ReportWire

Tag: Fraud and false statements

  • Trump can’t secure $454 million appeal bond in New York fraud case, his lawyers say

    Trump can’t secure $454 million appeal bond in New York fraud case, his lawyers say

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump holds up a news story about New York Attorney General Letitia James as he speaks to the media at one of his properties at 40 Wall Street following closing arguments at his civil fraud trial on January 11, 2024 in New York City.

    Spencer Platt | Getty Images

    Donald Trump does not have enough cash to obtain an appeal bond that would prevent New York’s attorney general from seizing his real estate assets to satisfy a $454 million civil fraud judgment, his lawyers indicated in a court filing Monday.

    Trump’s lawyers in the filing said it has proved “impossible” for the former president to get a bond that would secure the full judgment he faces while he appeals the verdict ordering him to pay it.

    The filing asks a panel of five Manhattan appeals court judges to let Trump avoid having to post a bond while he challenges a judge’s verdict that he, the Trump Organization and other defendants committed business fraud.

    If the panel does not approve that request, Attorney General Letitia James could begin a process to seize Trump’s properties on March 25.

    James, who had successfully sued Trump in the case, previously said she would take that step if he did not post an appeal bond or pay off the judgment.

    The filing in Manhattan Supreme Court’s appellate division says Trump’s team contacted about 30 surety companies but did not find one willing to underwrite the bond.

    Trump’s lawyer wrote that obtaining a bond of that size would require “cash reserves approaching $1 billion,” which neither the former president nor the Trump Organization company has.

    Under New York court rules, Trump must post an appeal bond to avoid James moving to collect on the fraud judgment.

    More news on Donald Trump

    Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung in a statement said, “A bond of this size would be an abuse of the law, contradict bedrock principals of our Republic, and fundamentally undermine the rule of law in New York.”

    Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron in February ordered Trump and his co-defendants to pay a total of $464 million in damages and interest for violating a New York anti-fraud statute.

    Engoron ruled that Trump, his two adult sons, the Trump Organization, and the company’s top executives had fraudulently inflated the value of real estate assets for years to boost his net worth and get better loan terms and other financial benefits.

    Trump was ordered to pay the lion’s share of the judgment: $454 million. Post-judgment interest on Trump’s share of the damages continues to accrue at a rate of nearly $112,000 a day.

    Trump, who has secured the Republican presidential nomination, in a deposition last year claimed to have “substantially in excess of $400 million in cash.”

    Despite that, Monday’s nearly 5,000-page court filing by his lawyers detailed his inability to get a bond to secure the full judgment.

    The filing includes an affirmation from Gary Giulietti, president of the Northeast division of the Lockton Companies, which he describes as the largest privately held insurance brokerage firm in the world.

    Giulietti, who was hired by Trump to help him get a bond, wrote, “Despite scouring the market, we have been unsuccessful in our effort … for the simple reason that obtaining an appeal bond for $464 million is a practical impossibility under the circumstances presented.”

    Only a handful of bond surety companies are approved by the Treasury Department to underwrite a bond that large, and many of those firms will only issue a single bond to a maximum of $100 million, Giulietti wrote.

    He also said that none of those companies will accept non-liquid assets — such as real estate — as collateral.

    “Simply put, a bond of this size is rarely, if ever, seen,” Giulietti wrote. “In the unusual circumstance that a bond of this size is issued, it is provided to the largest public companies in the world, not to individuals or privately held businesses.”

    The Trump Organization is privately held.

    Giulietti wrote that it would be unattainable for a private company to obtain a bond to secure the $464 million total judgment unless it had around $1 billion in cash or cash equivalents to offer as collateral, while still being able to satisfy its other business obligations.

    “While it is my understanding that the Trump Organization is in a strong liquidity position, it does not have $1 billion in cash or cash equivalents,” he wrote.

    Trump’s attorneys also noted in the filing that bond issuers often will demand collateral totaling 120% of the judgment, which equates to over $557 million.

    Those issuers are also likely to demand a two-year advance on a 2% annual bond premium, which would require the defendants to pay more than $18 million upfront, the lawyers wrote.

    The defendants had previously offered to post a $100 million bond to prevent James from collecting on the judgment while Trump appealed Engoron’s verdict.

    An appellate division judge rejected that proposal but allowed the defendants to continue doing business in New York and lifted Engoron’s three-year ban on Trump seeking loans in New York. That order is temporarily in effect before a full appeals court panel hears the motion for a stay.

    Trump earlier this month obtained a $91.6 million bond from insurance company Chubb to secure a civil defamation judgment against him in favor of writer E. Jean Carroll as he appeals that verdict. According to Monday’s filing, Chubb was one of the companies that Trump contacted in trying to obtain the bond for the business fraud case.

    Carroll had successfully sued Trump in federal court for defaming her after she accused him in 2019 of raping her in the mid-1990s in a Manhattan department store.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • As online romance scams rise, banks ask for help to save victims billions

    As online romance scams rise, banks ask for help to save victims billions

    [ad_1]

    The banking industry is seeking help from the federal government and the social media industry to stop an escalating crisis that’s costing Americans billions of dollars every year: online romance scams.

    These digital crimes have proliferated since the pandemic, as criminals pose as attractive partners and reach out to lonely Americans on social media.

    “We really need help,” Paul Benda, the executive vice president for risk, fraud and cybersecurity at the American Bankers Association, said in an interview with CNBC. “We need the social media companies to shut down these people that are putting these out there. We need law enforcement engaged to try and prosecute some of these folks. Unless you put a bad guy behind bars, that guy is gonna keep doing what he’s doing.”

    Experts estimate that known instances of fraud amount to billions of dollars every year. Factoring in that many victims don’t report their losses to anyone, the overall losses could be in the tens of billions of dollars annually, they say.

    The romance scams are run by organized criminal gangs, often based in Southeast Asia, that set up phony social media avatars and use those to connect to potential American victims. Their targets are male and female, old and young, highly educated and not, according to experts.

    The common theme is loneliness and a willingness to engage online. Once a victim responds to the message, avatar operators launch into a lengthy campaign — often hours of texting each day — designed to persuade the victim that they have fallen in love with a real person. The psychological power of the relationship can take hold surprisingly quickly.

    “Some people get hooked in within a matter of weeks,” Benda said. “It’s that really burning brightness of a relationship where the texts go on constantly, all day and all night and they get hooked into that.”

    Once that psychological hook is set, the scammer turns the conversations to money. In some cases, they present the victim with a sure-fire-seeming investment opportunity, or they prey on the victim’s empathy and solicit money for an expensive but phony medical procedure.

    “Some of the scams I’ve heard of, they literally have people draining their bank accounts, to send the scammer everything that they have,” Benda said. “They want to do anything for the person they love … And these are just evil people taking advantage of vulnerable people.”

    The experts CNBC spoke with said social media companies should do more to throttle this kind of outreach over their platforms and do a better job of taking down the big perpetrators.

    They also saw the value in regulatory changes that would allow financial institutions to talk to one other about customers who are at risk. Some victims may be draining a savings account with one institution to send funds to a fraudster, while the institution that services their 401(k) retirement account remains unaware.

    Scammers will often coach the victim on how to access and transfer funds. And Benda noted banks are in a difficult position, even when they suspect their customer is in the process of being defrauded.

    “We’re legally obligated to provide you access to your funds, full stop. So we can’t stop you from withdrawing from your bank account. Not even if we think that … it’s going to destroy your life,” he said.

    The experience can be an emotional one even for the bank employees who watch the scam play out.

    “We’ve heard stories where we know a bank teller that was sobbing … talking with a longtime customer, begging them not to do this type of thing, and in the end, no, we have to give them access to their funds,” Benda said.

    Banks generally will not reimburse a customer for romance scam losses, Benda explained, because the customer transferred the money of their own free will. And reimbursing victims would likely just make a market that would draw in more scammers.

    Erin West, deputy district attorney in Santa Clara County, California, estimated that between $30 billion and $50 billion was lost to romance scams in 2022.

    “That’s an astonishing number. It’s huge,” she said, adding the caveat that arriving at an estimate can involve some guesswork since victims can be reluctant to report the details of their own financial humiliation.

    But West, who is part of a national group of prosecutors trying to shed light on the problem, said the scale of the emotional wreckage may be even worse. Discovery of these scams can lead to lost marriages, lost careers or a permanent change in financial position.

    “I’ve been in law enforcement for 25 years, and I’ve done sex crimes and I’ve done homicide, and I’ve never heard the depths of despair that you get when someone realizes that the life they thought they’d had is completely gone,” she said. “On one day, to lose a marriage and every last cent that they have, is traumatic for people.”

    West explained there’s a very human reason why lonely people fall for these scams.

    “This kind of crime goes to the very core of what we want in life. We want to feel loved,” she said. “And we want to have a person to come home to, even if it’s by text, who loves us, understands us, and is thinking of us. And they provide exactly that.”

    “And then they provide a dream that not only can you be loved, but you can be financially comfortable beyond your wildest dreams,” West said. “It’s easy to call it lust and greed, but what it really is, is it’s comfort on both levels.”

    — CNBC’s Bria Cousins contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Investors in Airbnb arbitrage business allege they were defrauded in scheme promising ‘higher returns than the stock market’

    Investors in Airbnb arbitrage business allege they were defrauded in scheme promising ‘higher returns than the stock market’

    [ad_1]

    Illustration by Elham Ataeiazar

    Daryn Carr is no stranger to side hustles. After his mom died from Covid in 2020, he used funds from her pension to pay off some bills and buy a car. With the remaining money, he invested in crypto and started an ATM business. 

    One day in 2022, while scrolling through Instagram, he came upon another opportunity. Carr found a guy named Anthony Agyeman, who was promoting a type of arbitrage on Airbnb that involved taking listings from hotel booking and short-term rental sites and relisting them on Airbnb at a higher price, retaining the profit. 

    Agyeman claimed in marketing materials that his business, Hands-Free Automation, had “5-year exclusivity contracts” with thousands of property owners that gave it permission to relist their properties at a higher price.

    Getting involved with Hands-Free Automation, or HFA, required a payment of between $20,000 and $30,000 to effectively own a piece of Airbnb listings. Agyeman described it as a “minimal to no risk” path to extra income with a guaranteed return in three to six months of investment, “then pure profit after.”   

    HFA has no affiliation with Airbnb but found a way to make money on the marketplace using a practice that Airbnb explicitly prohibits. Agyeman was following similar tactics that he’d used on Amazon and Shopify, where he promoted the opportunity for investors to passively own virtual storefronts. 

    The tech companies that own these marketplaces all say they use a combination of artificial intelligence and automation along with manual reviews to monitor vendor and customer activity for fraud and other misbehavior, but they’ve been ill-equipped to deal with the volume of complaints stemming from various sorts of scams.

    The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice have cracked down on companies similar to HFA, accusing them of advertising their products with false promises of profit and success and allegedly selling “automated” software that didn’t work. HFA and Agyeman haven’t been charged by the Justice Department, FTC or any law enforcement agency. 

    Airbnb told CNBC it was unaware of any contact from regulators regarding HFA.

    For a clearer picture of HFA’s inner workings, CNBC spoke with investors in a lawsuit filed against the company in February 2023, as well as six former HFA employees, an Airbnb customer who unwittingly stayed at an HFA-listed property, and a property owner who said his listings were uploaded to Airbnb by HFA without permission. CNBC has granted anonymity to those who requested it because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly on HFA’s operations, or feared retribution from the company.

    Brian Chesky, co-founder and CEO of Airbnb, Inc., speaks during an interview with CNBC on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York City, May 10, 2023.

    Brendan McDermid | Reuters

    Carr, who lives in New York, wired HFA $1,000 through his crypto debit card at the urging of a salesperson and borrowed an additional $18,490 to pay for HFA’s entry-level package. In total, Carr paid HFA $19,497, according to the lawsuit, which Carr filed along with 11 other investors. The plaintiffs alleged that HFA falsely claimed it had relationships with the properties, and that HFA’s services violated Airbnb’s terms of service. The case is still proceeding. 

    Carr told CNBC that his investment with HFA disappeared, leaving him in debt and working a customer service job to make ends meet. He claims he got scammed and suspects that much of his money went toward subsidizing Agyeman’s lifestyle.

    “I couldn’t believe that I lost $20,000 into thin air,” Carr said. 

    Thomas Hunker, an attorney for Agyeman and HFA, denied that customer money had been used for anything except the business. 

    “We have always honored our fiduciary obligations with respect to allocation of company money in the best interest of the company,” Hunker said in a written response to CNBC.

    ‘It’s proven and it works’

    HFA admitted to customers that it was “continuously encountering problems with” Airbnb “due to the constant changes they have made to their terms and services,” according to the lawsuit. 

    Plaintiffs in the suit against Agyeman and other defendants are asking for at least $624,000 in damages from their lost investments. Meanwhile, the defendants continue to advertise and sell products to prospective investors under a new company called Wealthway. They’re deploying a team that aims to generate more than $3.5 million in monthly sales, Wessel Botes, a former sales employee who left the company in November, told CNBC. 

    Hunker said in an email to CNBC that HFA identifies properties to list from third-party websites used by hotels and other property owners to “increase bookings.” That gives HFA “indirect permission” through those third-party sites to relist rooms on Airbnb, he said, adding that the base price of the booking goes back to the property owner.

    However, Airbnb has banned the practice in its terms of service and community policy since at least 2021. 

    “Using a 3rd party to book a hotel or 3rd party accommodation and listing it on Airbnb at an inflated rate is not allowed,” the policy says.  

    Airbnb told CNBC that business practices such as Agyeman’s aren’t permitted. The company said it continues to improve systems that identify and remove fake or misleading listings, adding that it had blocked more than 216,000 suspicious listings as of September.

    Hunker said HFA doesn’t have investors, but rather has clients who pay a “flat fee” for an arbitrage service. Yet, HFA says on its LinkedIn page that it helps “Airbnb investors add 300+ properties to their account without having to purchase the properties.”

