J. V. Huffman, Jr. Sentenced to 30 years – but I Want My Money!

Recently sentenced to more than 30 years in prison, J.V. Huffman Jr., 46, was a Conover, North Carolina, man who defrauded hundreds of people out of their hard-earned money for nearly 20 years.

THE SENTENCING HEARING:

Huffman addressed the judge saying, “I can tell you it was never an intent to rip off the world.”  Huffman said his own financial problems prompted the Ponzi scheme that stole from friends, neighbors and fellow church members.  “I certainly want to say that I’m sorry,” Huffman said.

The judge said he isn’t frequently at a loss for words, but in this case he was.

“These are good, honest, hard-working people who worked their entire lives,” Bell said to Huffman. “You had every opportunity. You didn’t have to work in a mill for 40 years, and there aren’t one, two or 10 (victims), there are hundreds.”

Bell said it is also not just one generation that’s affected, but up to three that could feel the effects of what Huffman’s done. After sentencing Huffman to 30 years, Bell gave him some advice for his time in prison.

“I hope that every day of those 30 years, you think of those people who had their money taken from them,” Bell said.

NOW WHAT?

Victims of Ponzi schemes generally don’t want to hear what’s coming next, but here goes.  Look back and ask yourself, what did you do to find yourself in this mess?  For a Ponzi schemer to defraud you – you had to fall into what I call the PIT.  First, “P” – you fell for the promise.  Likely, think back about it and be honest, you were PROMISED something that seemed really good – perhaps too good to be true.  You were promised a better return than anyone you knew was getting for their investments.

From 8+% to 16% – Huffman followed a tried and true method to defraud – he made a great promise.  He followed human nature – making you think that you were somehow special and that he could get you a better return than most of your friends were getting.  He hooked you right then and there.  And, if there is a lesson from this tragedy it would be DON’T FALL FOR THAT!

Now fairly, once Huffman had you hooked he solidified his position with you by creating the “I” – ILLUSION through fake statements making you feel that what you had was somehow real…and he showed you evidence of his success.  After all, in order for you to feel successful – he must be successful.  Now, I know that many of Huffman’s victims might say, “I never met the man.”  True, but you likely knew someone who did and he created the perfect reputation so that he could continue his scheme.

Lastly, he used “T” – TRUST as his foundation for attracting more victims.  Huffman did exactly the same thing that Bernie Madoff did – just on a smaller scale.  And who did he go after – friends, church members, folks who knew and trusted him.  And not knowing the victims, my guess is – many of you suggested Huffman to your friends – after all, you were getting such great returns.  Victims creating or paving the way for more victims.  And, many of you would now say that this has created painful riffs in your relationships with others.

Simple advice:  (1) If you think you’re getting a better deal than others get – your likely being scammed.  (2) Don’t do investment business with those you know and trust – they are the most likely folks to scam you.

WHAT CAN I DO TO GET MY MONEY BACK?

Perhaps nothing.  But, there are provisions in the federal tax code that might offer some relief.  And, while I hear that you’d want it all back…believe me, something is better than nothing.  For sure, Huffman can’t earn enough in prison to provide any restitution.

A post in my blog that discusses how you can gain some relief can be found here.  NOW LET ME BE CLEAR…it is easy to be defrauded twice by folks who prey on those who have been victims of schemes just like Huffmans.  BE CAREFUL.  That said, I wrote the following and stand behind the author of the blog referenced above:

Moira Souza Shiver, expert on the application of IRC Section 165, has been asked by me to write this guest blog.  The benefits of Section 165 can be substantial, yet there are few who are qualified to understand how to effectively navigate the regulatory maze to gain maximum benefit.  As a business ethics and fraud prevention speaker, I try, through this blog, to provide a useful forum for discussing issues, and there is none more important at this time than the effective use of legal methods to recover loss.

If you’ve been scammed by Huffman and, perhaps, attended the sentencing hearing…I’d welcome your comments.

Finally, regarding financial help…check out Moira and research folks who provide Section 165 help…but be careful, and don’t fall prey to someone who promises more than is reasonable.

YOUR COMMENTS WELCOME!

Ethics and Political Leadership can they co-exist? – An Open Letter to President Obama

President Obama,

As I pen this letter, I do so with all but a faint amount of hope that perhaps some truth can be found in its contents and you could, through your actions, demonstrate what many thought might happen when they voted for you.  Then again, the word ‘politics’ seems to be out of place with the other words – ‘ethics’ and ‘leadership’.

You campaigned on ‘change.’  In your State of the Union address you stated,

I campaigned on the promise of change, change we can believe in, the slogan went. And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren’t sure if they still believe we can change, or that I can deliver it.

Now, Mr. President is the time for that change to be seen and not heard from you as our leader.  Your actions will show that your campaign promises were not just rhetoric to get you elected, but true heart felt feelings of what America could be.  You further stated,

But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We can’t wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side, a belief that if you lose, I win.

