DOCSLIB.ORG

GAO-14-213R, Financial Audit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GAO-14-213R, Financial Audit On December 23, 2013, the enclosure was replaced to reflect SEC’s correction of certain unaudited information in its agency financial report, as discussed on page 1 of the enclosure. 441 G St. N.W. Washington, DC 20548 December 16, 2013 The Honorable Mary Jo White Chair United States Securities and Exchange Commission Financial Audit: Securities and Exchange Commission’s Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements Dear Ms. White: This report transmits the GAO auditor’s report on the results of our audits of the fiscal years 2013 and 2012 financial statements of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and its Investor Protection Fund (IPF),1 which is incorporated in the enclosed U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Fiscal Year 2013 Agency Financial Report. As discussed more fully in the auditor’s report that begins on page 54 of the enclosed agency financial report, we found • the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles; • SEC maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2013, although internal control deficiencies regarding information security exist that merit attention by those charged with governance; and • no reportable noncompliance in fiscal year 2013 with provisions of applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements we tested. The Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 requires that SEC annually prepare and submit audited financial statements to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget.2 The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended in 2010 by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), requires SEC to annually prepare and submit a complete set of audited financial statements for IPF to Congress.3 We agreed, under our audit authority, to audit SEC’s and IPF’s financial statements. Section 963 of the Dodd-Frank Act further requires that (1) SEC annually submit a report to Congress describing management’s responsibility for internal control over financial reporting and for assessing the effectiveness of 1IPF was established in 2010 by section 922 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to fund the activities of SEC’s whistleblower award program and the SEC Office of Inspector General suggestion program. IPF is a separate SEC fund and its financial statements present SEC’s financial activity associated with its whistleblower and Inspector General suggestion programs. Accordingly, IPF’s financial transactions are also included in SEC’s overall financial statements. 231 U.S.C. § 3515. 3Section 21F(g)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6(g)(5). Page 1 GAO-14-213R SEC’s Financial Statements for Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 such internal control during the fiscal year, (2) the SEC Chairman and Chief Financial Officer attest to SEC’s report, and (3) GAO attest to and report on the assessment made by SEC.4 Accordingly, this report also includes our reporting in response to the requirement under the Dodd-Frank Act. ________ We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; the House Committee on Financial Services; and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. We are also sending copies to the Secretary of the Treasury, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-3133 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Sincerely yours, James R. Dalkin Director Financial Management and Assurance Enclosure 4Dodd-Frank Act, Pub. L. No. 111-203, § 963(a), (b) (2), 124 Stat. 1376, 1910 (2010), codified at 15 U.S.C. § 78d- 8(a), (b)(2). Page 2 GAO-14-213R SEC’s Financial Statements for Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FISCAL YEAR 2013 AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT About This Report The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) fiscal year (FY) 2013 Agency Financial Report (AFR) provides financial and high-level performance results that enable the President, Congress and the public to assess the SEC’s accomplishments and understand its financial picture. This report satisfies the reporting requirements contained in the following laws and regulations: • Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 • Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 • Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Section 922 Whistleblower Protection, and Section 963 Annual Financial Controls Audit • Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 • Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act of 1982 • Government Management Reform Act of 1994 • GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 • Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, as amended by IPERA and IPERIA • Office of Management and Budget Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal Controls • Office of Management and Budget Circular A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements • Recovery Auditing Act, Section 831, Defense Authorization Act, for 2002 For the second year in a row, the SEC is producing an AFR, with a primary focus on financial results, and an Annual Performance Report (APR), which focuses on strategic goals and performance results, in lieu of a combined Performance and Accountability Report. The FY 2013 APR will be included in the SEC FY 2015 Congressional Budget Justification in February 2014. Additionally, SEC will publish a Summary of Performance and Financial Information (SPFI), also to be released in February 2014. This AFR and prior year SEC AFRs are electronically available at www.sec.gov/about/secreports.shtml. To comment on this report, email [email protected]. Pages 2 and 18 of this FY 2013 Agency Financial Report were updated on December 17, 2013 to correct the error in the amount of disgorgement and penalties ordered in FY 2012, which was $3.1 billion, not $2.8 billion. Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting For the seventh year in a row, the SEC received a Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting from the Association of Government CERTIFICATE OF Accountants. The award EXCELLENCE IN ACCOUNTABILITY is presented to REPORTING® Federal Government agencies whose Presented to the annual reports U.S. Securities achieve the and Exchange Commission highest standards In recognition of your outstanding efforts in preparing the Agency Financial Report and Summary of Performance demonstrating and Financial Information for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012. accountability and A Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting is presented by AGA to federal government agencies whose Agency Financial Reports achieve the highest standards demonstrating communicating results. accountability and communicating results. Robert F. Dacey, CGFM, CPA Chair, Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting Board Relmond P. Van Daniker, DBA, CPA Executive Director, AGA Contents Message from the Chair 2 Introduction to the Agency Financial Report 4 Management’s Discussion and Analysis 5 Vision, Mission, Values and Goals 6 History and Purpose 8 Organizational Structure and Resources 9 FY 2013 Year in Review 13 Looking Forward 28 Financial Highlights 33 Performance Highlights 40 Verification and Validation of Performance Data 40 Strategic and Performance Planning Framework 40 Performance Achievements 42 Management Assurances 45 Annual Assurance Statement 45 Financial Section 51 Message from the Chief Financial Officer 52 Report of Independent Auditors 54 Enclosure I: Management’s Response to Audit Opinion 61 Financial Statements 64 Notes to the Financial Statements 70 Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited) 98 Investor Protection Fund Financial Statements 102 Notes to the Investor Protection Fund Financial Statements 104 Other Information 109 Schedule of Spending 110 Inspector General’s Statement on Management and Performance Challenges 112 Management’s Response to Inspector General’s Statement 116 Summary of Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances 120 Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act Reporting Details 121 Appendices 123 Appendix A: Chair and Commissioners 124 Appendix B: Major Enforcement Cases 127 Appendix C: SEC Divisions and Offices 145 Appendix D: Glossary of Selected Terms 147 Appendix E: Acronyms 151 Available on the Web at www.sec.gov/about/secafr2013.shtml To contact the SEC, please see www.sec.gov or “Contact Us” at www.sec.gov/contact.shtml. To comment on this report, email [email protected]. For further information on selected terms and topics, please see “Fast Answers” at www.sec.gov/answers.shtml. 2013 AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT • MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR Message from the Chair Over the past year, the men rules that would require sponsors of securitization transactions and women of the Securities to retain a portion of the risk in the product being sold. The and Exchange Commission Commission acted as well to improve the supervision of continued to demonstrate clearing agencies; put in place a new regulatory regime for an unyielding commitment to municipal advisors; and adopted the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ketan Parekh
    Stock Market Scams in India INTRODUCTION Introduction Financial scams have a habit of cropping up with an alarming regularity in the Indian financial system. We have reconciled to financial irregularities to such an extent that we simply do not pay heed to smaller scams that take place around us on a daily basis. I am, or rather was, a part of the financial machinery for a few years, and trust me even the private sector is not entirely free of the machinations of unscrupulous and enterprising scamsters. The scope of the money involved multiplies manifold in the public sector, with a corresponding drop in accountability. India has seen some of the most high-profile scandals where investors have lost billions of rupees just because a few people in high places could not control their greed. The Satyam Computer Services fraud is neither the first nor will it be the last corporate scam to have hit India, so investors must be on guard and ask for more information before making any investment decision, says former Sebi chairman M Damodaran. But with corporates, brokers, banks, politicians, regulators colluding at times, many a multi- crore scam has hit India. And the saga is likely to go on. India has seen some of the most high-profile scandals where investors have lost billions of rupees just because a few people in high places could not control their greed. Over the Years there have been numerous fraud and scandals in the Indian Stock Market. These scams have had a very major impact on the stock markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Willing to Be Scammed: How Self-Control Impacts Internet Scam Compliance