    Before connecting CNBC with his attorney, Agyeman said in an interview that he wasn’t involved in the day-to-day operations at HFA and he denied any financial improprieties. 

    Airbnb told CNBC it had no business relationship with Agyeman and had taken action to curtail his operations. The company said multiple accounts linked to Agyeman and HFA had been removed.

    The opportunity for property owners to make money is fundamental to Airbnb’s business model. The company says that, since its founding in 2007, hosts have made more than $180 billion. En route to upending the hotel industry, Airbnb’s market cap has swelled to almost $95 billion, making it bigger than any hotel chain.

    Airbnb acknowledged in its annual report that “perpetrators of fraud” use “complex and constantly evolving” tactics on the site and that “fraudsters have created fake guest accounts, fake host accounts, or both, to perpetrate financial fraud.”

    Agyeman, who started HFA with co-founder Megan Shears, claims to have created proprietary software that would fully automate the arbitrage process by trawling the internet for properties to relist at a markup. HFA’s employees would take care of booking properties and handle guest inquiries and complaints.

    Agyeman, 27, lives in Texas, as does Shears, 26, according to public records. Their social media posts show luxurious vacation spots next to screenshots of Airbnb bookings purportedly worth thousands of dollars. Several investors said in court filings that they first learned about Agyeman and Shears through Instagram.

    “It’s proven and it works and you get higher returns than the stock market,” one HFA promotional video said

    Investors in the lawsuit say otherwise. And some customers who used the service to book travel say they lost money and were left scrambling for a place to stay.  

    In February 2022, a customer named Kathy booked a beachside Airbnb on Florida’s Sanibel Island for a five-night spring break vacation with her family. Kathy, who spoke on condition that CNBC not use her last name, paid $4,600 upfront for what she thought was a “fantastic” poolside one-bedroom apartment. CNBC identified Kathy as an HFA customer because her name and phone number were posted on HFA’s Instagram account. 

    Days went by without word from her host. Kathy, who lives in Texas, repeatedly reached out to Airbnb, but was told she’d have to engage directly with the host to cancel her booking.

    Kathy looked up the property’s address on Google Maps. Rather than a tropical apartment building, she saw what appeared to be a vacant lot. “Please refund my money,” she recalled telling the host. 

    Desperate to make sure she had a place to stay, Kathy booked a room at a resort in Fort Myers, more than 40 miles from Sanibel Island. Ultimately, after days of back-and-forth messages, Airbnb refunded about half her money.

    It ended up being “a super expensive vacation,” Kathy said. “I will never use it again,” she said of Airbnb.

    ‘Proprietary relationships’

    For Agyeman and Shears, Airbnb was just one of their stomping grounds. They had an Amazon and Shopify automation business, a trucking business, and a line of vegan gummies. Agyeman also helped run a YouTube channel focused in part on swapping tips for running a successful business. 

    The duo broke into the arbitrage business in 2020. According to the lawsuit, Agyeman and Shears claimed in marketing material that they had more than 200,000 properties and had “proprietary relationships with Airbnb and Vrbo,” Expedia’s vacation rental site.

    Agyeman relied on freelancers who would take data from other travel booking sites to use on their Airbnb and Vrbo listings, according to former employees and internal documents. An internal training video viewed by CNBC instructed copywriters on how to recycle the original listings’ details for Airbnb or Vrbo.

    “PLEASE ANYWHERE IN THE LISTING DO NOT MENTION THAT THIS IS A HOTEL OR THE HOTEL NAMES OF THE HOTEL OR RESORTS,” a training document said.

    HFA said its software algorithmically adjusted the price of a property in response to changes on the original listing. Agyeman said on social media that his employees were “the only ones tapped into Airbnb & Vrbo Arbitrage Automation.” 

    One spreadsheet listed 68 different clients as Airbnb investors. Going at least as far back as July 2022, HFA attracted 120-plus investors who collectively paid close to $3 million for “automated” Airbnb, Shopify, or Amazon businesses, according to internal payment tracking and financial records reviewed by CNBC.

    Carr, who was listed as a property host, said that when it came to his experience with HFA, there was chaos on both sides of the marketplace. On one occasion, he said, he was contacted by the owner of a hotel who found one of its rooms on Airbnb. Another time, a woman messaged him 30 to 40 times when she couldn’t find her booking.

    “People are going to the hotels saying I got an Airbnb, and they’re like, ‘What are you talking about?’” Carr said.

    Carr and other HFA investors told CNBC their frustrations were dismissed or met with legal threats. But in a letter to investors cited in the lawsuit, HFA conceded that its Airbnb business had been disappointing. 

    “Due to Airbnb constant changes we believe this program will take much longer than anticipated to help you our client reach your goals,” HFA wrote.

    Still, HFA declined to refund investors’ funds, instead offering them an Amazon or Shopify storefront, according to the letter and the lawsuit. Hunker said this was contemplated by the parties’ agreements.

    Getting properties listed on Airbnb involved some finagling, because the company requires hosts to prove ownership. To get around Airbnb’s rules, HFA instructed its investors to list their own homes, a former employee and two investors told CNBC. Hunker denies that HFA gave those instructions. Once validated as a property owner, investors could then add more listings that HFA would pull from other websites.

    Negative reviews flowed in from unhappy would-be vacationers, outraged investors and a business owner who’d discovered his property had been listed without consent.

    An HFA investor told CNBC that one listing received a comment from a guest who said he paid $800 for a motel room that cost less than half that amount and described it as a “total scam.”

    “Host does not own the property,” the reviewer said, according to a screenshot of the message seen by CNBC. “It is a standard motel room, no frills.”

    On a hot September day in Las Vegas in 2022, another guest showed up at an MGM hotel only to discover there was no reservation through Airbnb. Neither the guest nor Airbnb could get in touch with the listed host for hours. Carr, the HFA investor host on record for the property, provided CNBC with screenshots of the messages.

    “I had my family double parked on the Vegas strip for three hours wasting gas while I was running back and forth between the three MGMs in 103 degree weather being told each time after waiting in line that there was no reservation in my name,” the guest wrote.

    Eventually MGM found the room had been booked through Expedia, which is where HFA turned after receiving the reservation request on Airbnb.

    An Expedia spokesperson declined to comment.

    Collin Ballard was shocked in May 2022, when he saw photos from his Dallas hostel advertised on Airbnb. Most alarming was the price: $1,760 a night vs. his starting nightly rate of $40.

    Collin Ballard found a room from his Dallas hostel listed on Airbnb without his permission.

    Collin Ballard

    Ballard wrote to the host, telling him he was the owner and asking him to remove the listing.

    “I just figured it was someone scamming,” Ballard said in an interview, adding that he knew nothing about Airbnb arbitrage. 

    Ballard said nobody ever responded to his message, but the listing was eventually taken down.

    Gains never materialized

    Airbnb ultimately removed most if not all of HFA’s listings over the course of several months in 2022, according to the lawsuit, though employees and investors told CNBC they weren’t sure why.

    Several investors told CNBC that they encountered verification problems because it was impossible to prove they owned their listings. HFA responded by forging bills or other documents with the stolen listings’ address, according to investors, the lawsuit, an HFA training video, and a former employee.

    If the allegations are true, HFA was sidestepping a key safety feature. False information can make it difficult for Airbnb to respond in an emergency or a situation that calls for the involvement of its safety team.

    Airbnb told CNBC that it was rolling out a more robust verification process in the U.S. and elsewhere beginning as early as 2024.

    Hunker denied allegations that HFA forges documents, and said Airbnb doesn’t require the lister to be the property owner.

    By the end of last year, HFA’s investors realized that their promised gains were not materializing. Dozens unsuccessfully pressed for refunds of their deposits, according to a former employee, an internal HFA document, and the investor lawsuit.

    A month after HFA’s then-counsel wrote to two dozen investors in January 2023 declining to provide refunds, investors filed their lawsuit, with 22 plaintiffs saying they received fewer than five bookings each, including 16 who said they had no bookings at all. 

    Hunker said HFA could present records showing its clients profited from the company’s services on the condition that CNBC sign a nondisclosure agreement. CNBC declined.

    Agyeman continues promoting his businesses on social media. In his Instagram bio, he includes a new private equity venture called OKU Capital. Agyeman is its only member, according to Florida state filings and the firm’s LinkedIn profile.

    Agyeman’s Wealthway advertises “fully managed,” “automated” vacation rental businesses with “minimal to no risk.” It’s similar to HFA, down to the branding on its website.

    On its website, Wealthway has a video appearing to show a meeting between Agyeman and an Airbnb executive named David Levine, whose LinkedIn profile says he’s Airbnb’s head of API and enterprise partnerships for North America.

    “What you guys have been doing at Wealthway is incredible and you guys have been following our partner guidelines,” Levine says in the recording. 

    In November, Botes, the former HFA salesman, became suspicious of the clip and sent it to Levine in a LinkedIn message.

    “That video appears to have been taken out of context and altered,” Levine replied, according to screenshots of the messages viewed by CNBC. “Neither I, nor Airbnb, have any affiliation with Wealth Ways Vacation Rentals.”

    Airbnb said it believes the clip is inauthentic. Levine didn’t respond to CNBC’s LinkedIn message. Hunker didn’t respond to a question about the video’s authenticity.

    WATCH: NYC’s new legislation cracking down on Airbnb

    NYC's new legislation cracking down on Airbnbs goes into effect today

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gen Z, millennials are less worried about fraud than older generations. But they have a unique risk

    Gen Z, millennials are less worried about fraud than older generations. But they have a unique risk

    [ad_1]

    Pekic | E+ | Getty Images

    Younger adults are less worried about financial fraud than are older generations, a recent study found.

    Only 15% of Gen Z and 20% of millennials are concerned about falling victim to stolen money or assets through deceptive tactics, according to a Bank of America Better Money Habits survey of 1,000 respondents. By comparison, about 27% of Gen X and 27% of baby boomers feel at risk of fraud.

    “Younger generations are still navigating financial literacy and [are] still understanding the pitfalls” of fraud, said Jennifer Ehresman, head of client protection for consumer and small business at Bank of America.

    More from Personal Finance:
    3 ways Gen Zers can build credit before renting
    Gen Z, millennials now the biggest ‘dupe’ shoppers
    Gen Z, millennials have a much harder time ‘adulting’ than their parents

    Younger cohorts also tend to believe they are less exposed to fraud thanks to the immediacy of online banking apps; the accessibility allows them to check account transactions in real time, Ehresman said.

    “They feel more connected in the flow of financials,” she added.

    However, believing they can spot and report fraud quickly may offer a false sense of security.

    It’s true that older adults tend to have bigger account balances on the line. But that doesn’t mean younger generations can’t experience severe consequences, said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree.

    “Their credit may not be as strong … they don’t have that much wiggle room in their budget. Financial fraud is a really big deal and can be really impactful,” Schulz said.

    Social media scams are a problem for younger adults

    Fraudsters are using younger adults’ online presence to their advantage. Consumers lost about $2.7 billion to scams on social media, far higher than any other method of contact, the Federal Trade Commission reported in October.

    Those losses are more common for younger generations. During the first six months of 2023, social media was the criminals’ point of contact in 38% of fraud losses for people ages 20 to 29. For those 18 or 19 years of age, the figure was 47%, according to the FTC.

    Fraud isn’t always ‘fixed in an afternoon’

    The amount of time it takes to recover from a scam will depend on the information compromised.

    “In some cases, it’s fixed in an afternoon; other cases, there can be more involved,” Schulz said.

    For example, if a scammer obtained your credit card number and racked up charges, fixing the problem may take just a phone call where you report the issue, as credit cards have rigorous fraud protections.

    However, if someone stole your Social Security number, that can have bigger ramifications that are harder to recover from.

    A criminal could use that information to open new credit cards or take out new loans in your name.

    They could also use your personal information to file a tax return in your name and claim your refund. The IRS’ Identity Theft Victim Assistance program had 294,138 individual case receipts during fiscal year 2023, a hike from 92,631 cases in 2019, according to a recent report from National Taxpayer Advocate.

    How to build a ‘financial fraud check’

    “One of the best things to do is building [a] basic financial fraud check,” Schulz said.

    That means routinely checking your bills and credit card statements. A fraudster who gets your credit card information will test if you notice small charges.

    “It’s a matter of a bad guy [who] gets ahold of your credit card and they buy a candy bar at a gas station,” Schulz said.

    If you don’t recognize a charge, take action and report it.

    “The first time you look through the list of transactions will take a while. But … it builds that positive habit,” he said.

    Be skeptical any time you’re thinking of signing up for a service, especially if it requires your financial information. Before you fill in any forms with sensitive data, understand the fine print and what the impact could be if that information were stolen.

    “If something feels too good to be true, it’s okay to say no,” said Schulz.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump gag order in fraud case reinstated by New York appeals court

    Trump gag order in fraud case reinstated by New York appeals court

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends trial in a civil fraud case that state Attorney General Letitia James brought against him, his adult sons, the Trump Organization and others, in New York City, Oct. 3, 2023.

    Eduardo Munoz | Reuters

    A New York appeals court Thursday reinstated a gag order on Donald Trump in the former president’s $250 million civil business fraud trial.

    The order bars Trump from making public statements about the staff of Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron, who is presiding over the ongoing trial.

    Engoron had imposed the gag order on Trump after Trump repeatedly targeted the judge’s principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield.

    Engoron later imposed a similar gag order on Trump’s attorneys, barring them from making any public statements about confidential communications between the judge and his staff. The gag orders on Trump’s attorneys were also reinstated Thursday.

    Engoron has said his chambers have been “inundated” with threats and harassment against him and his staff during the trial. An official who monitors threats for the New York Court System’s Department of Public Safety told the appeals court in a sworn statement that Trump’s comments about Greenfield have prompted “hundreds” of threatening messages, many of which were antisemitic.

    In its ruling Thursday, a four-judge appellate panel lifted a temporary suspension of the gag orders on Trump and his attorneys that was put in place while Trump appealed the speech restrictions.

    The gag orders are now likely to stay in place for the remainder of the trial, which is expected to last until mid-January.