You are 100% right about that statement.  American people are becoming so disillusioned about politicians and Washington insiders that they are becoming angry and believe that none of you can be trusted.  You are more concerned with being elected than you are with helping Americans.  That is not why you were sent and therefore, lacks integrity.

You addressed both parties in your State of the Union address and rightly you should have because few of those elected to public office in Washington have demonstrated by their actions that they care more about those who elected them than they care about their re-election.

ETHICS are defined as actions motivated based on ideas of right and wrong.  Mr. President, the next question I ask will surely define you and your potential Presidency.  Do you believe it is ethical to act on ideas that are right for the people even if they are wrong for your re-election?

If your answer is YES…then read on, if not…we’re wasting our time.

A LEADER is a person who rules or guides or inspires others.  You have, through your election, certainly inspired a demographic of voters to become engaged and active – to elect you on the promise of change.  Therefore Mr. President may I challenge you step up and show your LEADERSHIP.

Mr. President – ETHICAL LEADERSHIP now calls for dramatic unprecedented action.  It requires something that has not been done before and that will show more than just words, but true meaning behind your beliefs.

Mr. President – make the following commitment to the American people and I think you can guarantee your place in history – you will show something that has never been seen before.  You will show that the promise and idea of change is more powerful than just campaign words.  Mr. President do the following…

OVER THE COURSE OF 2010 – DO NOT CAMPAIGN FOR ANY CANDIDATE FOR ELECTED OFFICE IN WASHINGTON OR ANY STATE.  Show that you are more interested in results than campaigns.  Separate yourself from politics and become the ‘change leader’ that many Americans expected you to be. That means you should remain politically neutral.  Who cares what the party is if you’re getting the job done! Require both Democrats and Republicans to sit with each other in order to craft legislation that benefits the needs of Americans and publically call out any Senator or Representative who elects to bicker in partisan politics rather than work to represent those for whom they serve.  Do what you promised, make the process transparent and then Americans will gain what is so lacking in Washington – TRUST. Forget party and focus on how you can lead.

The American people do not need you to be the ‘same ole – same ole’ that they have seen for years.  Rather, it’s time to change how we do what we do and that change starts with you. If you want less partisanship then be less partisan.

I was told as a boy and then later in life – “A fish rots from the head down.”   As a kid I didn’t know what that meant…but I do now.  You’re the fish, Mr. President so, perhaps put better, “The buck stops with you.”  Guess the tone of Washington firmly rests with your decisions.  The choice is yours and, as I say speaking to groups on Ethics – EVERY CHOICE HAS A CONSEQUENCE.

Sincerely

Chuck Gallagher – American, Small Business Owner, Ethics Speaker and Author

Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell – is it time for a change?

State of the Union News…

A new CNN report states – “President Obama will ask Congress Wednesday night to repeal the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that bars gays and lesbians from openly serving in, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod told CNN.”

QUESTIONS:

If you have served in the military what do you think of the current policy?

If you have no military service, do you think that this policy should be maintained or repealed?

Is the current policy ethical?

COMMENTS WELCOME!

Milton Retana Conman to Spanish Speaking Investors Guilty of $62 Ponzi scheme

Facing a potential 125 years in prison, jurors deliberated for less than an hour convicting Retana of preying on Spanish-speaking investors with promises of hefty returns in the real estate bubble bilking more than 2,000 victims out of more than $62 million.

Retana began soliciting investors in 2006 through his company, Best Diamond Funding, by telling them that their money would be used to buy and sell real estate.  Best Diamond Funding solicited money through advertisements in Spanish-language magazines, on the Internet, and during weekly investment seminars at locations across Los Angeles. The investment seminars often had as many as 300 potential investors and incorporated religious messages. Retana guaranteed returns as high as 84 percent each year, claiming that he would purchase properties in bulk at below-market prices and immediately sell them for a profit. However, records obtained by federal investigators showed that Retana used only a tiny fraction of the victims’ money to purchase real estate and that his company was actually losing money.

During the trial, several victims testified that they mortgaged their homes and drained their retirement accounts because they believed Retana’s promises that their investments would be safe. The victims who testified at trial were largely from working-class families in East Los Angeles, and they included a stone mason, a long-haul truck driver, and a roofer who was also a pastor at his local church.

Retana’s scheme was almost uncovered in the summer of 2008, when the California Department of Real Estate audited his company. But Retana stymied that investigation by ordering his employees to hide all of the investor files at the back of his wife’s religious bookstore, La Libreria Del Exito Mundial. His scheme was disrupted in October 2008, when federal agents from the United States Postal Inspection Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation executed search warrants on the offices of Best Diamond Funding and the bookstore. During those searches, agents found $800,000 in cash stashed in Retana’s desk, as well as another $3.2 million in cash hidden in the back of the bookstore. The FBI also seized another $8 million from Retana’s bank accounts.