    Running head: Willing to be scammed: how self-control impacts Internet scam compliance Willing to be scammed: How self-control impacts Internet scam compliance Submitted by David Modic to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology In September 2012 This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signature: ………………………………………………………….. 2 WILLING TO BE SCAMMED WILLING TO BE SCAMMED 3 Abstract At any given moment in time, there are people complying with fraudulent requests (i.e. scams) on the Internet. While the incidence rates are low (between five and ten percent of the population becoming victims on a yearly basis), the financial and emotional consequences can be high. In this Thesis we composed a unified theory of which factors made individuals more likely to comply with scams and what psychological mechanisms are unwittingly employed by con-men to make their (illegitimate marketing) offers more enticing. The strongest overall predictor of scam compliance (i.e. the extent to which an individual is likely to comply with fraudulent requests) was the level of self-control, regardless of the observed stage of a scam. On the basis of previous research, we postulated and have empirically shown that falling for a scam is a 3-stage process (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Important Safety Message Oakdale Police Department
    Safety Important Safety Message Oakdale Police Department Likely Perpetrators Dear• St rangersOakdale preying Residents: on older people who may be isolated,lonely, confused, or desperate for attention. • Caregivers and persons in a position of trust who use fear or guilt to take advantage of a senior. Too• Foften,amilym eresidentsmbers with a crigetminal hooked history and by/or cona artists and scammers whose intent is toh istoryfinancially of drug abuse, exploitaddiction, them. or unemployment. It isn’t just the elderly, as anyone who has received unsolicited and suspicious phone calls, mail or email spam can attest.Signs that an Older Adult Might Thebe Oakdalein Trouble Police Department urges you to review this information and discuss• Unusual it rewithcent changesloved to ones, a person's friends, account, and especially those who may need a littleincluding extra atyphelp.ical withdrawals,This bookletnew person(s) offers information on various scams, tips to avoidadded, being or sudden exploited, repeated use and of the resources seniors' ATM to help. or credit card. If• youA large work check in written a financial to someone youinstitution, don't know. money transfer company or retail • industryA change (which in their powersells of prepaid attorney or cards the or money orders), you are in a unique beneficiarieson their insurance or investment positionaccounts. to stop a scam in progress. In fact, you may be the last person who can• Unusualstop the or unnecessary customer purchases, from suchlosing as buying a large amount of his or her assets. new golf clubs or a diamond bracelet. By• stayingUnnecessary alert, home repairs.sharing concerns, and asking questions you can help protect • yourselfBecoming and close others with a muchavoid younger financial person or harm.
    [Show full text]
  • JOHN THOMAS FINANCIAL, INC., And
    -~;i;e:l: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the I SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSlON. y " . MA c:.8 2014 ~FFlCE otrH{SECRETARt In the Matter of JOHN THOMAS CAPITAL MANAGMENT GROUP LLC d/b/a PATRIOT28 LLC, File No. 3-15255 GEORGE R. JARKESY, JR., JOHN THOMAS FINANCIAL, INC., and ANASTASIOS "TOMMY" BELESIS, Respondents. RESPONDENTS' POST-HEARING MEMORANDUM OF LAW Karen Cook, Esq. S. Michael McColloch, Esq. Karen Cook, PLLC S. Michael McColloch, PLLC E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 214.593.6429 Phone: 214.593.6415 1717 McKinney A venue, Suite 700 171 7 McKinney A venue, Suite 700 Dallas, Texas 75202 Dallas, Texas 75202 Fax: 214.593.6410 Fax: 214.593.6410 Counsel for: John Thomas Capital Management Group d/b/a Patriot28 LLC and George Jarkesy, Jr. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preliminary Statement....................................................................................................... l The AP is Void Because the Commission Prejudged the Case Against Respondents ............................................................................................................ 2 The AP Should Be Dismissed Due to Improper Ex Parte Communications with the Division of Enforcement Prior to the Hearing ..................................... 8 The AP is Void Because the Commission Failed to Follow its Own Rules of Practice.................................................................................................................. ll Respondents' Constitutional Rights Were {and continue to be) Violated .................