    Engoron acknowledged the ruling in court and informed the parties in the case that he intends to “enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously.”

    Trump attorney Christopher Kise said the appeals court’s ruling marked a “tragic day for the rule of law” in a statement to NBC News.

    “Hard to imagine a more unfair process and hard to believe this is happening in America,” Kise said, claiming the ruling prevents Trump from publicly explaining why he believes his trial is unfair.

    The appellate ruling came three days after Trump’s attorneys urged the appeals court not to reimpose the gag orders, arguing that they unconstitutionally blocked Trump from accusing Engoron and Greenfield of political bias.

    Engoron has found Trump in violation of his gag order twice, imposing a total of $15,000 in fines on the former president since the fraud trial began in early October.

    The narrow order does not block Trump from attacking Engoron or New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the case accusing him and his co-defendants of falsely inflating Trump’s assets for financial gain.

    Trump has repeatedly attacked both of them, casting the judge as a Trump “hater” and decrying the case as a “witch hunt.”

    On Wednesday, Trump sent at least six separate Truth Social posts targeting Engoron’s wife, accusing her of criticizing Trump and commenting on the trial on X, formerly Twitter.

    Engoron’s wife told Newsweek earlier this month that she does not have an account on X and has not posted any anti-Trump messages. After the gag orders were reinstated, Office of Court Administration spokesman Al Baker said that the judge’s wife “has sent no social media posts regarding the former president.”

    “They are not hers,” Baker said in a statement, NBC reported.

    Trump sent at least three additional posts Thursday claiming that Engoron’s wife sent anti-Trump social media messages.

    Read more CNBC politics coverage

    Engoron has already found Trump, his two adult sons, the Trump Organization and its top executives liable for fraudulently misstating the values of real estate properties and other assets. The trial will determine penalties and resolve other claims of wrongdoing in James’ suit.

    In addition to seeking around $250 million in damages, James wants to permanently bar Trump Sr., Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump from running a New York business.

    Engoron on Thursday morning extended the scheduled end of the trial from mid-December. He set closing arguments for Jan. 11 after Trump’s lawyers asked for more time to prepare.

    The defense is expected to call Trump back to the stand as its final witness on Dec. 11. Engoron plans to issue a verdict in the case a few weeks after the trial ends.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Caroline Ellison said SBF considered raising money from Saudi crown prince to repay FTX customers

    Caroline Ellison said SBF considered raising money from Saudi crown prince to repay FTX customers

    [ad_1]

    Caroline Ellison, former chief executive officer of Alameda Research LLC, exits court in New York, US, on Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2023. 

    Yuki Iwamura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Caroline Ellison, who ran Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto hedge fund while also dating the FTX founder, told jurors in her second day of testimony that one way her boss was considering repaying FTX customer accounts was by raising money from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

    Ellison, 28, pleaded guilty in December to multiple counts of fraud as part of a plea deal with the government and is now viewed as the prosecution’s star witness in Bankman-Fried’s trial. In damning testimony Tuesday, she said Bankman-Fried directed her and other staffers to defraud FTX customers by funneling billions of dollars to sister hedge fund Alameda Research.

    Assistant U.S. attorney Danielle Sassoon wasted no time diving back into the questioning Wednesday when court was called to session.

    After previously detailing how FTX customer funds were used to repay Alameda loans, Ellison said Wednesday that crypto lender Genesis called back a bunch of loans in 2022 and asked to see a balance sheet. Because Alameda’s actual balance sheet showed it had $15 billion in FTX customer funds, Bankman-Fried directed Ellison on June 28, 2022, to come up with “alternative” balance sheets that didn’t look as bad, she said.

    Ellison, wearing a buttoned gray blazer with her long hair swept over her left shoulder, said she discussed her concerns with Bankman-Fried as well as top execs Gary Wang and Nishad Singh. She said the group brainstormed ways to make the balance sheet look better.

    After the meeting, Ellison prepared a number of different balance sheet variations to send to Genesis. Eventually, according to Ellison, Bankman-Fried chose the one that omitted a line saying “FTX borrows,” hiding $10 billion in borrowed customer money. “Some was netted against related-party loans,” she said, and “some netted against crypto.”

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon questions Caroline Ellison as defense lawyer Mark Cohen stands to object at Sam Bankman-Fried’s fraud trial before U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan over the collapse of FTX, the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange, at Federal Court in New York City, U.S., October 11, 2023 in this courtroom sketch. 

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    That made it seem “like we had plenty of assets to cover our open term loans,” Ellison said.

    Ellison told jurors she “was in a constant state of dread” since she knew there were billions of dollars of loans being recalled that could only be repaid with money from FTX customers. She said she was “worried about the possibility of customer withdrawals” that could happen at any time.

    “I was concerned that if anyone found out, it would all come crashing down,” Ellison said. When asked by Sassoon why she continued with the scheme, Ellison said, “Sam told me to.”

    By October 2022, the internal balance sheet had liabilities of $15.6 billion, while the numbers they showed the lender indicated just under $8 billion. Ellison said Bankman-Fried was talking about trying to raise money from Mohammed bin Salman, also known as MBS, as a way to make FTX customers whole.

    Disappearing Signal messages

    Ellison, a Stanford graduate and one of Bankman-Fried’s earliest recruits to Alameda in 2017, was reportedly persuaded by Bankman-Fried to ditch her job at Wall Street trading firm Jane Street to join Alameda as a trader. At the time, the hedge fund was still in its original office in the San Francisco Bay area.

    Six years later, Ellison is testifying against the 31-year-old Bankman-Fried, who faces seven federal charges, including wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering, all tied to the collapse of FTX and Alameda late last year. If convicted in the trial, which began last week, Bankman-Fried could spend his life in prison. He has pleaded not guilty.

    Ellison said Bankman-Fried directed FTX and Alameda employees to use the disappearing message setting on Signal and told them to be very careful about what they put in writing because of potential legal exposure. In addition to a companywide meeting about the Signal policy, Bankman-Fried also told employees that they should only write things on Slack that they’re comfortable seeing on the front page of The New York Times.

    Caroline Ellison, former CEO of Alameda Research, center, arrives at court in New York on Oct. 10, 2023.

    Yuki Iwamura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Backing up to the summer and fall of 2022, Ellison provided more detail about her interactions with Bankman-Fried as his crypto firms’ financial problems were becoming more apparent. Ellison said they talked about bringing in more money for FTX one of two ways: by acquiring BlockFi or by selling equity.

    In August 2022, Ellison said, Bankman-Fried blamed her for Alameda’s finances even though she’d been warning about FTX’s expanding portfolio of venture investments and the need to repay FTX customer accounts. She said Bankman-Fried told her she should have hedged and, “speaking loudly and strongly,” said it was her fault.

    On the stand, Ellison took some blame, admitting she should have done things differently, “but Sam was the one who chose to make all the investments that put us in a leveraged position,” she said.

    Ellison, who’d started dating Bankman-Fried in the summer of 2021, said that by the fall of 2022 they’d been broken up for several months. She said she would try to avoid one-on-one contact with Bankman-Fried, though they were still talking on Signal and were together in group meetings. She said she still provided him the same regular updates on Alameda and its balance sheet.

    Ellison said she kept a Google Doc that had a subcategory labeled “things Sam is freaking out about.” It included “raising from MBS,” as well as “getting regulators to crack down on Binance,” a rival exchange that was also an early investor in FTX. Bankman-Fried wanted to see Binance feel some pain because he saw that as the best way for FTX to increase market share, Ellison said.

    Another worry on the list was “bad pr in the next six months,” which Bankman-Fried feared would interfere with FTX’s efforts to obtain a license for futures trading in the U.S., she said.

    WATCH: Ellison says ‘Sam directed me to commit these crimes

    Star witness in SBF trial: "Sam directed me to commit these crimes"

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How this 77-year-old widow lost $661,000 in a common tech scam: ‘I realized I had been defrauded of everything’

    How this 77-year-old widow lost $661,000 in a common tech scam: ‘I realized I had been defrauded of everything’

    [ad_1]

    Marjorie Bloom was the victim of a “tech support” scam. She lost $661,000 in the fraud.

    Marjorie Bloom

    In the spring of 2021, Marjorie Bloom waited for a phone call that would never come.

    Over the course of the previous month, the retiree had wired hundreds of thousands of dollars into cryptocurrency per the suggestion of someone she believed to be a trusted confidant. The man claimed to be a “fraud investigator” at PNC Bank, where she’d been a longtime customer.

    At his behest, Bloom, a widow who is now 77, liquidated her nest egg — savings, stocks, an annuity — for a total of $661,000.

    More from Personal Finance:
    Student loan borrowers at risk of scams as payments restart
    Social Security’s trust funds are running dry: 4 things to know
    This account is like an ‘extra strength’ Roth IRA

    The action was supposedly preventative: The “investigator” persuaded Bloom that criminals, using stolen personal data, were in the process of pilfering her life savings. To protect her money, he said, she had to move it quickly — and covertly. Divulging the problem to anyone, even her three children, could compromise their efforts, he said.

    Had she alerted her children, she might have avoided the scam: Bloom’s daughter, Ester, is the deputy managing editor for CNBC Make It. (Ester Bloom put CNBC in touch with her mother but was not involved in the reporting or editing of this story.)

    The “investigator,” though very convincing, turned out to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Bloom, a retired civil servant, was ensnared in a “tech support” scam.

    This type of fraud is increasingly common and largely targets older adults, who lost $588 million to tech support scams in 2022, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Criminals persuade victims they have a serious computer issue such as a virus, then masquerade as computer technicians from well-known companies as a cover for theft. Often, they persuade victims to wire funds to fraudulent accounts.

    So on that Friday morning in May 2021, Bloom eagerly awaited a call with instructions on how to access the life savings she had diligently taken steps to secure.

    The hours ticked by. Growing nervous, she eventually called the “investigator.” His number had been disconnected. She called PNC, but the bank didn’t have a record of the employee.

    “All of a sudden, this grayness lifted,” said Bloom, who lives in Chevy Chase, Maryland. “I realized I had been defrauded of everything.”

    ‘The money is there. The scammers know that’

    Bloom’s experience reveals an unsettling reality at a time when technological advancement, little-understood investment options and a patchwork of protections in the U.S. financial system expose more older Americans to financial fraud.

    Americans 60 and older lost $3.1 billion to cyber fraud in 2022, an 84% increase from 2021, according to the FBI. Losses have jumped ninefold in just five years, from $342 million in 2017, FBI data shows. Because fraud statistics are based only on reported incidents, its true scope may be far greater.

    Older adults, many of whom have saved their entire careers for retirement, can have the most to lose. In addition to retirement savings, they might have other pots of income and wealth: home equity, Social Security payments, pension checks and, if widowed, maybe a life insurance payout.

    “The money is there,” said Rebecca Keithley, a supervisory special agent in the FBI’s Economic Crimes unit and the bureau’s national program coordinator of the Department of Justice’s Elder Justice Initiative. “The scammers know that.”

    Keithley — also the FBI’s national program coordinator for frauds and swindles — is not involved in the investigation of Bloom’s case.

    Meanwhile, the U.S. is undergoing a massive demographic shift as an average of 10,000 baby boomers hit retirement age every day. This generation has shouldered more responsibility for their retirement preparations as employers began shifting away from pensions to 401(k)-type retirement plans decades ago.

    Consumers ages 65 and older had an average of $232,710 in 401(k) plan savings in 2022, according to Vanguard Group, one of the nation’s largest retirement-plan administrators. Further, 65- to 74-year-olds had a net worth of more than $1.2 million, on average, in 2019, according to the Federal Reserve’s most recent Survey of Consumer Finances.

    Fraud may deprive victims of funds for basic living expenses such as food and shelter, or for the travel and leisure they’d worked so hard to attain in their post-work life.

    Beyond the immediate financial hit, fraud has several knock-on effects: Victims who raid their tax-preferred retirement funds may owe the IRS a hefty bill. Taking out a second mortgage or maxing out credit cards carry regular debt payments.

    Older adults don’t have the same ability as younger victims to earn in the workforce, and it’s often challenging to recoup money from criminals or financial institutions.

    “Most victims will say, ‘I’m devastated financially, I’m ruined,’” said Kathy Stokes, director of fraud prevention programs at AARP, an advocacy group for older adults. “But emotionally it’s as bad, if not worse.”

    How criminals ‘hijack’ the aging brain

    Tech support scams like the one Bloom suffered are an acute threat for older adults.

    They are a type of “call center” fraud, which “overwhelmingly target” older adults, the FBI said. About half of people victimized by illegal call centers are 60 or older, and they experience 69% of the total financial losses relative to other age groups.

    Nearly 18,000 Americans ages 60 and over reported being a victim of tech support scams in 2022, the FBI said. That’s more than any other type of elder fraud and almost doubled from 2020.

    Victims 60 and older lost more to these scams than all other age groups combined, the FBI reported. The average person lost $33,000, though losses extended to over $1 million in some cases, the FBI said.

    In Bloom’s case, her computer froze suddenly on April 22, 2021. A popup window alerted her to call a customer support phone number listed on the screen, supposedly for Microsoft.

    Bloom then made a key mistake: She called the number, an action that real tech companies won’t ever ask of customers in a security pop-up warning.

    During the call, a “Microsoft engineer” told her that foreign hackers had hijacked her computer and stolen sensitive personal data. Her financial accounts, he suggested, were also likely under threat.

    When Bloom told him she banked with PNC, the engineer — who was really a con artist — transferred her to an accomplice posing as a PNC fraud investigator. The man convinced Bloom that there were pending transactions worth $29,000 tied to her bank account. Her money had to be moved without delay to a new account, the scammer urged.

    None of it was true.

    Fraud Inc: How to steal $100 billion from Medicare and Medicaid

    “I fell for it,” said Bloom, who retired in December 2017 after serving 42 years as a federal attorney, including stints at the Department of Energy and, most recently, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

    “I didn’t tell anybody,” Bloom added.

    The appearance of an immediate threat is an “age-old psychological technique” common in frauds that tends to be “more successful with the aging brain,” said Keithley of the FBI.