Soon after the execution of the federal search warrants, agents interviewed Retana, who lied about how much money he had received from the investors and claimed that he could pay all of them back. Retana was later secretly recorded telling a Best Diamond employee not to tell the government how much money Best Diamond had received from the investors.

DO PONZI SCHEME FRAUDSTERS TARGET ONLY THE WHITE OR RICH?

No…not a chance.  The Ponzi scheme fraudster looks for an opportunity.  Anyone who is lured by an UNREALISTIC PROMISE – dazzled by an ELABORATE ILLUSION and sucked in by TRUST is a target.  Bernie Madoff evidenced that through his focus on primarily Jewish clients – not because of race or money, but because of trust.  When a person is lured by the PIT (Promise, Illusion and Trust) they are susceptible to a Ponzi scheme fraud.

If you were a victim of Milton Retana’s fraud – feel free to comment on how you became a victim.

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME.

Oh, and Milton Retana is to be sentenced on April 26, 2010.  What do you think his sentence should be…

Teddy Gatamba Sentenced to 81 months in federal prison for Tax Law Violations

Teddy Gatamba sentenced to 81 months in federal prison for tax law violations.

Seem that Gatamba, a citizen of either Rwanda or Burundi, used the names of Grand Place Management, UST Tax Service, and Dendy Tax Service to obtain electronic filing identification numbers, obtained the names and social security numbers of numerous individuals and used that personal information to prepare false income tax returns, without the knowledge or consent of the individuals. Gatamba prepared the returns using bogus employer names and making bogus claims of overpayment of taxes, and then filed the returns electronically. Refund Anticipation Loans, in the form of checks and Refund Anticipation Value Cards, were issued, based on the false income tax returns, in the names of the individuals on the bogus tax returns. Gatamba and others cashed the checks and withdrew funds from ATMs using the Refund Anticipation Value Cards. Evidence presented at trial showed that there was an intended loss of more than $2 million.

Comments?

John Anthony Miller – Ponzi Scheme Fruadster sentenced to 13 Years in prison… Was it worth it?

Frankly I’d say John Anthony Miller was lucky.  Based on the sentences being handed down for Bernie Madoff like Ponzi schemes, to get 13 years was probably light considering…

According the the news release from the US Attorney’s office, from 2000 through November 2008, Miller operated a Ponzi scheme through his Newport Beach-based investment companies, JAM Jr. Enterprises and Forte Financial Partners. Miller made promises of “guaranteed” annual returns of as much as 18 percent per year, telling investors that their money would be invested in foreign currency trading, oil wells, real estate and other vehicles. During the course of the scheme, Miller provided investors with monthly account statements that falsely represented they were earning the promised returns. In fact, Miller had never earned any real profits from his investment activity and, in the pattern of a typical Ponzi scheme, used money from some investors to make Ponzi payments to other investors.

Now it seems that Miller was, knowing his fate was sealed, trying to escape the clutches of the federal prison system.  Guess Miller didn’t think that prison suited his style.

The FBI and the State Department already were aware that John Anthony Miller’s scheme was falling apart when they targeted him in a sting in November 2008.  Working with an informant, an FBI agent who also was an attorney and a former clerk for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, set up a sting operation. Miller’s telephone calls with the informant were recorded as the scheme was collapsing.

Miller sought the informant’s help in obtaining a passport to a country that did not have an extradition treaty with the United States, according to the complaint. Using a story that a family friend knew a corrupt passport official, the informant set up a meeting between Miller and the purportedly corrupt official, who was actually an undercover officer from the U.S. Department of State.

Miller agreed to pay $20,000 for the passport, with $5,000 paid up front and the balance of $15,000 upon delivery of the passport. Miller paid the undercover officer $5,000 in cash that had been stuffed in an envelope. He then filled out a passport application that used the identity of his deceased classmate, according to the complaint. Miller ultimately concluded it was best to flee the country. After using Ponzi proceeds to pay the undercover agent the $5,000 deposit  required for the bogus passport in November 2008, Miller was told it would take seven to 10 days for the documents to be prepared. He provided two photographs of himself, and used the name, Social Security number and date of birth of his deceased Catholic school classmate in the application.

Looks like that scheme, like his ponzi schemes just didn’t work.  2010 brought a different outcome than the one Miller was planning – PRISON.

