Raoul Weil from UBS Declared A Fugitive
Jan
13
Toomre Capital Markets LLC ("TCM") has previously written of the bubbling scandal regarding the Swiss banking giant UBS and its activities in helping American citizens participate in various tax-avoidance schemes. Such posts included Former UBS Private Banker To Plead Guilty, Wealthy Americans Under Scrutiny in UBS Case, UBS Global Wealth Chairman Raoul Weil Indicted, and UBS Poised To Name US Tax Dodgers.
On January 13th 2009, this story is back in the news. U.S. District Judge James Cohn declared that Raoul Weil, 49, the former chairman of the global wealth management division at UBS, was a fugitive from American justice. Apparently, Mr. Weil, the head of the division in which UBS private banker Bradley Birkenfeld once worked, did not surrender to United States judicial officials on charges of conspiring to help wealthy Americans hide assets from U.S. tax authorities. In the indictment unsealed in November 2008, Mr. Weil and other unidentified bankers conspired to help approximately 20,000 Americans hide as much as twenty billion of assets in Swiss bank accounts without declaring them to U.S. tax authorities and hence paying any income taxes generated from them.
This scandal stems from the December 2007 case in which Orange County, California billionaire Igor Olenicoff pled guilty to a charge of filing a false tax return and agreed to pay $52 million in back taxes, penalties and interest. An American based in Switzerland, Bradley Birkenfeld, worked for Raoul Weil (who then oversaw UBS cross-border private banking services, including those offered to wealthy American citizens) and was the private banker for Mr. Olenicoff. Mr. Birkenfeld himself then pled guilty to conspiring to tax avoidance charges and is rumored to be cooperating with American authorities.
Mr. Weil was based in Switzerland and was a member of UBS' executive board until he stepped down after the indictment was made public. Apparently, Switzerland does not consider tax-avoidance charges serious enough to merit the extradition of its citizens. Hence, there always has been some doubt about whether Mr. Weil might ever appear before United States judicial authorities. Mr. Weil's failure to appear, though, likely will increase the pressure on his now former employer UBS to release the complete list of American citizens who had cross-border private banking accounts in Switzerland before UBS unilaterally made the decision to close them last summer.
As Toomre Capital Markets LLC has stated before, UBS is caught in a difficult place. Swiss strict banking laws prevent the revelation of account information simply for suspicion of tax-avoidance schemes. On the other hand, American judicial officials can criminally charge UBS which potentially would forever prevent the banking giant from conducting business in America. The reader might remember that UBS has a large presence in America both in its institutional bank and investment bank units as well as what was known as the former PaineWebber.
This declaration of Mr. Weil as a fugitive is likely to be yet another step in turning up the heat on UBS. Apparently many wealthy Americans have been making proffers to American tax authorities about their hidden assets and how hence they thus filed false income tax returns. Surely before this saga is over, a number of criminal lawsuits will be launched to further deter others from participating in tax-avoidance schemes. The interesting question is whether UBS will be criminally charged and what that fall-out might be. Until this scandal is resolved, this might not be the best time to be a retail investor with an account with UBS.
Bank Partners in Crimes.
Update .Dec . 17 th. 2010.
Nov.23 - - -Nov.26 th. 2010.
The following sent to - - - - 312- - Lords - - - - - - House of Lords.
The following sent to - - - - 649 - - M.P.'s - - - - - House of Commons.
BANKS -PARTNERS IN CRIMES.
Pictet & Cie Bank.
Ivan Pictet.
Charles Pictet.
Nicolas Pictet.
Jacques de Saussure.
Jean – Francois Demole.
Renaud de Planta.
Philippe Bertherat..
Pictet & Cie.- claim they are the “Rolls Royce”of swiss banks.
Swiss Banks or more correctly Swizz banks.
Swizz. ---- “ a great disappointment.” or a “ fraud.”
Fraud. ---“ an intentional deception or dishonesty.”— “a crime.”
Crime. ---“ an act committed or omitted in violation of a law.”
Serious Crimes .
Conspiring to pervert the Course of Justice.
Perverting the Course of Justice.
Contempt of Court.
Pictet & Cie Bank –Partners –(1996—2010)-liable.
Peters &Peters – Partners.—(1999----2010)-liable.
The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld crucial documents requested under a High Court order. The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld evidence from the Police, and one of it’s account managers Susan Broadhead gave a false witness statement to the Police.
Another one of it’s managers Nicholas Campiche ( Now Head of Pictet – Alternative Investments.) concocted a letter pretending to be a client and closed his account. The senior partner (Ivan Pictet.) sought to have numerous documents destroyed,along with those copies held in their London office’s of Pictet Asset Management. Initially stating that they were forgeries then their lawyers Peters & Peters – Monty Raphael –and the barrister Charles Flint.Q.C. later had to admit in Court that the documents were genuine.
