Tuesday. The U.S. Attorney in Philadelphia filed a civil lawsuit in January. It accused Ernst & Young of causing the hospitals to submit more than 200,000 false claims to the government in the early- to mid-1990s, based on incorrect advice on how to bill Medicare for a common blood test. Under the agreement released Monday, New York-based Ernst & Young, one of the nation's largest accounting firms, admitted no wrongdoing..." (ABCNews.com, July 20, 2004).
Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping
1991
$125,000,000 federal and state civil claims
$5 billion
punitive damages
For Valdez Alaska oil spill. Exxon agreed to settle all federal and state civil claims resulting from the 1989 oil spill, by the payment of $900 million in damages. The settlement also had a reopener clause stating that Exxon might incur an additional $100 million for unforeseen natural resource damages. There was a criminal fine of $100 million, of which $50 million will be remitted; the State of Alaska will receive $50 million of the $100 million as restitution for restoration of the damaged natural resource. (EPA Valdez history). See also Multinational Monitor July 1999
"ExxonMobil has continued to fight against the $5 billion punitive damage verdict in the Valdez case. In November [2001], a federal appellate court ruled that the $5 billion award was too high. The appellate court agreed that Exxon's conduct in the Valdez case was reckless, but held that precedent compelled it to reduce the punitive verdict, which was approximately 17 times the compensatory damages awarded to commercial fishers in the case." (Multinational Monitor Dec 2001).
Exxon Mobil
2003
$11,800,000,000
"An Alabama jury on Friday approved an $11.8 billion award for the state in a suit against Exxon Mobil Corp. over royalties for offshore natural gas leases, an Exxon spokesman said.The jury also awarded the state $63 million in compensatory damages. Exxon expects to appeal the decision, which spokesman Bob Davis called "unjustified and excessive.""Our company did not engage in fraud and it is our belief that fraud was never established during the trial," Davis said.Alabama sued Exxon Corp. in 1999, before the company's merger with Mobil, for allegedly defrauding the state out of natural gas royalties. In December, Alabama's Supreme Court reversed a $3.5 billion jury verdict against the Irving, Texas company, sending the case back to a lower court for retrial. Exxon had argued previously that there was a difference in view over how to compute royalties under offshore gas leases..." (ExxonMobil Jury Awards $11.8 Bln to Alabama, Reuters, Nov 14, 2003).
Judge slashes Alabama verdict against ExxonMobil. "Attorneys for Alabama say a judge's decision to reduce a record $11.9 billion verdict against ExxonMobil (XOM) could ultimately help the state's case survive appeals. Montgomery County Circuit Judge Tracy McCooey decided Monday to reduce the record verdict that Alabama won in a natural gas royalty dispute with ExxonMobil to $3.6 billion, saying she was bringing it in line with U.S. Supreme Court guidelines... In November, a Montgomery County jury ruled that ExxonMobil had cheated the state out of royalties from natural gas wells drilled in state-owned waters along the Alabama coast. The jury returned a verdict of $102.8 million in compensatory damages and interest and $11.8 billion in punitive damages. The verdict, which was bigger than the state sought, was the largest returned by any American jury in 2003. The other verdicts in the top 100 last year totaled $7.6 billion. In McCooey's decision, she left the compensatory damages intact, but cut the punitive damages to $3.5 billion. At a total of $3.6 billion, the outcome is still larger than any other verdict of last year. McCooey said the state's anticipated loss from underpayments over the life of the natural gas wells was between $386 million to $930 million. She said reducing the punitive damages to $3.5 billion would create "a single-digit ratio between the punitive damages and the anticipated gain," which is in keeping with U.S. Supreme Court guidelines. Jury foreman Joe King of Montgomery said he was disappointed by the cut. "We wanted to set an amount that would get their attention," he said. "They will laugh at this. It's just change to them." The $3.6 billion judgment compares to nearly $247 billion in revenue and $21.5 billion in profits reported by ExxonMobil in 2003. The case now heads to the Alabama Supreme Court, which overturned an earlier verdict in the case. In 2000, a Montgomery jury returned a $3.5 billion verdict against ExxonMobil in the same dispute, but the Supreme Court threw it out in 2002 because jurors saw an internal legal memo from ExxonMobil. The state also sued other oil companies that drilled natural gas wells in Alabama's coastal waters. The Alabama Supreme Court is currently considering Hunt Petroleum's appeal of a $24.6 million verdict that a Mobile County jury returned against it. Two other oil companies settled with the state in 2002 without going to trial. Shell paid $33.5 million and Amoco $29 million." (Judge slashes Alabama verdict against ExxonMobil, USAToday, March 30, 2004).