    In this technique, known as an “amygdala hijack” in reference to the brain’s fear and threat response center, criminals trigger strong emotional reactions that overwhelm the rational part of our brains. We act rather than think, a classic fight-or-flight response — in this case induced by nefarious social engineers, often part of sophisticated organized crime networks.

    Older adults tend to be home more often, use landline phones and be generally unsophisticated about technology and safe online behavior — all of which make them vulnerable and therefore frequent targets, Keithley said.

    The Covid pandemic was a disproportionate threat to older adults, keeping Americans indoors and quickly pushing them online. The health emergency “ushered in a new wave of exploitative practices targeted at older Americans,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a 2022 report to Congress.

    ‘Somebody should have asked’

    Marjorie Bloom on a trip to Vietnam in 2019, before she was defrauded. Bloom expects she’ll have to make sacrifices, such as traveling less, after she lost her life savings in the scam.

    Marjorie Bloom

    Bloom, an avid traveler, is undeniably tough. In 2013, at 67 years old, she trekked to the base camp of Mount Everest, the world’s tallest mountain; the base camp alone sits at an altitude of about 18,000 feet.

    But the scam tested her resolve.

    A year after the fraud, Bloom set out on a road trip to North Dakota. Five days in, she had a panic attack that seized the right side of her body in pain. She canceled everything and went home.

    “In retrospect, I think the entire ordeal was a fearful reaction to spending money,” Bloom said.

    Before she realized she’d been scammed, Bloom had made five wire transfers within 28 days, amounting to $661,000, according to receipts of the transactions, which were reviewed by CNBC.

    Much of those funds came from liquidating a stock portfolio — an inheritance from her parents — worth more than $400,000. She also liquidated the bulk of an annuity worth more than $200,000; if she’d kept it intact, it would have begun paying her a guaranteed income stream of about $2,700 a month for the next three decades, starting in 2023.

    “This was my life savings,” Bloom said. “It’s what I was going to live on as a retiree.”

    Hikers walk to Everest Base Camp in Nepal.

    Kriangkrai Thitimakorn | Moment | Getty Images

    When she discovered the loss, Bloom’s immediate thought was of her three kids: a “profound disappointment” at squandering the reserves she’d intended to bequeath them. Bloom had wanted to offer the same financial assistance to her children as her parents had provided for her. Now, much of that money is gone, she said.

    Her second concern was for her own financial security. Bloom still receives regular checks from a federal pension and Social Security, now her main sources of retirement income. It’s enough to cover her mortgage, condo fee, car payment and other necessities — but the financial loss exposes Bloom to sacrifices nonetheless.

    For one, she laments an inability to travel as frequently as she’d hoped in retirement. She is a member of the North Bethesda Camera Club and uses trips as an outlet for photography, a hobby that developed during her Everest expedition.

    “I’m not starving,” Bloom said. “But I could do a lot more [if I hadn’t lost money].”

    “I’ve lost a significant amount that I’ve worked for,” she said.

    All of a sudden, this grayness lifted. I realized I had been defrauded of everything.

    Marjorie Bloom

    Maryland resident

    Bloom sued PNC Bank — where she’d been a customer for over a decade — in May 2022 for full financial restitution and other damages, such as interest and attorney’s fees.

    In her lawsuit, Bloom argued that the fraud was ultimately successful because PNC ignored “obvious red flags” and “textbook evidence” of financial exploitation raised by her wire transfer requests, which were inconsistent with her typical pattern of banking.

    According to the lawsuit, the bank didn’t take steps to investigate or determine whether her money was at risk. The lawsuit claimed the bank acted negligently and breached its contractual duty of care.

    “I’m retired … [and] I look my age,” Bloom said. “There’s just no doubt about it.”

    “Somebody should have asked,” she added.

    In February, a federal judge in the District of Columbia dismissed the negligence claim but allowed the claim for breach of contract to move forward in court. 

    Bloom and the bank settled the lawsuit in September. Bloom declined to disclose terms of the agreement to CNBC. (Bloom’s comments to CNBC for this story occurred in the spring, before the parties entered into settlement negotiations.)

    A spokesperson for PNC Bank declined comment on the settlement.

    Asked about the lawsuit in the spring, the bank said it acted within the scope of its legal duty.

    Sergio Flores/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    “PNC maintains a comprehensive set of security controls to help protect our customers from increasingly sophisticated fraud threats and, when possible, we do our best to recover funds on behalf of impacted customers,” a spokesperson told CNBC, when asked about Bloom’s case and statements about the bank.

    “While PNC regrets any losses incurred by a customer, we disagree with the allegations in this case and believe we acted appropriately with respect to these transactions,” the spokesperson added.

    ‘You’re basically at the mercy of your bank’

    Lawsuits such as Bloom’s are rarely successful, legal experts said. Outcomes hinge on a complex web of federal and state rules that govern banking and elder financial fraud.

    For instance, there’s a distinction between “unauthorized” and “authorized” banking transactions.

    Unauthorized transactions occur when criminals get hold of a customer’s personal information — a debit card number, let’s say — and buy something without approval. Customers are often reimbursed in such instances.

    However, in Bloom’s case, she made the wire transfers. Transactions initiated by a customer — even a victim duped by scammers — are generally considered “authorized,” said Carla Sanchez-Adams, senior attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. And such transactions carry weak customer protections, she said.

    “You’re basically at the mercy of your bank,” Sanchez-Adams said.

    Wire transfers also have weaker protections than other types of electronic fund transfers — such as debit card, ATM or peer-to-peer transactions, for example — because they’re exempt from the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, a federal consumer protection law passed in 1978, she said.

    I’m retired … [and] I look my age. There’s just no doubt about it. Somebody should have asked.

    Marjorie Bloom

    fraud victim

    Another federal law — the Bank Secrecy Act — sets standards for banks to ensure they have controls to prevent and detect crime such as money laundering and terrorist financing. While the law requires banks to file reports to regulators in certain cases to flag suspicious activity, it doesn’t give individual consumers a legal remedy to recoup money lost due to criminal enterprise, Sanchez-Adams said.

    “Banks should have some skin in the game,” Sanchez-Adams said. “If you don’t make them hurt, they won’t change their practices.”

    Some states have elder-protection laws that establish separate duties to protect older adults from financial fraud, but they vary broadly in scope, she said.

    For example, under Maryland law, banks are required to report suspected elder fraud to local law enforcement and other parties. As Bloom argued in her lawsuit, that means employees have likely received training to identify such activity. Such “heightened procedures” to protect older adults are part of the bank’s duty of care relative to older customers, the lawsuit said.

    To sidestep internal protocols — which most banks have established, according to industry data — scammers will often coach victims on what to say to bank tellers or other representatives, experts said. Perhaps the money is for a loan, or for a home-improvement project, for example. Bloom didn’t require coaching, she said; according to her lawsuit, PNC bank employees didn’t perform more than a “perfunctory inquiry” necessary to complete the transfers.

    And there’s an additional tension: Banks and other financial institutions have to weigh issues such as consumer privacy when choosing to intervene, said Marve Ann Alaimo, a partner and elder law expert at Porter Wright Morris & Arthur.

    If the bank reasonably does its best to protect a client and there’s still financial damage, it isn’t necessarily the bank’s fault, she said.

    “We live in a free-market economy. And when you own something, you have the ultimate right to dispose of it as you wish,” Alaimo said, referring to money held in a financial account.

    “There’s only so much protection a third party can provide for you,” she added. They “aren’t the ultimate arbiter of free will.”

    Cryptocurrency gives thieves ‘new advantages’

    Meanwhile, Bloom’s money apparently went on a global tour.

    Scammers had her wire funds from her PNC bank account to an account at the now-defunct Signature Bank in New York. According to the lawsuit, from there, her money was transferred to an account on the cryptocurrency trading platform Coinbase, which scammers created using Bloom’s picture and personal data. The assets were then converted into cryptocurrency — a type of virtual asset — and, an investigation later showed, moved to offshore accounts on the Binance crypto trading platform in the Cayman Islands.

    Thieves have successfully used crypto to steal increasing amounts of money across all types of internet scams, according to the FBI.

    In this context, cryptocurrency — examples of which include bitcoin and ethereum — is like cash; it’s just another way to move money from Point A to Point B. But crypto “offers up new advantages” for thieves who transfer and launder illicit proceeds, said Patrick Wyman, chief of the FBI’s Virtual Asset Unit. Wyman is not involved in the investigation of Bloom’s case.

    For one, using crypto is an easy way to move large sums of money across borders very quickly without having to engage with the financial system, Wyman said.

    A Bitcoin automated teller machine (ATM) at a gas station in Washington, DC, on Jan. 19, 2023.

    Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Another benefit for scammers: Crypto offers them a level of anonymity. Criminals use the digital assets to obfuscate their real identity — which, by the nature of crypto transactions, is difficult if not impossible to ascertain.

    However, unlike with traditional financial transactions, which are private, all crypto transactions are recorded on a public ledger, or blockchain. So, while law enforcement officials may not be able to learn the identity of a perpetrator, they can generally trace the flow of money, Wyman said.

    And that offers a silver lining for victims: “In some cases, we absolutely are able to recover those funds,” Wyman said.

    In April, the U.S. Department of Justice seized more than $112 million worth of virtual currency linked to crypto investment scams. The assets were seized from six accounts, one of which held $66.4 million, likely tied to wire fraud schemes, the DOJ said.

    Wyman encourages victims to report fraud to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center as soon as possible. It generally gets harder to recoup money the longer victims wait, he said.

    Bloom reported the theft to the FBI; her case remains open. She’s not optimistic about her chances of recovering money via law enforcement efforts. Even if the authorities are successful, she expects it will take years.

    “I oscillate,” she said of her reflections on the theft.

    “I go from being thoroughly upset and [asking] ‘What in the world was I thinking?’ to saying ‘You just have to move forward. What’s done is done.’”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kazakh fintech Freedom Holding is being investigated by DOJ, SEC, documents show

    Kazakh fintech Freedom Holding is being investigated by DOJ, SEC, documents show

    [ad_1]

    Freedom Holding CEO Timur Turlov speaks during a press interview in Moscow, Russia, Oct. 10, 2019.

    Maxim Shemetov | Reuters

    Freedom Holding, a Nasdaq-traded Kazakh financial firm that’s been the target of prominent short sellers, is being investigated by federal prosecutors and Securities and Exchange Commission counsel over compliance issues, insider stock moves, and an offshore affiliate tied to sanctioned individuals, CNBC has learned.

    The SEC’s Boston regional office has been probing Freedom for months, according to documents seen by CNBC and people familiar with the matter. The company, headquartered in Almaty, Kazakhstan, has a $5 billion market cap and is controlled and majority-owned by 35-year-old billionaire CEO Timur Turlov, a former Russian citizen.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Massachusetts is also making preliminary inquiries into Freedom, documents seen by CNBC show. Such inquiries often occur after a civil probe unearths evidence of possible crimes.

    Freedom shares fell as much as 9.3% Friday morning after CNBC’s report.

    The overlapping SEC and DOJ probes are scrutinizing the firm’s internal controls and offshore operations, as well as Turlov’s claims that Freedom can get its largely Russian client base access to hot U.S. IPOs, according to the documents and sources.

    Turlov and Freedom are aware of the SEC probe, which has been going on for months, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The Justice Department’s involvement with these issues is more recent, documents show. Probes of this kind can take years and may not lead to criminal or civil charges. So far, there have been no formal charges or allegations of wrongdoing. 

    Turlov didn’t respond to CNBC’s interview request, but in an interview that was published by a Kazakh outlet Thursday, he acknowledged that “almost all global regulators came to us this summer.”

    Freedom declined to comment.

    An SEC spokesperson told CNBC that it doesn’t comment on the existence or nonexistence of an investigation.

    A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. 

    The SEC has been aware of potential securities violations at Freedom since at least 2022. Some of the issues that caught investigators’ attention — including allegations related to sanctions violations, IPO access and stock trading — were also raised in an August report from short seller Hindenburg Research, which claimed that Freedom “still does business in the Russian market, and that the company has openly flouted sanctions along with anti-money laundering (AML) and know-your-customer (KYC) rules.”

    The SEC intensified its scrutiny after the Hindenburg report and an analysis published in April by short seller Citron Research, sources familiar with the matter told CNBC.

    Freedom’s website describes the company as a provider of investment banking and brokerage services to Central Asia and Eastern Europe. Its website lists two addresses in the U.S., one in New York and the other at a Las Vegas co-working and virtual office space. 

    The company leases a 15,250-square-foot office in the Trump Building in New York’s Financial District, according to filings. The two floors house Freedom’s existing U.S. operations, including a brokerage firm registered with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Freedom says in filings it has nearly 3,700 employees and 370,000 brokerage customers.

    The Trump Building at 40 Wall St. in New York.

    Jin Lee | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Turlov founded Freedom in 2010, and by 2013 he had expanded the business from Moscow to the EU. The company said it divested its Russian business in February, almost a year after Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine. Turlov, a former citizen of Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean as well as Russia, owns 71% of Freedom shares, worth roughly $3.6 billion.

    Turlov has been a citizen of Kazakhstan since 2022. He was required to renounce both his Saint Kitts and his Russian citizenship, as Kazakhstan doesn’t recognize dual citizenship.

    ‘Signs of illegal activity’

    The Hindenburg report, in part, alleged that Freedom helped sanctioned individuals gain access to the U.S. financial system through a Belizean holding company, also owned by Turlov, that helped funnel and obfuscate transactions. In SEC filings, Freedom acknowledged it does business with sanctioned individuals through the Belize affiliate, but denies those individuals have access to U.S., U.K. or EU financial systems through Freedom.

    The Belizean entity, incorporated in 2014, is now named Freedom Securities Trading Belize, or FST Belize.

    “FST Belize, we have the same sanctions compliance as in the entire holding,” Turlov said in an August interview with a publication in Kazakhstan. “There is no reason for sanctions, if there is no involvement of U.S. representatives in the operation.”