    [Show full text]
  • Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions
    Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions Firms Fined, Individuals Sanctioned Reported for Delaney Equity Group, LLC (CRD® #142285, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) October 2013 and David Cameron Delaney (CRD #2447186, Registered Principal, West Palm Beach, Florida) submitted an Offer of Settlement in which the firm was censured and fined $215,000. The firm was prohibited from directly or FINRA has taken disciplinary actions indirectly receiving, in any manner, any penny stock in any form, and prohibited against the following firms and from selling, for the benefit of any customer or firm proprietary account, any individuals for violations of FINRA penny stock deposited with the firm (including through the firm’s clearing rules; federal securities laws, rules firm) by Automated Customer Account Transfer (ACAT) unless the stock has and regulations; and the rules of been held in the account for at least 180 days or has been beneficially owned the Municipal Securities Rulemaking by the accountholder, including the accountholders predecessors, if any, for Board (MSRB). the requisite statutory period not to be less than 180 days, and in amounts not to exceed the volume limitations prescribed by the applicable federal securities laws; or the stock is subject to an effective registration statement. The firm shall retain, within 60 days of the date of the Order Accepting Offer of Settlement, an independent consultant, to conduct a comprehensive review of the adequacy of the firm’s policies, systems and procedures (written and otherwise) and training relating to the compliance with Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, applicable rules and regulations with respect to the distribution of unregistered non-exempt securities, compliance with the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
    [Show full text]
  • Penny Stock - Wikipedia, the Visitedfree Encyclopedia on 7/28/2015 Page 1 of 4
    Penny stock - Wikipedia, the visitedfree encyclopedia on 7/28/2015 Page 1 of 4 Penny stock From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Penny stocks, also known as cent stocks in some countries, are common shares of small public companies that trade at low prices per share. In the United States, the SEC defines a penny stock as a security that trades below $5 per share, is not listed on a national exchange, and fails to meet other specific criteria.[1] In the United Kingdom, stocks priced under £1 are called penny shares. In the case of many penny stocks, low market price inevitably leads to low market capitalization. Such stocks can be highly volatile and subject to manipulation by stock promoters and pump and dump schemes. Such stocks present a high risk for investors, who are often lured by the hope of large and quick profits. Penny stocks in the USA are often traded over-the-counter on the OTC Bulletin Board, or Pink Sheets.[2] In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) have specific rules to define and regulate the sale of penny stocks. Contents ◾ 1 Concerns for investors ◾ 1.1 Notable cases ◾ 2 Regulation ◾ 3 References ◾ 4 External links Concerns for investors Many penny stocks, particularly those that trade for fractions of a cent, are thinly traded. They can become the target of stock promoters and manipulators.[3] These manipulators first purchase large quantities of stock, then artificially inflate the share price through false and misleading positive statements. This is referred to as a "pump and dump"[4] scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • Sentry Magazine Vol 1 No 6 Fall 1988 Winter 1989
    For the Navy Security community Vol. 1, No. 6 Fall 1988/Wlnter 1989 Industrial Security It really exists , TEMPEST The lnvlslble thr_eal fS6:~.!~Y Vol. 1 No. 6 Fall 1988/Winter 1989 Security communitv Special features From the editor: Since last issue, I've received a lot Moving up·· MA and LDO Promotio11s ....................................... 4 of positive response from the Oeel Unique police duty at Navy's largest shipyard .................... & concerning the changes aod expansion of Sentry. This issue renects even more Security violations ...who's responsible ...............................22 changes, expanding into areas o( Jungle Patrol ........................................................................... 35 lndus1rial Security and Technical The Invisible Security threat·· TEMPEST............ ...............40 Security, and the growing Legal Issues, 'Alligator Muldoon' ·· SECSTA 's Sccuriry Officer .................... 46 Information Security and Personnel Finding fund$ for security .................................................... 50 Security sections. The command is also growing and The Navy Industrial SecUiity Program ............................... 54 changi11g. As of 1 October 1988, we are Defending against terrorism: Part 6: Mail Boml>s .................. 58 now the Naval Investigative Service Command (NISCOM), and have a new headquarters building 10 go with the News & Features new name. Our new loca1io.n is at the Washingto.11 Navy Yard, Building 111. Crime Prevention awards ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan C. Rugg, CFA, President Cyrus M
    Item 1. Cover Page PART 2B of FORM ADV Jonathan C. Rugg, CFA, President Cyrus M. Amini, Esq., CFA, CIO & CCO Shawn Hsieh, MBA, CFA, CFP Aaron Dejuan Morris, AIF Jamie N. Rugg, CFP David Fitzgerald, CIMA Thomas Murphy K. David Yoshioka Hugh A. Meyer, MBA David D. Hu, CLU, CFP Charlesworth & Rugg, Inc. 20750 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 420 Los Angeles, California 91364 Phone: (818) 340-0157 Facsimile: (818) 702-8851 Email: [email protected] March 31, 2019 This brochure supplement provides information about the qualifications of Charlesworth & Rugg, Inc. (C&R) supervised persons. If you have any questions about the contents of this brochure supplement, please contact us at (818) 340-0157. The information in this brochure supplement has not been approved or verified by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or by any state securities authority. C&R is a registered investment adviser. However, being a registered investment adviser does not imply a certain level of skill or training and does not guarantee investment performance. Additional information about C&R is also available on the SEC’s website at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov. 1 Jonathan C. Rugg, CFA Item 2. Educational Background and Business Experience NAME: Jonathan Christopher Rugg YEAR OF BIRTH: 1983 FORMAL EDUCATION: B.S. with concentrations in Finance, Real Estate and Marketing at The University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School of Business, 2006 Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) Charterholder, 2010 BUSINESS BACKGROUND: Firm Position Responsibilities Period C&R President Investment selection, asset 8/16 - Present allocation and business development Chief Develops, maintains, monitors, 8/16 – 3/19 Compliance and revises, compliance related Officer policies and procedures Vice Investment selection, asset 8/10 – 7/16 President allocation and business development Urdang Capital Associate, Analyzing investments, 7/06 - 6/10 Management Acquisitions underwriting, due diligence Item 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Scammers and Their Mules in Malaysia
    (2020) 26 JUUM 65 - 72 https://doi.org./10.17576/juum-2020-26-08 Online Scammers and Their Mules in Malaysia Mohamad Rizal Abd Rahman ABSTRACT Scammers have adopted various scam techniques in defrauding their victims. One of the most common ways is by engaging mules to assist them. This article discusses relevant legal provisions in Malaysia which are enforced against these illegal activities. The objectives are to highlight the significance of section 415 and 420 in dealing with online scammers, and section 414 and 424 in dealing with mules who assist them. Relevant cases are also cited to enable readers to understand the real scenario behind these scammers and their mules. The article ends with a scenario to be pondered in between human conscience and government intervention in order to prevent, if not eradicate, these illegal activities. Keywords: scam; mule; Malaysia; law INTRODUCTION testimony beforethe US Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on 2 March 2000: Humans are prone to be susceptible to matters which benefit them financially and emotionally. “The human side of computer security is easily exploited and Fake multilevel marketing or pyramid system, constantly overlooked. Companies spend millions of dollars on firewalls, encryption and secure access devices, and it’s money business opportunities, auctions, credit card offers, wasted, because none of these measures address the weakest loans, job vacancies, etc are the most common fake link in the security chain, the people who use, administer, “attractions” that scammers adopt in defrauding operate, and account for computer systems that contain others. Either by way of phishing, pharming, protected information..