Exxon Mobil
2004
$6,750,000,000
"A federal judge on Wednesday ordered Exxon Mobil Corp. to pay about $6.75 billion in punitive damages and interest to thousands of fishermen and others affected by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. Exxon Mobil has 30 days to appeal the order by U.S. District Judge Russel Holland, who ordered the Irving, Texas-based company to pay $4.5 billion in punitive damages and about $2.25 billion in interest. The money is to go to 32,000 fishermen, Alaska Natives, landowners, small businesses and municipalities affected by the 11-million gallon spill in Prince William Sound... Exxon Mobil said it plans to appeal. Spokesman Tom Cirigliano said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has twice vacated Holland's decision in the case. The judge had been ordered by the appellate court to reconsider the damages awarded in an earlier ruling in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year about punitive damages... The spill occurred March 23, 1989, less than three hours after the 987-foot ship Exxon Valdez left the Alyeska Pipeline terminal in Valdez. The ship grounded at Bligh Reef, rupturing eight of its 11 cargo tanks and spewing some 10.8 million gallons of crude oil into the sound." (Exxon Mobil to Pay $6.75B in Damages, Associated Press, ABC News, Jan. 28, 2004).
"A federal judge in Alaska yesterday ordered Exxon Mobil Corp. to pay $6.75 billion to 32,000 fisherman, landowners and others affected by the 11 million gallons of oil that poured into Prince William Sound after the grounding of the Exxon Valdez nearly 15 years ago. Exxon Mobil immediately vowed to appeal, and the case seems destined for further litigation. Yesterday's ruling stems from the torrent of lawsuits filed after the spill against Exxon by fishermen, Alaska Natives, landowners, small businessmen and municipalities in south-central Alaska. Those suits led to a 1994 decision by an Anchorage jury that awarded a consolidated set of plaintiffs $5 billion in punitive damages. Since then, the case has been kicked back and forth between federal judge H. Russel Holland's court in Alaska and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California, which has twice vacated Holland's decisions. Irving, Tex.-based Exxon Mobil has argued in numerous appeals that the award was extreme, and Holland at one point had reduced it to $4 billion. But Holland yesterday ruled that punitive damages of $4.5 billion plus $2.25 billion in interest are in line with the Supreme Court's guidelines for punitive damages in civil cases. David W. Oesting, the plaintiffs' lead counsel, said $4.5 billion is near the outer limit of what the Supreme Court has deemed acceptable, but he said that it's justified..." (Judge Says Exxon Owes $6.75 Billion For Valdez: Appeal Promised as Suit Over '89 Spill Drags On. By Griff Witte, Washington Post, Jan 29, 2004).
Exxon Mobil
2005
$8,700,000 fines
$571,000,000 pollution control
$9,700,000 environmental projects
"Exxon Mobil Corp. will spend an estimated $571 million for pollution controls at seven oil refineries, including its Torrance plant, in a settlement over alleged violations of clean air laws, the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency said Tuesday.
The world's largest publicly traded oil company also will pay fines totaling $8.7 million and spend $9.7 million to retrofit city buses, restore coastal habitat in Louisiana and sponsor other environmental projects around the refineries. The settlement aims to reduce annual emissions of toxins that can cause respiratory problems and worsen cases of childhood asthma, the federal agencies said.