    FST Belize holds Kazakh licenses that let it operate a securities trading platform and process international payments and money transfers, according to the company. In 2021, the Kazakh government added the subsidiary to a list of companies “with signs of illegal activity.”

    In response, Freedom said it “fully complies” with local laws and regulations wherever it operates.

    Another point of inquiry by U.S. authorities is the trading activity of Freedom stock, which was uplisted to the Nasdaq in 2019 under the ticker FRHC after previously trading over the counter.

    Historically, negative reports from established short sellers will hurt a company’s stock. Freedom shares dipped about 8% the two trading days that followed Hindenburg’s report. They quickly rebounded, including a 25% jump on Aug. 18, with no apparent explanation.

    Hindenburg alleged that Freedom and Turlov protected the company’s stock from wild swings by ensuring that clients held the shares in their brokerage accounts, reducing the risk of volatility.

    At least five law firms have said they’re investigating claims on behalf of investors for potential violations of securities law since the Hindenburg report.

    Citron compared Freedom to Sam Bankman-Fried’s failed and allegedly fraudulent trading firm, Alameda Research. The investment firm said Turlov’s ties to Russia and its continued brokerage operations in the country made the company a prime candidate for an SEC investigation.

    Freedom Holding’s main offices are in Esentai Tower, the tallest building in Kazakhstan’s financial hub, the city of Almaty. Other tenants in the Skidmore, Owings & Merrill-designed building include the Ritz-Carlton Almaty and Ernst & Young’s Kazakhstan operations.

    Andrey Rudakov | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Freedom has faced prior regulatory challenges.

    In July, the company’s European subsidiary paid a 50,000 euro fine to the Cypriot securities regulator over failures in its money laundering and anti-terrorist financing controls.

    And last year, Freedom’s former U.S. auditor, WSRP, was replaced by Deloitte Kazakhstan, after the U.S. audit regulator found that three of Freedom’s auditors at WSRP failed to follow proper standards of review. Freedom’s auditors were sanctioned and barred for what the regulator said was a failure to assess the true nature of the company’s relationship with its Belize entity.

    Those auditors are eligible to reapply for reinstatement. But WSRP stepped down as Freedom’s auditor. Deloitte Kazakhstan helped Freedom restate the prior auditor’s erroneous filings to the SEC and regain compliance with exchange rules, filings show.

    Deloitte’s Kazakh office is just a few blocks away from Freedom’s headquarters, on the outskirts of Kazakhstan’s largest city and financial hub. Freedom is the only SEC-registered U.S. company that Deloitte Kazakhstan audits, according to Public Company Accounting Oversight Board records.

    A view from Almaty’s Esentai Tower, where Freedom’s head offices are. The offices of Deloitte Kazakhstan, Freedom’s latest auditor, can be seen in the distance, near the building with a green illuminated sign.

    Wwd | Penske Media | Getty Images

    “First thing to consider is that the company has been audited by the largest big-4 auditor, Deloitte,” Turlov said, in his response to Hindenburg’s report.

    Deloitte and Roman Sattarov, the Deloitte partner overseeing Freedom’s audit, didn’t respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

    Freedom is still trying to expand in the U.S. In February, the company agreed to pay $400 million, primarily in stock, for middle-market investment bank Maxim Group. Maxim has worked on IPOs for many smaller companies and has been part of bigger deals, such as PIMCO Access Income Fund’s $866 million offering in 2022.

    Turlov isn’t letting the U.S. probes keep him away. He traveled to New York last month. 

    “This week talking to our US office, partners and regulators,” he wrote in a Sept. 25 post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. 

    A spokesperson for Turlov said he was “definitely not meeting with regulators.”

    In Turlov’s interview published Thursday in Kazakhstan, he didn’t say which U.S. regulators approached the company, but said it all stemmed from Hindenburg’s report, which he called “misinformation.”

    WATCH: Hindenburg Research goes after Carl Icahn

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump and company liable for fraud in New York lawsuit, judge rules

    Trump and company liable for fraud in New York lawsuit, judge rules

    [ad_1]

    A judge on Tuesday ruled that Donald Trump and his company are liable for fraud by misstating the true values of multiple real estate properties for years and thus grossly overstating the former president’s net worth by billions of dollars.

    Judge Arthur Engoron in his bombshell decision also canceled the New York business certificates of Trump, the Trump Organization, and the other defendants, including two of his sons, in a lawsuit by the state Attorney General’s Office.

    The judge said he would appoint an independent receiver to manage the dissolution of the corporate entities whose business certificates he canceled.

    It is not clear whether Engoron’s decision means the Trump Organization and related entities will have to completely cease doing business in New York, or whether the companies can be legally reconstituted later.

    A spokeswoman for Attorney General Letitia James declined to comment on that question.

    But Trump’s lawyer Chris Kise, who called the decision “outrageous,” said it “seeks to nationalize one of the most successful corporate empires in the United States and seize control of private property all while acknowledging there is zero evidence of any default, breach, late payment or any complaint of harm.”

    “While the full impact of the decision remains unclear, what is clear is that President Trump and his family will seek all available appellate remedies to rectify this miscarriage of justice,” Kise said.

    Engoron’s ruling, which also dismissed Trump’s request to dismiss the case, did not settle six other claims in dispute in the case whose defendants included him, the company and his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, as well as former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg, company executive Jeff McConney.

    Those issues remaining claims will be addressed at a nonjury trial due to begin Monday.

    James is seeking $250 million in damages in the case and wants Trump and his two adult sons barred from doing business in the state.

    Engoron, in granting partial summary judgment to James on the fraud claim, found that Trump made false and misleading valuations for multiple real estate assets in statements to insurers and banks for years as he sought more favorable terms on insurance coverage and loans.

    Because of those misstatements, Trump also inflated his true net worth in annual financial statements by billions of dollars, according to the decision.

    “In defendants’ world: rent regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land; restrictions can evaporate into thin air; a disclaimer by one party casting responsibility on another party exonerates the other party’s lies,” Engoron wrote.

    “That is a fantasy world, not the real world.”

    Engoron also ordered sanctions of $7,500 for five attorneys who represented the Trump defendants for making frivolous and previously rejected arguments in court filings. Kise is among those fined by the judge.

    “Today, a judge ruled in our favor and found that Donald Trump and the Trump Organization engaged in years of financial fraud,” James wrote in a post on the X social media site.

    “We look forward to presenting the rest of our case at trial,” James added.

    Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, separately faces a total of 91 felony charges in four criminal cases. Two of those cases relate to efforts to reverse his re-election defeat in 2020. Another case involves his retention of classified government documents at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, a property that is mentioned in Engoron’s ruling Tuesday.

    In the fourth criminal case, Trump is charged with falsifying business records related to a 2016 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

    He has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.

    Engoron in his ruling wrote that James’ office in its civil fraud suit “has prevailed on liability on its first cause of action … as against all defendants.”

    The judge added that if liability for fraud is established under New York law, that statute allows the attorney general to obtain an order enjoining defendants from continuing to do business or “any fraudulent or illegal acts.”

    Even after Engoron appointed an independent financial monitor for the Trump Organization last year, “defendants have continued to disseminate false and misleading information while conducting business,” the judge wrote.

    “This ongoing flouting of this Court’s prior order, combined with the persistent nature of the false [statements of financial condition] year after year, have demonstrated the necessity of canceling the [defendants’ business] certificates … as the statute provides,” the judge wrote.

    Engoron’s 35-page ruling details how Trump fraudulently valued his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, once by more than 2,000%, Trump Park Avenue and 40 Wall Street in New York City, his Seven Springs property in Westchester County, New York, and his golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland.

    “Time and time again, the Court is not comparing one appraisal to another; it is comparing an independent professional appraisal to a pie-in-the-sky dream of concocted potential,” Engoron wrote.

    After noting that Trump submitted statements falsely claiming that the Trump Tower apartment in which he resided for decades was nearly three times its actual size, and was worth a whopping $327 million, the judge wrote, “a discrepancy of this order of magnitude, by a real estate developer sizing up his own living space of decades, can only be considered fraud.”

    “The documents here clearly contain fraudulent valuations that defendants used in business,” Engoron wrote.

    “Defendants respond that: the documents do not say what they say; that there is no such thing as ‘objective’ value; and that, essentially, the Court should not believe its own lying eyes,” the judge noted.

    Kise, the Trump attorney, said Engoron’s “outrageous decision is completely disconnected from the facts and governing law.’

    “The Court ignored fully the Appellate Division mandate and basic legal, accounting and business principles,” Kise said. “Without even conducting a trial, the Court substituted its own judgment for that of nationally recognized experts from the NYU Stern School of Business and beyond.  More importantly, the Court disregarded the viewpoint of those actually involved in the loan transactions who testified there was nothing misleading, there was no fraud, and the transactions were all highly profitable.”

    Another Trump attorney, Alina Habba, in a statement said, “It’s important to remember that the Trump Organization is an American success story and the fact that a judge without trial would say there is no question of fact and issue a decision like this in summary judgement is concerning.”

    Habba who was among the attorneys sanctioned by Engoron.

    Trump responded to Engoron’s ruling by reposting a statement on social media attacking James and the judge, while doubling down on his claims of having a much higher net worth than what was displayed on the financial statements at the center of the fraud case.

    “It is very unfair, and I call for help from the highest Courts in New York State, or the Federal System, to intercede,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social site.

    In a tweet Tuesday, Eric Trump, who runs the Trump Organization with Donald Trump Jr., wrote, “In an attempt to destroy my father and kick him out of New York, a Judge just ruled that Mar-a-Lago, in Palm Beach Florida, is only worth approximate ‘$18 Million dollars’ “

    “Mar-a-Lago is speculated to be worth [well] over a billion dollars making it arguably the most valuable residential property in the country. It is all so corrupt and coordinated,” Eric wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Bulletproof’ hosting site that allegedly enabled 400 ransomware attacks seized, founder indicted

    ‘Bulletproof’ hosting site that allegedly enabled 400 ransomware attacks seized, founder indicted

    [ad_1]

    FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on “oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation” and alleged politicization of law enforcement, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., July 12, 2023.

    Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

    The mastermind behind a ransomware hosting service that allegedly helped criminals collect more than 5,000 bitcoin in ransom from hundreds of victims was indicted in federal court this week, prosecutors announced Thursday. At current prices, that bitcoin would be worth more than $146 million.

    Artur Grabowski’s LolekHosted service operated for about a decade and advertised itself as a haven for “everything but child porn,” according to Florida prosecutors. Clients allegedly used the hosting service to deploy ransomware viruses that infected around 400 networks around the world. Ransomware attacks typically lock and encrypt the data on an organization’s computers so they’re unusable until the victim pays a fee.

    Grabowski and his co-conspirators allegedly refused to cooperate with law enforcement requests, protected allegedly criminal actors from takedowns, and profited immensely from the service.

    Grabowski was charged with computer fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit international money laundering.

    Grabowski himself is also the subject of a $21.5 million seizure order.

    The indictment against the Grabowski was unsealed in Florida court Wednesday. Grabowski remains at large.

    Three other unindicted and unnamed co-conspirators were also involved in the alleged scheme, prosecutors said in the charging document.

    His “100% privacy hosting” service was seized Tuesday by the IRS’ Criminal Investigation unit and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Grabowski, a Polish national, faces a maximum sentence of 45 years, if he is ever detained and convicted.

    Federal prosecutors have stepped up their efforts to curtail ransomware attacks. Earlier this year, the Justice Department launched a dedicated unit focused on combating cyber national security threats.

    A string of ransomware prosecutions have also been unsealed in U.S. courts, although with perpetrators scattered around the world, it’s unclear how many will face time behind bars.

    WATCH: Ransomware attacks have surged 20%, CEO says

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tech investors face ‘new era’ of China restrictions after Biden order limits funding in A.I., chips

    Tech investors face ‘new era’ of China restrictions after Biden order limits funding in A.I., chips

    [ad_1]

    US President Joe Biden speaks on how “Bidenomics” is helping clean energy and manufacturing, at Arcosa Wind Towers in Belen, New Mexico, on August 9, 2023. 

    Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

    The Biden administration’s executive order restricting U.S. private equity and venture capital investments in Chinese technology finally landed on Wednesday. For U.S. tech investors who’d already grown wary of the budding cross-Pacific rivalry, the ruling is the clearest signal yet that the world’s second-biggest economy is off limits.

    Biden is specifically targeting investments in technologies like semiconductors, quantum computing and artificial intelligence on concern that China’s advancements in those areas run counter to U.S. national security interests. The new measure is expected to go into effect next year.

    U.S. investors have been steadily retreating from China due to a combination of a weakening economy and the fraught geopolitical environment. Combined U.S. private equity and venture investments in China fell to an eight-year low in 2022 in terms of capital deployed, a trend that continued into the first half of this year, according to PitchBook data.

    “We’ve had conversations with with our own clients who have said, ‘Yeah, look, we’ve really been pulling back on on our presence in China for a little while,’” said Elena McGovern, co-head of the national security practice at private equity advisory firm Capstone, in an interview. “This is the first time that the U.S. government is imposing restrictions on how U.S. capital flows out of the country, how U.S. investors are making investment decisions. So that is a new era.”

    Political pressure has been bipartisan. Last month, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party sent letters to four U.S. venture firms, expressing “serious concern” about their investments in Chinese tech startups. And in July, legendary VC firm Sequoia Capital said it would split its international business into three parts, with Neil Shen helming its powerful Sequoia China unit.

    At this point, any technology that can be used to enhanced China’s military strength or surveillance capabilities is of notable concern to the White House.

    “U.S. money should not be used to finance Beijing’s military development,” said Eric Reiner, managing partner at Vine Ventures, which backs early-stage companies in the U.S., Israel and Latin America. “A lot of these firms that have been investing in China and setting up offices there are really playing with fire.”

    While AI, computer processors, and quantum computing are areas of stated concern, many investors and experts say they have to move forward with the expectation that the ban will widen, essentially making any deal in Chinese technology too risky to pursue.