British Parliament. Hansard .29th March 2007.
Barry Sheerman .M.P.—quote.
---------“ Constituents of mine have lost £2 million through fraud. The fraudster used Pictet & Cie - - a French Bank - - and Pictet Asset Management to back the fraud being perpetrated.””
(1) It is a criminal offence for a bank to knowingly act for an undischarged criminal bankrupt in so far as it seeks to assist that criminal bankrupt in the fraudulent movement of monies. ( Money Laundering.)
(2) It is a criminal offence for a bank to lie to the police and the bankrupts trustee in bankruptcy in so far as any knowledge of, or dealings with the bank was refuted .
(3) A bank can be guilty of Contempt of Court if it fails to comply fully with the Courts order for discovery .
(4) The banks contempt is further compounded if it fails to address its error after it is specifically drawn to the to its solicitors attention. ( Monty Raphael).
(5) It is a criminal offence under the Financial Services Act to seek to destroy evidence that might be relevant to an investigation .
(6) It is a criminal offence not to relinquish control of funds to the Trustee immediately the fact of the bankruptcy is drawn to the banks attention.
(7) It is a criminal offence to lie or otherwise obfuscate the lawful and proper enquiries of the F.S.A.
In the F.S.A. cover up , they concluded that there had been “ Rogue” elements in Pictet & Cie’s , London operations . They had been moved from their London Office so who was there left to prosecute. “ Unbelievable.”
On Dec 9th,2008. the complaint was sent to 150 Members of the House Of Lords and 230 Members of Parliament.
*** We thank --David Cameron. M.P. ( Canary Wharf Speech.) Dec. 15th. 2008.
Now--- PRIME MINISTER.
(1) Bankers who behave irresponsibly should face professional consequences.
(2) If anyone is found to have behaved criminally they must be prosecuted.
(3) The F.S.A and the Serious Fraud Office should be following up every lead,
investigating every suspect transaction .
(4) We need to make it 100% clear –those who break the law should face
prosecution.
(5) That we make sure we root out any wrongdoing that may have happened, whoever
is involved, however high or well connected they may be.
Ivan Pictet.
Managing partner in Pictet & Cie Bank . --- retiring -?. 2010.
President of the Geneva Financial Centre. ---stepping down -2010. ?
World Bank.committee member.---- ?
United Nations. Investment Committee member,
Vice President – Global Humanitarian Forum. --- redundant.2010.?
Member of the Henokiens.
Blackstone Group --- Board Member.
Past- President – Geneva Private Bankers association.
Past –President – Geneva Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
Monty Raphael. ( Peters & Peters.)
Quote.” ---- Doyen of U.K. Fraud lawyers.
Head of Fraud and Regulatory Dept. ---- stepping down, --2009.? Director of the Fraud Advisory panel.
Member of the Law Society of England & Wales.
International Bar Association Member.
Written Parliamentary Questions received by the table office ..
(1) To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to ensure that Swiss Banks such as Pictet & Cie do not evade criminal prosecution under EU law even when the illegal act is committed by a London based subsidiary.
(2)To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to protect the rights of UK citizens who seek redress following criminal activities by Swiss banks with subsidiary offices located in London.
On Dec 9th,2008. the complaint was sent to 150 Members of the House Of Lords and 230 Members of Parliament.
On Aug 19th.2009.another complainants file regarding the “cover up” was forwarded to the same 380 members.
We started our campaign in June 2008 -- via the “net” to highlight our fight to get “justice”. In our second year campaign we hoped to reveal further damning evidence . Due to there being an on going Police investigation into our complaint we are at this moment unable to place dozens of documents on to the “net”. Again we thank other “ E- Mailers” for their information in relation to our campaign.
Quote. ( America’s Top Lawyer .)
You can be the richest man in the world with the best lawyers that money can buy but you cannot win against a man who has got nothing left to lose and is telling the truth.
Truth Hurts.
Ivan Pictet. Announces stepping down from Pictet & Cie. 5th Feb 2010.
Stepping Down—President of Geneva Financial centre.—2010.
Monty Raphael. Steps down as head . May. 2009.
*** We note that there has been a sharp increase in Peters & Peters partners leaving to go to other practices. Moving does not alleviate them of any responsibility from any illegalities that may have occurred at Peters & Peters during their partnership tenure. From 1999 onwards.
*** Were currently waiting to see if the Police and other Law Enforcement Bodies attempt to cover this case up like their F.S.A. counterparts. If they do –“ then watch this space.”