The refineries covered in two consent decrees filed in federal courts in Chicago and Lafayette, La., represent 11% of the nation's refining capacity.
Under the settlement, annual emissions of acid-rain-causing sulfur dioxide are to be cut by 42,000 tons and those of smog-forming nitrogen oxides are to be reduced by 11,000 tons. Improvements also are required for detecting leaks, minimizing the flaring of hazardous gases, cutting pollution from sulfur recovery plants and handling benzene wastes.
Exxon Mobil, based in Irving, Texas, agreed to the settlement without the government filing suit so that it could expand fuel production in compliance with the Clean Air Act.
Three states that joined in the settlement — Illinois, Louisiana and Montana — will share the civil penalties..." (AP / Los Angeles Times, Oct 12, 2005).
Fax.com
2004
$5,400,000
"Federal regulators approved a record $5.4 million fine against a company for faxing unsolicited advertisements to consumers. The Federal Communications Commission said the fine given to Fax.com was the largest for violating do-not-fax rules that went into effect in 1992. The company sends faxes on behalf of clients that pay a fee. The FCC said Fax.com violated the rules 489 separate times, incurring an $11,000 fine for each instance... The commission said it rejected arguments from Fax.com that the ban on unsolicited faxes was unconstitutional and that the fine was excessive... The FCC primarily tracks violations of the rules through complaints from people receiving unwanted faxes. A company must have written permission from a person before sending an advertising fax, though the requirement does not apply if the sender has done business with the recipient. A rule requiring all organizations sending faxes to get written permission from all parties, even those with which they have a business relationship, has been delayed until 2005. Congress first authorized the FCC to enact do-not-fax rules in 1991 when it passed the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. That law also gave the FCC the power to issue rules to curb telemarketing calls. The FCC and Federal Trade Commission eventually set up a do-not-call registry that took effect Oct. 1..." (Fax.com fined $5.4M for sending unwanted ads, USA Today, Jan 5, 2004).
Fidelity Brokerage Services
2004
$2,000,000
"Fidelity Brokerage Services agreed Tuesday to pay $2 million in fines to settle allegations by federal regulators and the New York Stock Exchange that employees in nearly two dozen of its branch offices altered and destroyed documents prior to annual inspections. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the NYSE, which conducted a joint investigation, each levied $1 million fines against Fidelity Brokerage, one of the largest brokerage firms with an estimated 11.7 million retail customer accounts and 1,500 institutional accounts. The document tampering and destruction was pervasive throughout the firm's branch offices, the regulators said. At least 62 employees allegedly engaged in it in at least 21 of the firm's 98 branch offices, mostly in western states. The violations allegedly occurred between January 2001 and July 2002 in anticipation of Fidelity Brokerage's annual internal inspections of its branch offices, which deal with retail customers... Boston-based Fidelity Brokerage, a division of mutual fund giant Fidelity Investments, neither admitted to nor denied the allegations in agreeing to pay the fines. The firm also was censured by the NYSE... As a result of Fidelity's internal investigation, 13 employees were fired... The NYSE also censured and imposed suspensions of several months against seven former employees of the firm, six of whom were brokers in the Tigard, Ore., branch office. The seventh person was a customer service representative in the Salt Lake City branch office..." (Fidelity Brokerage paying $2M in fines, AP/USAToday, Aug 3, 2004).