    “It’s likely to deter investments in those sectors, even beyond what is explicitly prohibited,” said, Adam Hickey, a former deputy assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s national security division who’s now a partner at law firm Mayer Brown. “Most investors want to avoid being seen as acting against U.S. national security interests.”

    Steve Sarracino, the founder of Activant Capital, said “I don’t know anyone that’s doing early-stage China investing from from the U.S.” The only exception, he said, were “hedge funds, who really are in the business of calculating geopolitical risks.” Activant has offices in the U.S., Germany and South Africa.

    The U.S. government’s ongoing hostility towards China carries its own risks. For one, there’s a ton of investment money in and around China that can fill the vacuum and potentially generate huge returns. There’s also the challenge of dealing with existing investments.

    For example, major U.S. venture firms have invested in ByteDance, the parent of mobile video app TikTok, which has faced the threat of a potential ban in the U.S. or a forced sale to keep operating. Investors want to maximize their returns, which could be huge should ByteDance go public.

    TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew testifies before the House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on “TikTok: How Congress Can Safeguard American Data Privacy and Protect Children from Online Harms,” on Capitol Hill, March 23, 2023, in Washington, DC. 

    Olivier Douliery | Afp | Getty Images

    ByteDance reportedly scrapped a planned U.S. listing in 2021 after the company learned it needed to deal with potential security concerns. That same year, China cracked down on domestic companies that traded on U.S. exchanges. With the tech IPO markets still largely closed and U.S.-China tension only building, it’s not clear when or how ByteDance investors will realize their gains.

    Other investors worry that if relations eventually improve between the two countries, U.S. firms will be at a disadvantage when it comes to finding and getting into deals. Rebuilding trust will likely be a particular challenge.

    “If you already had a presence there, you will have an advantage when things open up,” Sarracino said. But that’s not the case for firms that weren’t in China or those that pared back their operations in the country, he said.

    Reiner says the investment returns that could be generated from Chinese companies aren’t worth the global threat posed by having China own and control sensitive technologies.

    “I wonder if the executive order itself is even really necessary,” he said, “or if we really should be spending our time securing our resources and incentivizing China not to spy on our important and proprietary technology.”

    WATCH: Biden doesn’t want U.S. dollars funding China’s military

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • SoftBank sues social media startup it invested in, alleging it faked user numbers

    SoftBank sues social media startup it invested in, alleging it faked user numbers

    [ad_1]

    SoftBank Founder Masayoshi Son is pictured here in 2019 during an earnings presentation.

    Tomohiro Ohsumi | Getty Images

    SoftBank’s Vision Fund filed suit against the founders of one of its portfolio companies Monday, alleging that they artificially inflated user metrics, lied to the fund about performance and bilked the fund for millions.

    Buzzy social media startup IRL launched in April 2021 and was seemingly “one of the fastest growing social media apps for Generation Z,” the complaint in San Francisco federal court alleges.

    SoftBank was invested in the company due to its apparently low cost, “strong” user engagement that left it “well positioned for further viral growth” in the same way Facebook and Twitter exploded.

    In May 2021, a month after the company launched, SoftBank invested $150 million in IRL through one of the conglomerate’s high-spending Vision Funds, buying $125 million in shares from the company and another $25 million from insiders including CEO Abraham Shafi as well as Noah Shafi and Yassin Aniss, the complaint says.

    SoftBank believed that IRL had 12 million monthly active users.

    But those numbers were a lie, the complaint alleges. IRL was secretly swarming its own platform with an army of bots, according to the complaint, creating the veneer of a thriving social network which was, in reality, a cover to “defraud investors.”

    The plot began to unravel when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation into IRL in late 2022. In April 2023, Abraham Shafi was suspended as CEO, and the company dissolved in June.

    The suit raises significant questions about the level of scrutiny that SoftBank applied to its portfolio companies. When a third-party assessment of user numbers came in significantly below IRL’s own sales pitch, SoftBank representatives accepted Abraham Shafi’s explanations that they were “definitely not accurate,” according to the suit.

    Past missteps from SoftBank include large positions in allegedly fraudulent crypto exchange FTX and devalued property company WeWork. SoftBank’s Vision Funds have faltered significantly since the market highs of 2021, and the conglomerate posted a full-year loss of $32 billion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court rules 9-0 that bankruptcy filers can’t avoid debt incurred by another’s fraud

    Supreme Court rules 9-0 that bankruptcy filers can’t avoid debt incurred by another’s fraud

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision Wednesday ruled that a woman could not use protection under the U.S. bankruptcy code to avoid paying a debt that resulted from fraud by her partner.

    The court said that the woman, Kate Bartenwerfer, owed the debt to San Francisco real estate developer Kieran Buckley even if she did not know or could not have known about her now-husband David’s misrepresentations about a house they sold to Buckley for more than $2 million.

    The decision resolves a difference of opinion between several federal circuit appeals courts on the question of whether an innocent party can be liable in bankruptcy proceedings for another person’s fraud.

    The 9-0 ruling written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett underscored a Supreme Court decision in 1885, which found that two partners in a New York wool company were liable for the debt due to the fraudulent claims of a third partner even though they were not themselves “guilty of wrong.”

    Barrett dismissed Bartenwerfer’s grammatically focused argument that the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, written in a passive voice as “money obtained by fraud,” refers to “money obtained by the individual debtor’s fraud.”

    “Innocent people are sometimes held liable for fraud they did not personally commit, and, if they declare bankruptcy, [the bankruptcy code] bars discharge of that debt,” Barrett wrote.

    “So it is for Bartenwerfer, and we are sensitive to the hardship she faces,” she wrote.

    The debt to Buckley, which was originally a court judgment of $200,000 imposed in 2012, since has grown to more than $1.1 million as a result of interest, according to Janet Brayer, the attorney who represented Buckley in a lawsuit over the house sale.

    Brayer said that debt is growing at a current rate of 10% annually and that it excludes attorney fees to which she is entitled to under California law.

    “We have been working on this since 2008,  and now finally have been vindicated and justice served for all victims of fraud, Brayer said. “Hence, I am a happy girl today.” 

    Iain MacDonald, a lawyer for Bartenwerfer, did not have an immediate comment on the ruling, saying he planned to discuss the decision with her.

    Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, noted that the ruling involves people who acted together in a partnership, not “a situation involving fraud by a person bearing no agency or partnership relationship to the debtor.”

    “With that understanding, I join the Court’s opinion,” Sotomayor wrote.

    The ruling on Bartenwerfer’s case came 18 years after the events that triggered the dispute.

    Bartenwerfer, and her then-boyfriend David Bartenwerfer, jointly bought a house in San Francisco in 2005 and planned to remodel it and sell it for a profit, the ruling noted.

    While David hired an architect, engineer, and general contractor, monitored their progress and paid for the work, “Kate, on the other hand, was largely uninvolved,” Barrett wrote.

    The house was eventually bought by a man named Kieran Buckley after the Bartenwerfers “attested that
    they had disclosed all material facts relating to the property,” Barrett noted.

    But Buckley learned that the house had “a leaky roof, defective windows, a missing fire escape, and
    permit problems.”

    He then sued the couple, claiming he had overpaid for the home based on their misrepresentations of the property.

    A jury ruled in his favor, awarding him $200,000 from the Bartenwerfers.

    The couple was unable to pay the award or other creditors and filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code, which normally allows people to void all of their debts.

    But “not all debts are dischargeable,” Barrett wrote in her ruling.

    “The Code makes several exceptions to the general rule, including the one at issue in this case: Section 523(a)(2)(A) bars the discharge of ‘any debt … for money … to the extent obtained by … false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud,’” Barrett wrote.

    Buckley challenged the couple’s move to void their debt to him on that ground.

    A U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge ruled in his favor, saying “that neither David nor Kate Bartenwerfer could discharge their debt to Buckley,” the opinion by Barrett noted.

    “Based on testimony from the parties, real-estate agents, and contractors, the court found that David had knowingly concealed the house’s defects from Buckley,” Barrett wrote.

    “And the court imputed David’s fraudulent intent to Kate because the two had formed a legal partnership to execute the renovation and resale project,” she added.

    The couple appealed the ruling.

    The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that David still owed the debt to Buckley given his fraudulent intent.

    But the same panel disagreed that Kate owed the debt.

    “As the panel saw it [a section of the bankruptcy code] barred her from discharging the debt only if she knew or had reason to know of David’s fraud,” Barrett wrote.

    Bartenwerfer later asked the Supreme Court to hear her appeal of that ruling.

    In her opinion, Barrett noted that the text of the bankruptcy code explicitly bars Chapter 7 from being used by a debtor to discharge a debt if that obligation was the result of “false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud.”

    Barrett wrote, “By its terms, this text precludes Kate Bartenwerfer from discharging her liability for the state-court judgment.”

    The justice noted that Kate Bartenwerfer disputed that, even as she admitted, “that, as a grammatical matter, the passive-voice statute does not specify a fraudulent actor.”

    “But in her view, the statute is most naturally read to bar the discharge of debts for money obtained by the debtor’s fraud,” Barrett wrote.

    “We disagree: Passive voice pulls the actor off the stage,” Barrett wrote.

    The justice wrote that Congress, in writing the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, “framed it to ‘focu[s] on an event that occurs without respect to a specific actor, and therefore without respect to any actor’s intent or culpability.’”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Crypto firms Genesis and Gemini charged by SEC with selling unregistered securities

    Crypto firms Genesis and Gemini charged by SEC with selling unregistered securities

    [ad_1]

    The Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday charged crypto firms Genesis and Gemini with allegedly selling unregistered securities in connection with a high-yield product offered to depositors.

    Gemini, a crypto exchange, and Genesis, a crypto lender, partnered in February 2021 on a Gemini product called Earn, which touted yields of up to 8% for customers.

    According to the SEC, Genesis loaned Gemini users’ crypto and sent a portion of the profits back to Gemini, which then deducted an agent fee, sometimes over 4%, and returned the remaining profit to its users. Genesis should have registered that product as a securities offering, SEC officials said.

    “Today’s charges build on previous actions to make clear to the marketplace and the investing public that crypto lending platforms and other intermediaries need to comply with our time-tested securities laws,” SEC chair Gary Gensler said in a statement.

    Gemini’s Earn program, supported by Genesis’ lending activities, met the SEC’s definition by including both an investment contract and a note, SEC officials said. Those two features are part of how the SEC assesses whether an offering is a security.

    Regulators are seeking permanent injunctive relief, disgorgement, and civil penalties against both Genesis and Gemini.

    The two firms have been engaged in a high-profile battle over $900 million in customer assets that Gemini entrusted to Genesis as part of the Earn program, which was shuttered this week.

    Gemini, which was founded in 2015 by bitcoin advocates Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, has an extensive exchange business that, while beleaguered, could possibly weather an enforcement action.

    But Genesis’ future is more uncertain, because the business is heavily focused on lending out customer crypto and has already engaged restructuring advisers. The crypto lender is a unit of Barry Silbert’s Digital Currency Group.

    SEC officials said the possibility of a DCG or Genesis bankruptcy had no bearing on deciding whether to pursue a charge.

    It’s the latest in a series of recent crypto enforcement actions led by Gensler after the collapse of Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX in November. Gensler was roundly criticized on social media and by lawmakers for the SEC’s failure to impose safeguards on the nascent crypto industry.

    Gensler’s SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, chaired by Rostin Benham, are the two regulators that oversee crypto activity in the U.S. Both agencies filed complaints against Bankman-Fried, but the SEC has, of late, ramped up the pace and the scope of enforcement actions.

    The SEC brought a similar action against now bankrupt crypto lender BlockFi and settled last year. Earlier this month, Coinbase settled with New York state regulators over historically inadequate know-your-customer protocols.

    Since Bankman-Fried was indicted on federal fraud charges in December, the SEC has filed five crypto-related enforcement actions.

    This is breaking news. Check back for updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FTX has recovered $5 billion worth of ‘liquid’ assets, lawyers say

    FTX has recovered $5 billion worth of ‘liquid’ assets, lawyers say

    [ad_1]

    John Ray, chief executive officer of FTX Cryptocurrency Derivatives Exchange, arrives at bankruptcy court in Wilmington, Delaware, US, on Tuesday, Nov. 22, 2022.

    Eric Lee | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    FTX has recovered over $5 billion worth of liquid assets, including cash and digital assets, attorneys in Delaware bankruptcy court said during an FTX bankruptcy hearing Wednesday.

    The news comes after federal prosecutors announced plans to seize at least $500 million worth of FTX-connected assets as part of their ongoing prosecution of FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried.

    related investing news

    CNBC Pro

    The recovery will be a welcome boon to FTX customers after the crypto exchange imploded in November. FTX’s new CEO, John J. Ray, previously attested that at least $8 billion of customer assets were unaccounted for in the “worst” case of corporate control he’d ever seen.

    The $5 billion figure doesn’t include any illiquid cryptocurrency assets, FTX attorney Adam Landis told the court. He said the company’s holdings are so large that selling them would substantially affect the market, driving down their value.

    FTX’s collapse was related to, among other things, a failure to correctly mark illiquid assets to market. FTX executives, including Bankman-Fried and Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison, borrowed against the value of the FTX-issued token FTT. Alameda controlled the vast majority of FTT coins circulating, similar to a publicly traded companies float, and could not have liquidated their position at full book value.

    Correction: This article has been updated to reflect that FTX attorney Adam Landis told the court the $5 billion figure doesn’t include any illiquid cryptocurrency assets.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested following FTX collapse. Here’s what happens next

    Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested following FTX collapse. Here’s what happens next

    [ad_1]

    Tom Williams | CQ-Roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

    Sam Bankman-Fried’s arrest in the Bahamas on Monday marks the beginning of a new chapter in the FTX saga, one that will pit the former crypto billionaire against the Southern District of New York.

    The indictment is expected to remain sealed until Tuesday morning. U.S. prosecutors haven’t commented, and neither the Attorney General of the Bahamas nor the Royal Bahamas Police Force would confirm the nature of the charges against Bankman-Fried.

    The New York Times reported that the charges against Bankman-Fried included conspiracy to commit wire fraud and securities fraud, as well as standalone charges of securities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering.