    [Show full text]
  • Miguel Ortiz January 4, 2017 New York, NY
    BEFORE THE NATIONAL ADJUDICATORY COUNCIL FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY In the Matter of Department of Enforcement, DECISION Complainant, Complaint No. 2014041319201 vs. Miguel Ortiz January 4, 2017 New York, NY, Respondent. Respondent willfully made material misrepresentations to conceal losses in an account. Respondent also willfully failed to disclose on his Form U4 an unsatisfied judgment. Held, findings and sanctions affirmed. Appearances For the Complainant: Leo F. Orenstein, Esq., Jeffrey D. Pariser, Esq., Department of Enforcement, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority For the Respondent: Pro se Decision Miguel Ortiz appeals a November 6, 2015 Hearing Panel decision. The Hearing Panel found that Ortiz made materially false statements and omitted material facts concerning the composition, value, and performance of an investment account and concealed the losses incurred in that account. It further found that Ortiz willfully failed to disclose on his Uniform Application for Securities Industry Registration and Transfer (“Form U4”) an unsatisfied judgment against him. The Hearing Panel barred Ortiz for his material misrepresentations and omissions and did not impose additional sanctions for Ortiz’s remaining misconduct. On appeal, Ortiz concedes that he made material misrepresentations and omitted to disclose material facts, but argues that his motivation was not greed or his own monetary gain. Rather, Ortiz argues that he misrepresented the composition, value, and performance of the account in a misguided attempt to shield the account’s owners, his longtime friend and her partner, from the “unpleasant reality” of large losses while he purportedly tried to recover the losses. Ortiz urges us to reduce the bar imposed upon him for this misconduct.
    [Show full text]
  • Sr001-Xxx.Ps
    1 107th Congress "!S. RPT. 1st Session SENATE 107–1 ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE AND ITS SUBCOMMITTEES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS JANUARY 29, 2001.—Ordered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 2001 VerDate 29-JAN-2001 04:09 Jan 30, 2001 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5012 Sfmt 5012 E:\HR\OC\SR001.XXX pfrm02 PsN: SR001 congress.#13 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine CARL LEVIN, Michigan GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire MAX CLELAND, Georgia ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri HANNAH S. SISTARE, Staff Director and Counsel ELLEN B. BROWN, Senior Counsel JOYCE A. RECHTSCHAFFEN, Democratic Staff Director and Counsel DARLA D. CASSELL, Chief Clerk (II) VerDate 29-JAN-2001 04:09 Jan 30, 2001 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\SR001.XXX pfrm02 PsN: SR001 III 105TH CONGRESS FRED THOMPSON, TENNESSEE, Chairman WILLIAM V. ROTH, JR., DELAWARE 1 JOHN GLENN, Ohio TED STEVENS, Alaska 1 CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey DON NICKLES, Oklahoma MAX CLELAND, Georgia ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania BOB SMITH, New Hampshire 2 ROBERT F.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Fund Administrators As a Solution for Hedge Fund Fraud
    Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law Volume 15 Issue 1 Article 8 2010 Independent Fund Administrators As A Solution for Hedge Fund Fraud Kent Oz Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl Recommended Citation Kent Oz, Independent Fund Administrators As A Solution for Hedge Fund Fraud, 15 Fordham J. Corp. & Fin. L. 329 (2009). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl/vol15/iss1/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Independent Fund Administrators As A Solution for Hedge Fund Fraud Cover Page Footnote J.D. Candidate 2010, Fordham University School of Law; M.B.A., Wharton School of Business, 1995; M.S., Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1993; B.S. United States Merchant Marine Academy, 1985. Derivatives structurer and marketer (1995 - 2008). I would like to thank Professor Squire for guiding me through the writing process and helping me consider alternatives to my arguments. I would also like to thank and acknowledge Professor James Jalil, Scott Dubowsky Esq., Steve Nelson Esq., Ric Fouad Esq., and John Liu Ph.D for listening to my ideas and offering their comments and insights. This note is available in Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl/vol15/iss1/ 8 INDEPENDENT FUND ADMINISTRATORS AS A SOLUTION FOR HEDGE FUND FRAUD Kent Oz* INTRODUCTION There is approximately $1.33 trillion invested in hedge funds worldwide.' Most of this money is invested in legitimate hedge funds,2 * J.D.
    [Show full text]