First American Bank Corp
2004
$6,000,000
"A Chicago-area bank that federal prosecutors say illegally avoided doing business in minority areas has agreed to invest nearly $6 million in predominantly black and Hispanic communities to settle a federal discrimination lawsuit, authorities announced Tuesday. The suit alleged that First American Bank Corp. engaged in a practice called redlining, where loans and other services were denied in black and Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Chicago and Kankakee, Ill. As part of the settlement, First American Bank must invest $5 million by 2009 in a program to offer residents and small businesses in predominantly minority areas subsidized interest rates. The rates would be at least a half percentage point below what the bank would normally charge a move U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said would result in about $80 million in extra loans in those areas. The bank did not admit any legal wrongdoing as part of the settlement, said Randall Samborn, a spokesman for Fitzgerald. A spokeswoman for the bank did not return a call for comment. The settlement also calls for the bank to spend at least $400,000 to advertise its services in predominantly minority areas and another $300,000 on consumer education efforts. The bank also must open three branches in predominantly black areas this year, and a fourth in a predominantly Hispanic area within three years. According to federal authorities, bank officials made statements indicating that its business practices were based on racial stereotypes, including that it did not provide a full range of services to minorities because they "equated making loans in low income or minority neighborhoods with making bad loans." A judge must still approve the settlement." (Chicago Bank Settles Federal Racial Discrimination Lawsuit, Agreed to Invest Nearly $6 Million, Associated Press, ABCNews.com, July 13, 2004).
FleetBoston Financial /
Bank of America
2004
$675,000,000
"Bank of America Corp. and FleetBoston Financial Corp. reached a record $675 million settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer over illegal mutual fund trading. Bank of America will make $250 million in restitution and $125 million in penalties, while Fleet will make $70 million in restitution and $70 million in penalties, Spitzer's office said in a statement. Bank of America and Fleet also agree to cut fees by $160 million over five years. The penalty is the largest since Spitzer announced an investigation of the $7.5 trillion fund industry in September. Bank of America is buying FleetBoston for about $48 billion. ``Getting this out of the way will help them focus on merging the two companies together,'' said Robert Maneri, who helps manage about $50 billion, including Bank of America and FleetBoston shares, at Victory Capital Management in Cleveland. Bank of America Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis, 56, fired at least five executives and set aside $100 million for fines since Spitzer accused the Charlotte, North Carolina-based company of trading abuses in September. Spitzer and the SEC have filed civil complaints against eight firms in the biggest fund-trading probe ever. Eight members of Bank of America's Nations Funds board of directors ``will resign or otherwise leave the board in the course of the next year'' for approving a measure that allowed a hedge fund to conduct ``company sanctioned'' market timing in its funds, according to the agreement." (Bank of America, Fleet in Record $675 Mln Fund Pact., Bloomberg, March 15, 2004).
Fleet Specialist
2004
"Five New York Stock Exchange trading firms have agreed to pay $242 million to settle charges of violating federal securities laws and exchange rules, the NYSE and the Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday. The SEC, after a joint investigation with the Big Board, said the five firms -- Bear Wagner Specialists, Fleet Specialist Inc., LaBranche & Co., Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Specialists and Van der Moolen Specialists USA -- violated securities laws and exchange rules by executing orders for their accounts ahead of orders for the public between 1999 and 2003. The firms -- known as market "specialists" for their roles bringing together buyers and sellers at the exchange -- violated their basic obligation to match orders from the public with other similar orders, and not to fill the orders via trades from their own accounts, the SEC and NYSE said. The firms agreed to the settlement without admitting or denying the allegations, the SEC said, adding that the investigation will continue, possibly targeting individuals... Under the agreement, $87.7 million of the settlement may be distributed to customers hurt by the firms' actions, according the SEC. The rest of the fines will go to the SEC and NYSE..." (NYSE firms pay $242M in trading case. The SEC says five trading firms agree to settle allegations of improper trading activities. CNN/Money, March 30, 2004).
ExxonMobil
2005
$1,300,000,000
About 11,000 Exxon gasoline dealers who maintained they were cheated on a company-sponsored cash discount program in the 1980s and 1990s will begin collecting up to $1.3 billion after a Supreme Court victory last week.
ExxonMobil said Monday that it will take a $200 million after-tax charge this quarter — in addition to a $550 million after-tax charge in late 2004 — to pay dealers' claims that the company improperly pocketed a 3% cost savings when customers paid for their gasoline purchases with cash.
In a two-sentence press release, ExxonMobil said it was taking the added reserve "in light of" the Supreme Court's split decision last week that upheld a federal district court's previous ruling in the case.