    The SEC has initiated a separate set of charges against Bankman-Fried, relating to “violations of our securities laws, which will be filed publicly tomorrow in the Southern District of New York,” enforcement director Gurbir Grewal said in a statement on Monday.

    A spokesperson for the SEC declined further comment.

    The charges could land Bankman-Fried in prison for decades, legal experts told CNBC. But before he ever serves time, U.S. prosecutors have to secure an extradition from the Bahamas back to New York.

    An effort to extradite

    “It is inconceivable to me that the Justice Department would have charged this case unless they were confident that they could extradite him,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, told CNBC.

    Mariotti anticipates an extradition will take weeks to complete.

    “The statement by the Bahamian government suggests that they’re going to cooperate,” Mariotti said.

    Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro

    The U.S. and the Bahamas have had an extradition treaty in place since 1931, with the most recent iteration codified in 1990. Because Bankman-Fried hasn’t been convicted in the Bahamas yet, U.S. prosecutors had to secure an arrest warrant and provide sufficient evidence to the Bahamians that he had committed a crime.

    Extradition is the first step in a process that could take years to finish. Given the magnitude of Bankman-Fried’s alleged crimes, prosecutors and regulators will be pursuing concurrent cases around the world.

    A trial in the U.S. “may not occur for years,” Mariotti said.

    “The more that they charge, the bigger that the case is, the more time they’re going to need to get in motion,” he said. “I would say late 2023 is the earliest a trial would occur.”

    Prosecutors could argue that FTX breached its fiduciary duty by allegedly using customer funds to artificially stabilize the price of the company’s self-issued FTT coin, Mariotti said.

    Intent is also a factor in fraud cases, and Bankman-Fried insists he didn’t know about potentially fraudulent activity. He told CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin at the New York Times DealBook conference that he “didn’t knowingly commingle funds.”

    “I didn’t ever try to commit fraud,” Bankman-Fried said.

    In prepared testimony for the House Financial Services committee, new FTX CEO John Ray confirmed that commingling of funds had occurred between FTX and Alameda Research, Bankman-Fried’s hedge fund.

    The risk of an FTX crypto contagion

    Other legal trouble

    Beyond the criminal charges set to be unveiled Tuesday morning, Bankman-Fried is also facing civil action, which could be brought by the SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and state banking and securities regulators, said Richard Levin, who chairs the fintech and regulation practice at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough.

    The CFTC and lawmakers have begun their probes into FTX and Bankman-Fried, who told Sorkin he was down to his last $100,000.

    Shortly after Bankman-Fried’s arrest, the SEC appeared to confirm that the agency would pursue a separate set of charges from the criminal indictment.

    Lawmakers also expressed their satisfaction at Bankman-Fried’s arrest. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who chairs the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, applauded both the Justice Department and Bahamian law enforcement “for holding Sam Bankman-Fried accountable.”

    Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, echoed that sentiment, but expressed disappointment that Bankman-Fried was arrested before his House testimony, which was scheduled for Tuesday.

    “I am surprised to hear that Sam Bankman-Fried was arrested in the Bahamas at the direction of the United States Attorney,” Waters said in a statement.

    “[The] American public deserves to hear directly from Mr. Bankman-Fried about the actions that’ve harmed over one million people,” Waters continued.

    Bankman-Fried had also been invited to appear before the Senate prior to his arrest. That hearing will occur on Wednesday.

    It’s unclear whether the SEC or the CFTC will take the lead in securing civil damages.

    “The question of who would be taking the lead there, whether it be the SEC or CFTC, depends on whether or not there were securities involved,” Mariotti told CNBC.

    SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, who met with Bankman-Fried and FTX executives earlier this year, has said publicly that “many crypto tokens are securities,” which would make his agency the primary regulator.

    But many exchanges, including FTX, have crypto derivatives platforms that sell financial products like futures and options, which fall under the CFTC’s jurisdiction.

    “For selling unregistered securities without a registration or an exemption, you could be looking at the Securities Exchange Commission suing for disgorgement — monetary penalties,” said Levin, who’s represented clients before both agencies.

    Investors who have lost their savings aren’t waiting. Class-action suits have already been filed against FTX endorsers, like comedian Larry David and football superstar Tom Brady. One suit excoriated the celebrities for allegedly failing to do their “due diligence prior to marketing [FTX] to the public.”

    FTX’s industry peers are also filing suit against Bankman-Fried. Failed lender BlockFi sued Bankman-Fried in November, seeking unnamed collateral that the FTX founder provided for the crypto lending firm.

    FTX and Bankman-Fried had previously rescued BlockFi from insolvency in June, but when FTX failed, BlockFi was left with a similar liquidity problem and filed for bankruptcy protection in New Jersey.

    Bankman-Fried has also been sued in Florida and California federal courts. He faces class-action suits in both states over “one of the great frauds in history,” a California court filing said.

    The largest securities class-action settlement was for $7.2 billion in the Enron accounting fraud case, according to Stanford research. The possibility of a multibillion-dollar settlement would come on top of civil and criminal fines that Bankman-Fried faces.

    FTX testimony this week is going to be very telling, says CEO of Bitfury Group, it sounds like a scheme

    A life behind bars

    If the DOJ were able to secure a conviction, a judge would look to several factors to determine how long to sentence him.

    Based on the size of the losses, if Bankman-Fried is convicted on any of the fraud charges, he could be behind bars for years — potentially for the rest of his life, said Braden Perry, a partner at Kennyhertz Perry who advises clients on anti-money laundering, compliance and enforcement issues.

    But the length of any potential sentence is hard to predict, said Perry, who was previously a senior trial lawyer for the CFTC, FTX’s only official U.S. regulator.

    Federal sentencing guidelines follow a numeric system to determine the maximum and minimum allowable sentence, but the system can be esoteric. The scale, or “offense level,” starts at one, and maxes out at 43.

    A wire fraud conviction rates as a seven on the scale, with a minimum sentence ranging from zero to six months.

    But mitigating factors and enhancements can alter that rating, Perry told CNBC.

    “The dollar value of loss plays a significant role. Under the guidelines, any loss above $550 million adds 30 points to the base level offense,” Perry said. FTX customers have lost billions of dollars.

    “Having 25 or more victims adds 6 points, [and] use of certain regulated markets adds 4,” Perry said.

    That means Bankman-Fried could be facing life in federal prison, without the possibility of supervised release, if he’s convicted on just one of the offenses that prosecutors will reportedly pursue.

    If convicted, his sentence could be reduced by mitigating factors.

    “In practice, many white-collar defendants are sentenced to lesser sentences than what the guidelines dictate,” Perry said. Even in large fraud cases, that 30-point enhancement previously mentioned can be considered punitive.

    By way of comparison, Stefan Qin, the Australian founder of a $90 million cryptocurrency hedge fund, was sentenced to more than seven years in prison after he pleaded guilty to one count of securities fraud.

    Roger Nils-Jonas Karlsson, a Swedish national accused by the United States of defrauding over 3,500 victims of more than $16 million, was sentenced to 15 years in prison for securities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Crypto.com CEO has history of red flags including bankruptcy and quick exits

    Crypto.com CEO has history of red flags including bankruptcy and quick exits

    [ad_1]

    Kris Marszalek, CEO of Crypto.com, speaking at a 2018 Bloomberg event in Hong Kong, China.

    Paul Yeung | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Kris Marszalek wants everyone to know that his company, Crypto.com, is safe and in good hands. His TV appearances and tweets make that clear.

    It’s an understandable approach. The crypto markets have been in freefall for much of the year, with high-profile names spiraling into bankruptcy. When FTX failed last month just after founder Sam Bankman-Fried said the crypto exchange’s assets were fine, trust across the industry evaporated.

    Marszalek, who has operated out of Asia for over a decade, subsequently assured clients that their funds belong to them and are readily available, in contrast to FTX, which used client money for all sorts of risky and allegedly fraudulent activities, according to court filings and legal experts. 

    Bankman-Fried has denied knowing about any fraud. Regardless, FTX clients are now out billions of dollars with bankruptcy proceedings underway.

    Crypto.com, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges, may well be in fine health. After the FTX collapse, the company published its unaudited, partial proof of reserves. The release revealed that nearly 20% of customer funds were in a meme token called shiba inu, an amount eclipsed only by its bitcoin allocation. That percentage has dropped since the initial release to about 15%, according to Nansen Analytics. 

    Marszalek said in a Nov. 14 livestream on YouTube that the wallet addresses were representative of customer holdings. 

    On Friday, Crypto.com published an audited proof of reserves, attesting that customer assets were held on a one-to-one basis, meaning that all deposits are 100% backed by Crypto.com‘s reserves.  The audit was performed by the Mazars Group, the former accountant for the Trump Organization.

    While no evidence has emerged of wrongdoing at Crypto.com, Marszalek’s business history is replete with red flags. Following the collapse of a prior company in 2009, a judge called Marszalek’s testimony unreliable. His business activities before 2016 — the year he founded what would become Crypto.com — involved a multimillion-dollar settlement over claims of defective products, corporate bankruptcy and an e-commerce company that failed shortly after a blowout marketing campaign left sellers unable to access their money.

    Court records, public filings and offshore database leaks reveal a businessman who moved from industry to industry, rebooting quickly when a venture would fail. He started in manufacturing, producing data storage products for white label sale, then moved into e-commerce, and finally into crypto.

    CNBC reached out to Crypto.com with information on Marszalek’s past and asked for an interview. The company declined to make Marszalek available and sent a statement indicating that there was “never a finding of wrongdoing under Kris’s leadership” at his prior ventures. 

    After CNBC’s requests, Marszalek published a 16-tweet thread, beginning by telling his followers: “More FUD targeting Crypto.com is coming, this time about a business failure I had very early in my career. I have nothing to hide, and am proud of my battle scars, so here’s the unfiltered story.” FUD is short for fear, uncertainty and doubt and is a popular phrase among crypto executives.

    In the tweets, Marszalek described his past personal bankruptcy and the abrupt closure of his e-commerce business as learning experiences, and added that “startups are hard,” and “you will fail over and over again.” 

    ‘Business failure’ — faulty flash drives

    Marszalek founded a manufacturing firm called Starline in 2004, according to his LinkedIn profile. Based in Hong Kong, with a plant in mainland China, Starline built hardware products like solid state drives, hard drives, and USB flash drives. Marzsalek’s LinkedIn page says he grew the business into a 400-person company with $81 million in sales in three years.

    There was much more to the story.

    Marszalek owned 50% of the company, sharing ownership and control with another Hong-Kong based individual, who partnered with Marszalek in multiple ventures. 

    In 2009, Marzsalek’s company settled with a client over a faulty shipment of flash drives. The $5 million settlement consisted of a $1 million upfront payment and a $4 million credit note to the client, Dexxon. The negotiations over the settlement began at some point after 2007.

    CNBC was unable to locate Marszalek’s business partner.

    Court documents don’t show whether Starline made good on either the $1 million “lump sum settlement fee” or the $4 million credit note. Starline was forced into bankruptcy proceedings by the end of 2009, court records from 2013 show.

    Over the course of 2008 and 2009, Marszalek and his partner were transferred nearly $3 million in payments from Starline, according to the documents.

    Over $1 million was paid out to Marszalek personally in what the court said were “impugned payments.” His partner took home nearly $1.9 million in similar payments.

    “It appears that there was a concerted effort to strip the cash from Starline,” Judge Anthony Chan later wrote in a court filing. 

    Some $300,000 was paid by Starline to a British Virgin Islands holding company called Tekram, the document says. That money went through Marszalek, and Tekram eventually returned it to Starline.

    By 2009, Starline had collapsed. Marszalek’s representatives told CNBC in a statement that Starline went under because customers failed to pay back credit lines that the company had extended them during the financial crisis of 2007 and 2008. Starline borrowed that money from Standard Chartered Bank of Hong Kong (SCB).

    “The bank then turned to Starline and the co-founders to repay the lines of credit and filed for liquidation of the company,” the statement said.

    Starline owed $2.2 million to SCB. 

    Marszalek said on Twitter that he had personally guaranteed the loans from the bank to Starline. As a result, when the bank forced Starline into liquidation, Marszalek and his partner were forced into bankruptcy as well.

    The court found that the $300,000 transfer to Tekram was “in truth a payment” to Marszalek.

    Marszalek said the money in the Tekram transfer was repayment of a debt Starline owed to Tekram. The judge described that claim as “inherently incredible.”

    “There is no explanation why the repayment had to be channelled through him or why the money was later returned to the debtor,” the judge said. 

    Riding the Groupon wave

    Bankruptcy didn’t sever the ties between Marszalek and his partner or keep them out of business for long. At the same time Starline was shutting down, the pair set up an offshore holding company called Middle Kingdom Capital. 

    Middle Kingdom was established in the Cayman Islands, a notorious hub for tax shelters. The connection between Middle Kingdom and Marszalek and his partner, who each held half of the firm, was exposed in the 2017 Paradise Papers leak. The Paradise Papers, along with the Panama Papers, contained documents about a web of offshore holdings in tax havens. They were published by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.

    Middle Kingdom was the owner of Buy Together, which in turn owned BeeCrazy, an e-commerce venture that Marszalek had started pursuing. Similar to Groupon, retailers could use BeeCrazy to sell their products at steep discounts. BeeCrazy would process payments, take a commission on goods sold, and distribute funds to the retailers.

    Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro

    Sellers and buyers flocked to the site, drawn in by considerable discounts on everything from spa passes to USB power banks. Buy Together drew attention from an Australian conglomerate called iBuy, which was on the verge of an IPO and pursued an acquisition of BeeCrazy as part of a plan to build out an Asian e-commerce empire.

    Court filings and Australian disclosures show that to seal the deal, Marszalek and his partner had to remain employed by iBuy for three years and clear their individual bankruptcies in Hong Kong court. The partner’s uncle came forward in front of the court to help his nephew and Marszalek clear their names and debts, filings show.