We were informed that due to pressure from our M.P. that the Ministry of Justice have asked Lord Myners to investigate our claims that the F.S.A. covered up the illegal activities of Pictet Asset Management. London.
The consensus of opinion is the Pictet & Cie should be prosecuted , and that their U.K. banking licence should be taken away.
Their solicitors at Peters & Peters .London -- prosecuted and” struck off”..
*** Started campaign --- June 6th.2008.
2 years ---- approx 2million e-mails - - - but still no writs, injunctions or threats of litigation - - - WHY - - - because it is all true.
*** . The bigger they are --- the harder they fall.!!!
In America ---- they would have all been in prison for the last seven years.
Nov.23rd --Nov.26th. 2010 .
The above sent to ------ 312 - - Lords - - - House of Lords.
The above sent to --- --649 - - M.P.'s - - - House of Commons._
Full Story.
Go to search box on “Google” and insert ( Ivan Pictet / Monty Raphael) or
insert ( Pictet & Cie / Monty Raphael ) - - then try it on “Google”.
Or try on Yahoo. - - - ( Charles Flint Q.C.) .
Or try on Yahoo - - - ( Nicholas Campiche.)
UBS, saints and sinners
Why add to rumors when you can easily check facts? You wrote "Apparently, Switzerland does not consider tax-avoidance charges serious enough to merit the extradition of its citizens" but it's easy to get this information correct with a bit of research. The US and most countries that use Anglosaxon law extradite their own citizens, but only after legal evidence (not suspicions) that will hold up in court is produced. Switzerland, like most European countries, which have Napoleonic legal systems, gives its citizens the right to refuse extradition. Evidence needed to make an extradition request, by the way, is much lighter in these countries than in the US, where it can take months, years. In any event, no extradition request appears to have been made for Weill; the US may or may not have requested a search for him, but this information is never publicly released for the obvious reason that people are more likely to hide or disappear if they know a government is looking for them.
Tax avoidance: Switzerland distinguishes between tax avoidance, a minor crime, and tax fraud. Fraud means using fraudulent means, such as changing signatures, changing data, etc., and if a govt. such as the US suspects fraud and shows enough evidence, Switzerland provides judiciary assistance (plenty of cases of this in the past, especially for organized crime). Banking secrecy is then lifted - nothing sacred about Swiss banking secrecy in the end.
So, is the guy a crook? That's another matter and one we all like to speculate about, but are you ready to hang him before the US Justice Dept. shows that the accounts in question avoided taxes by fraudulent means? Next interesting question, are the account owners saints or sinners? Personally, I find it hard to believe that 20,000 US citizens, each with a least $1 million, open offshore accounts (legally) and don't declare income (illegally) without knowing they are doing it. As an American with a bank account in Switzerland I've been bombarded with information over the past few years about my obligations to share everything with the IRS. Harder yet, finding sympathy for them.
The Conundrum of American Prosecutors
Thanks for the thought. I am not a lawyer. Hence, I used the term "apparently" when referring to what Switzerland might or might not do with regard to the involvement of one of its citizens in a tax-avoidance scheme. Yes, I also could have researched further exactly what Swiss law might be as it applies to the charges brought against Raoul Weil. However, I also have recently been informed that several publications, including the gray lady herself, The New York Times, have contained errors about how Swiss law applies to this case. My understanding too is that Swiss law distinguishes between tax avoidance and tax fraud.
What makes this case perplexing is that American prosecutors have learned (likely from Bradley Birkenfeld and others) that approximately 17,000 out of something like twenty thousand Americans have anonymous Swiss bank accounts at UBS. These American prosecutors strongly suspect that there are more American citizens like Igor Olenicoff who kept the off-shore account(s) secret and did not declare the income that was generated from those assets.
In order to provide sufficient information to indict for tax fraud and hence secure Swiss judiciary assistance, American prosecutors first must know the identity of each individual UBS account holder(s) they want to indict. However, under the strict Swiss banking laws, financial institutions such as UBS are prevented from sharing account information with anyone other than the Swiss authorities. That then leads the conundrum: How do American prosecutors identify the American citizens who held cross-border anonymous accounts at UBS?
It is highly likely that once a certain number of these American citizens have been identified and prosecuted for tax fraud, that further information will be revealed. If it turns out that there was a systematic pattern of UBS private bankers assisting American citizens avoid paying taxes due, no doubt there will be active pursuit of UBS private banking managers on tax conspiracy charges. Apparently, former UBS private banker Bradley Birkenfeld has suggested that there was such a systematic pattern.
The indictment of Raoul Weil revealed some of the information that American prosecutors currently possess. However, it certainly also is not all inclusive. The really interesting question is what is in that hidden information and what made American prosecutors confident that they could reveal the indictment of Raoul Weil back in November 2008?