"It is over," said plaintiffs' attorney Gene Stearns. "Exxon will no doubt fight on in every court that's available to them, but the trial judge already has sanctioned them and ordered that any further frivolous appeals will bear interest at the rate of 23.3%.".. (Some Exxon dealers to get $1.3B in court win, By Elliot Blair Smith, USA TODAY, June 28, 2005).
Fleishman-Hillard
2005
$5,700,000
"Issuing a public apology, Fleishman-Hillard on Tuesday agreed to a $5.7-million settlement of a lawsuit by the city of Los Angeles that alleged the public relations company padded its bills.
Los Angeles sued Fleishman-Hillard and its former local general manager last year. The suit contended that the company defrauded the city while billing more than $20 million from 1998 through 2004. Fleishman performed public relations work for several city agencies and worked without charge for Mayor James K. Hahn.
The lawsuit was filed a few days after an article last July in The Times quoted seven former employees who said workers routinely inflated monthly billings to the Department of Water and Power and were encouraged — sometimes even directed — to submit falsified time sheets. A city audit in November identified $4.2 million in questionable and unsubstantiated billings..." (Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2005).
Flextronics
2003
$934,000,000
"A judge has ordered electronics manufacturer Flextronics USA Inc. to pay more than $934 million to Beckman Coulter Inc., the maker of medical equipment, in a lawsuit over a contract, Beckman Coulter attorneys said. A jury last week said Beckman Coulter should receive nearly $3 million in compensatory damages and $931 million in punitive damages for fraud, breach of contract and two counts of economic duress.. also ordered that Flextronics not transfer funds overseas or dispose of assets beyond normal business operations without prior court approval... In 1997, Beckman Coulter signed a contract with Dovatron International Inc. to make circuit boards for use in a blood analyzer. Flextronics, which is based in Singapore but has U.S. offices in San Jose, acquired Dovatron in 2000. Fullerton-based Beckman Coulter sued Flextronics in 2001 after the electronics company ended the five-year contract.... The bulk of the judgment was an award of $750 million in punitive damages for economic duress stemming from a charge that Flextronics refused to release inventory parts owned by Beckman Coulter unless the company paid for additional parts that it did not need... "( Judge Orders Flextronics to Pay $934M, Associated Press, ABC News, Oct. 2, 2003).
Food Services of America (subsidiary of Services Group of America
1998
$4,440,000
Food Services of America (sub. of Services Group of America) & Thomas Stewart [2mo home confinement and 160hrs community service]/Specht. US Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity (Political Money Online).
Franklin Advisers
2004
$50,000,000
"Franklin Advisers, the San Mateo firm that advises the country's fourth largest mutual fund company, has agreed to pay $50 million back to Franklin Templeton shareholders to settle charges it violated securities laws by allowing improper trading. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had charged Franklin Advisers with a practice known as ``market timing,'' in which favored shareholders were allowed to take their own money in and out of mutual funds quickly to make trades. While typically not illegal, such practices are banned by many mutual funds because they rack up fees that other long-term investors end up paying. The Franklin case brought home to the Bay Area a nationwide scandal over trading practices that harmed small investors in the $7 trillion mutual fund industry. The most common practice was the one alleged at Franklin: market timing. The special privilege was generally given to wealthy investors willing to invest large sums of money -- boosting management fees. The practices violated Franklin's own prospectus, which told investors that market timing would be monitored and restricted, the SEC said in a statement Monday. Franklin Advisers had more than $350 billion in assets under management at the end of June. ``Some shareholders had unfair access to people in Franklin and could call them and arrange for trading,'' said Cary Robnett, the SEC's branch chief in San Francisco. ``Rapid in-and-out trading siphons off profits otherwise available to everyone... " (San Jose Mercury News, Aug 4, 2004).
Future Tech International
1998
$1,000,000
Future Tech International Inc & Juan Ortiz & Mark B Jimenez [fugitive]. US Dept of Justice civil and/or criminal actions relating to illegal corporate domestic money-in-politics activity. http://www.politicalmoneyline.com/cgi-win/x_vce.exe