    While the judge called the uncle’s involvement “suspicious,” he allowed him to repay the debt. As a result, both Marszalek and his partner’s bankruptcies were annulled. A few months later, in October 2013, BeeCrazy was purchased by iBuy for $21 million in cash and stock, according to S&P Capital IQ. 

    A month and a half after buying BeeCrazy, iBuy went public. Marszalek was required to remain until 2016. 

    The company struggled after its IPO as competition picked up from bigger players like Alibaba. Marszalek was eventually promoted to CEO of iBuy in August 2014, according to filings with Australian regulators. 

    Alibaba headquarters in Hangzhou, China.

    Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Marszalek renamed iBuy as Ensogo in an effort to retool the company. Ensogo continued to suffer, running up a loss in 2015 equal to over $50 million.

    By the following year, Ensogo had already reportedly laid off half its staff. In June 2016, Ensogo closed down operations. The same day, Marszalek resigned.

    After the sudden shuttering of Ensogo, sellers on the site told the South China Morning Press that they never received proceeds from items they’d already delivered as part of a final blowout sale. 

    “[Many] sellers had already sold their goods but had yet to receive any money from the platform at that time, their money thus vanished altogether with the online shopping platform,” according to translated testimony from a representative for a group of sellers before Hong Kong’s Legislative Council.

    One seller told Hong Kong’s The Standard that she lost more than $25,000 in the process. 

    “It seems to us that they wanted to make huge business from us one last time before they closed down,” the seller told the publication.

    Marszalek’s representative acknowledged to CNBC that “the shutdown angered many customers and consumers” and said that was “one of the reasons Kris was opposed to the decision.” 

    Welcome to crypto

    Marszalek moved quickly on to his next thing. The same month he resigned from Ensogo, Foris Limited was incorporated, marking Marszalek’s entry into the crypto market.

    Foris’ first foray into crypto was with Monaco, an early exchange. 

    With a leadership team composed entirely of former Ensogo employees, Monaco told prospective investors they could expect three million customers and $169 million in revenue within five years. 

    Monaco rebranded as Crypto.com in 2018.

    The exterior of Crypto.com Arena on January 26, 2022 in Los Angeles, California.

    Rich Fury | Getty Images

    By 2021, the company had smashed its own goals, crossing the 10 million user mark. Revenue for the year topped $1.2 billion, according to the Financial Times. That’s when crypto was soaring, with bitcoin climbing from about $7,300 at the beginning of 2020 to a peak of over $68,000 in November of 2021.  

    The company inked a deal with LeBron James for a Super Bowl ad, aired a prior commercial with Matt Damon and spent a reported $700 million to put its name on the arena that’s home to the Los Angeles Lakers. It’s also a sponsor of the World Cup in Qatar.

    The market’s plunge in 2022 has been disastrous for all the major players and goes well beyond the FTX collapse and the numerous hedge funds and lenders that have liquidated. Coinbase’s stock price is down 84%, and the company laid off 18% of its staff. Kraken recently cut 30% of its workforce. 

    Crypto.com has laid off hundreds of employees in recent months, according to multiple reports. Questions percolated about the company in November after revelations that the prior month Crypto.com had sent more than 80% of its ether holdings, or about $400 million worth of the cryptocurrency, to Gate.io, another crypto exchange. The company only admitted the mistake after the transaction was exposed thanks to public blockchain data. Crypto.com said the funds were recovered.

    Marszalek went on CNBC on Nov. 15, following the FTX failure, to try and reassure customers and the public that the company has plenty of money, that it doesn’t use leverage and that withdrawal demands had normalized after spiking.

    Still, the market cap for Cronos, Crypto.com’s native token, has shrunk from over $3 billion on Nov. 8 to a little over $1.6 billion today, reflecting a loss of confidence among a key group of investors. During the crypto mania at this time last year, Cronos was worth over $22 billion.

    Cronos has stabilized of late, hovering around six cents for the last three weeks. Bitcoin prices have been flat for about four weeks. 

    Marszalek’s narrative is that he’s learned from past mistakes and that “early failures made me who I am today,” he wrote in his tweet thread. 

    He’s asking customers to believe him.

    “I’m proud of my scar tissue and the way I persevered in the face of adversity,” he tweeted. “Failure taught me humility, how to not overextend, and how to plan for the worst.”

    Correction: Crypto.com’s Super Bowl ad featured LeBron James, not Matt Damon. The commercial with Damon came out in late 2021.

    Clarification: This story has been updated to more accurately reflect where in Asia Marszalek has operated.

    WATCH: Sam Bankman-Fried faces an onslaught of regulatory probes

    Sam Bankman-Fried faces an onslaught of regulatory probes

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Theranos COO Sunny Balwani sentenced to nearly 13 years in prison

    Former Theranos COO Sunny Balwani sentenced to nearly 13 years in prison

    [ad_1]

    Former Theranos chief operating officer and president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani was sentenced to nearly 13 years in prison Wednesday for fraud, after the unraveling of the blood-testing juggernaut prompted criminal charges in California federal court against both Balwani and Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes, who on Nov. 18 was sentenced to more than 11 years in prison.

    During the sentencing hearing, attorneys for Balwani attempted to pin the blame on Holmes, telling U.S. District Court Judge Edward J. Davila that “decisions were made by Elizabeth Holmes.”

    Davila had set a sentencing range of 11 years plus 3 months to 14 years, but prosecutors today sought a 15-year sentence given his “significant” oversight role at Theranos’ lab business.

    The final guideline sentence was 155 months, plus three years of probation. Davila set a Mar. 15, 2023, surrender date.

    Sunny Balwani, former president of Theranos Inc., arrives at federal court in San Jose, California, on Wednesday, Dec. 7, 2022.

    David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Balwani and Holmes, former romantic partners, helmed Theranos as the company enjoyed a meteoric rise, attracting backers ranging from the DeVos family to news magnate Rupert Murdoch. It was one of Murdoch’s publications, The Wall Street Journal, that first reported on irregularities with Theranos’ purportedly revolutionary blood-testing machines.

    As COO, Balwani managed both the laboratory business and the financial aspects of the company. Theranos was marred with repeated failures during his tenure, including falsified documents and erroneous test results.

    “I am responsible for everything at Theranos,” Balwani said in a message to Holmes. Balwani assumed broad responsibility for day-to-day operations at the company.

    Theranos claimed the machines required just a few drops of blood to run and could execute more than 1,000 tests. In reality, the Journal reported the company could only process a little over a dozen tests. The Journal’s reporting eventually prompted the company’s dissolution in 2018 and, later, the arrest of Balwani and Holmes on fraud charges.

    Balwani’s sentencing in federal court marks the end of the Theranos saga, which enthralled the public and prompted documentary films and novel treatments.

    With a star-studded investor list, a captivating founder who drew comparisons to Apple’s Steve Jobs, and a potentially revolutionary technology, the company for a time represented the apex of Silicon Valley ingenuity.

    The revelations about Theranos brought about a stunning fall from grace for both Balwani and Holmes, who were in a relationship for much of their tenure at the company. Holmes accused Balwani of abuse in court proceedings, providing text messages and contemporaneous notes from their relationship as evidence.

    “Kill the old Elizabeth,” Balwani purportedly told her.

    Balwani perpetrated a “decade-long campaign of psychological abuse,” Holmes’ lawyers argued. Balwani is nearly 20 years older than Holmes, who testified that he managed the lab and financial side of the business.

    This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Holmes’ former partner faces sentencing in Theranos case

    Holmes’ former partner faces sentencing in Theranos case

    [ad_1]

    A former Theranos executive learns Wednesday whether he will be punished as severely as his former lover and business partner for peddling the company’s bogus blood-testing technology that duped investors and endangered patients.

    The sentencing for Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, who was convicted in July of fraud and conspiracy, comes less than three weeks after Elizabeth Holmes, the company’s founder and CEO, received more than 11 years in prison for her role in the scheme. The scandal revolved around the company’s false claims to have developed a medical device that could scan for hundreds of diseases and other potential problems with just a few drops of blood taken with a finger prick.

    The case threw a bright light on Silicon Valley’s dark side, exposing how its culture of hype and boundless ambition could veer into lies.

    Holmes, 38, could have gotten up to 20 years in prison — a penalty that U.S. District Judge Edward Davila could now impose on Balwani, who spent six years as Theranos’ chief operating officer while remaining romantically involved with Holmes until a bitter split in 2016.

    While on the witness stand in her trial, Holmes accused Balwani, 57, of manipulating her through years of emotional and sexual abuse. Balwani’s attorney has denied the allegations.

    The two trials had somewhat different outcomes. Unlike Balwani, Holmes was acquitted on several charges of defrauding and conspiring against people who paid for Theranos blood tests that produced misleading results and could have pointed patients toward the wrong treatment. The jury in Holmes’ trial also deadlocked on three charges.

    Balwani was convicted on all 12 felony counts, and his lawyers contend he deserves a far more lenient sentence of just four to 10 months in prison, preferably in home confinement. Prosecutors for the Justice Department are seeking 15 years. A probation report recommends nine years.

    Duncan Levin, a former federal prosecutor who is now a defense attorney, described Balwani’s bid for a light sentence as “utterly unrealistic.” Levin suspects the judge may give greater weight to the Justice Department and the probation office recommendations, which mirror the sentences those agencies sought for Holmes.

    The judge ultimately gave her 11 1/4 years in prison and recommended that the sentence be served in a low-security facility in Byran, Texas.

    The Justice Department “has now conceded that both defendants deserve the same sentence, even though Balwani was convicted for far more counts,” Levin said. Since Holmes got an 11-year sentence, “it follows logically that he will get the same sentence.”

    Federal prosecutors also want the judge to order Balwani to pay $804 million in restitution to defrauded investors — the same amount sought from Holmes. Davila deferred a decision on restitution during Holmes’ Nov. 18 sentencing until an unspecified future date.

    In court documents, Balwani’s lawyers painted him as a hardworking immigrant who moved from India to the U.S. during the 1980s to become the first member of his family to attend college. He graduated from the University of Texas in 1990 with a degree in information systems.

    He later moved to Silicon Valley, where he first worked as a computer programmer for Microsoft before founding an online startup that he sold for millions of dollars during the dot-com boom of the 1990s.

    Balwani and Holmes met around the same time she dropped out of Stanford University to start Theranos in 2003. He became enthralled with her and her quest to revolutionize health care.

    Balwani’s lawyers said he eventually invested about $5 million in a stake in Theranos that eventually became worth about $500 million on paper — a fraction of Holmes’ one-time fortune of of $4.5 billion.

    That wealth evaporated after Theranos began to unravel in 2015 amid revelations that its blood-testing technology never worked as Holmes had boasted in glowing magazine articles that likened her to Silicon Valley visionaries such as Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.

    Before Theranos’ downfall, Holmes teamed up with Balwani to raise nearly $1 billion from deep-pocketed investors that included software mogul Larry Ellison and media magnate Rupert Murdoch.

    “Mr. Balwani is not the same as Elizabeth Holmes,” his lawyers wrote in a memo to the judge. “”He actually invested millions of dollars of his own money; he never sought fame or recognition; and he has a long history of quietly giving to those less fortunate.” Balwani’s lawyers also asserted that Holmes “was dramatically more culpable” for the Theranos fraud.

    Echoing similar claims made by Holmes’s lawyers before her sentencing, Balwani’s attorneys also argued that he has been adequately punished by the intense media coverage of Theranos, which has been the subject of a book, documentary and award-winning TV series.

    Balwani “has lost his career, his reputation and his ability to meaningfully work again,” his lawyers wrote.

    Federal prosecutors cast Balwani as a ruthless, power-hungry accomplice in crimes that ripped off investors and imperiled people who received flawed results. The blood tests were to be available in a partnership with Walgreen’s that Balwani helped engineer.

    “Balwani presented a fake story about Theranos’ technology and financial stability day after day in meeting after meeting,” the prosecutors wrote in their memo to the judge. “Balwani maintained this façade of accomplishments, after making the calculated decision that honesty would destroy Theranos.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mississippi grain company’s ex-CEO indicted on fraud charges

    Mississippi grain company’s ex-CEO indicted on fraud charges

    [ad_1]

    GREENVILLE, Miss. — The former leader of a Mississippi grain storage and processing company has been indicted on federal and state charges, more than a year after the company filed for bankruptcy, prosecutors said Tuesday.

    John R. Coleman, 46, of Greenwood, Mississippi, is the former CEO of Express Grain Terminals, LLC.

    A federal grand jury indicted Coleman on charges of defrauding farmers, banks and the Mississippi Department of Agriculture, U.S. Attorney Clay Joyner and Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch said in a news release.

    Coleman made his initial appearance Tuesday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden in Greenville. Federal court records did not list an attorney for him.

    Federal court documents say that from June 2018 to October 2022, Coleman altered Express Grain’s audited financial statements to receive a state warehouse license and lied about the amount of debt he owed on corn, wheat, soybeans or other crops held at the facility.

    The federal indictment said farmers delivered grain to Express Grain throughout the 2021 harvest season but did not receive payment.

    The indictment said that Express Grain sent an email to customers on Sept. 28, 2021, with wording approved by Coleman. The message said the company was in good financial shape.

    “We have funding from multiple sources to make sure everyone gets paid on time,” the company email said. “Stay safe out there and keep those combines rolling!”

    The next day, Express Grain eventually filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

    “Coleman’s fraud caused widespread financial hardship and suffering throughout the Mississippi Delta and elsewhere,” the federal indictment said.

    In September 2021, Express Grain had $70 million in outstanding loans from UMB Bank in Kansas City, Missouri.

    If convicted on the federal charges, Coleman would face up to 180 years in prison.

    Fitch also said a Leflore County grand jury has indicted Coleman on five counts of making false representations to defraud government and one count of false pretenses.

    The FBI, the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General and the Internal Revenue Service are investigating the case.

    Law enforcement agents raided the Express Grain offices and Coleman’s home in February, days before the company’s properties were sold at auction, the Greenwood Commonwealth reported. A legal battle over Express Grain’s proceeds was settled earlier this year. Farmers who chose to participate in the settlement were able to claim a share of $9 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link