• Over the course of his scheme, Miller defrauded more than 130 people out of more than $21 million, taking millions of dollars that some victims withdrew from IRA retirement savings accounts and others borrowed against their homes.
• Prosecutors read Snyder portions of letters from victims. A husband and wife, one of whom was suffering from colon cancer, lost more than $800,000. Now in bankruptcy and suffering from regular nightmares, they wrote: “They say time heals all wounds, but not in this case. The impact on our lives has been like a cancer growing and festering and has caused irreparable and unrecoverable damage to our lives, not just financially but emotionally and physically.” They added: “Miller raped us of our money, our dignity, and any hope of a decent future.”
• In sentencing papers, the feds labeled Miller “amongst the most egregious of any investment fraudster or Ponzi schemer this Court will ever see. He didn’t just solicit fraudulent investments through mailings or mass marketing, like many fraudsters do. He didn’t just interact with victims over the telephone or at investment seminars, like many others. [Miller] lied to people in person, up close, sitting in their living rooms or at their kitchen tables, knowing full well the vulnerability of his victims and the inevitable devastation his deceit would cause them.”

DO YOU FEEL THAT MILLER’S SENTENCE WAS JUST?

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!

Business Ethics Roundup – Week ending January 24, 2010 – Comments by Business Ethics Speaker Chuck Gallagher

This is a weekly round up of some of the best business ethics articles, reports and blogs that I’ve seen.  Feel free to click on the links provided, take a look and offer comments here.  The discussion that follows is useful to those who routinely come here for business ethics news and reports.

Business Schools put Ethics high on MBA agendas

This article plays an interesting theme that I am focusing in on as a business ethics speaker and blogger.  What role does the business school take when it comes to business ethics education?  Is business ethics a topic or course description or are ethics larger and part of a comprehensive education that is woven into the fabric of business disciplines taught in both graduate and undergraduate education?  The article is an interesting read.  My question, however, focuses on why just advanced degrees.  It seems to me to assume that business leaders must have advanced degrees in order to become leaders.  I’m not sure I agree with that, but take a look and feel free to offer comments.

Should business ethics be more than a course offered to business students?

Another link to a business ethics university related posting can be seen here.

Caribbean bookings up…

Now one might wonder what tourism bookings information might have to do with a business ethics blog?  Consider Haiti.  Many have criticized cruise ship companies when they continue to offer vacation bookings to Haiti and their neighbor – the Dominican Republic.  Chris MacDonald, a business ethics professor at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, said travellers to either nation on the island of Hispaniola should not be deterred from their plans — unless logistics make scheduled trips impossible — because these struggling nations need tourism dollars.  Perhaps the luxury and opulence that folks think about when it comes to the cruise industry is, in fact, a positive ethical behavior when it comes to pumping money into the area and providing sustenance for folks who need an economic foundation.

What do you think?

Finders Fee or a Bribe?  A Case Study in Blogger Ethics:

It is incredible what innovations the internet has created.  One is the blog.  It wasn’t that long ago that I didn’t have a clue what a blog was, but less the power it wielded.  Of course, as a business ethics blogger and speaker, I am aware of the simple, yet powerful, use of the pen and open publishing that blogging provides.  This article is cool, in that, it expands the discussion of blogging and ‘financial affiliations’ in the open world of the internet.

Here’s a quote: On Jan. 14, Katherine Rothman, CEO of KMR Communications, sent a mass email to bloggers and other editors who cover beauty, fashion, health and fitness. “I would like to make an offer to you that could be mutually beneficial in the event that this is of interest,” Rothman wrote. Writers, she continued, often find themselves covering “smaller or emerging companies” that lack PR representation. “My offer is this: if you recommend a prospective client to our firm and they sign a contract with us, I would in turn provide you with a generous finder’s fee.”

The discussion is interesting and this is worth a read!

Your comments, of course, are welcome.

CLOSING COMMENTS – Thanks for being a reader of the business ethics blog.  If you run across stories of either business ethics at work (doing well) or business ethics run amuck…feel free to give me a shout.  You can reach me outside of this blog at chuck@chuckgallagher.com

Charles E. Phillips – What you do in the dark will be brought to the light – the billboard campaign outing…

As a kid I’ll never forget my mother buying an Elvis Presley gospel record with an upbeat song entitled “Run On.”  Elvis seemed to sing it so fast that I recall not being able to completely understand all the words.  But, one line I understood clearly went as follows, “As sure as God made the day and the night
What you do in the dark will be brought to the light.”

Now, I admit, I didn’t completely understand the implication of those words…not until my hidden activities came into the bright light of the media.  In my case, that fact that I was a liar and a thief was splashed all across the front pages of my hometown newspaper.  Were the headlines true?  Unfortunately yes!

Now it seems, according to a CNN report, another man named Charles – Charles E. Phillips – is finding out the implications of those words as his ex-mistress has elected to operate a “fatal attraction” splash of her own on billboards in major cities.  Charles was outed.  And, my heart goes out to him.

The CNN story reports in part (the whole story is here).

Phillips, 50, the co-president of Oracle Corp., admitted the affair with Wilkins, 42, in a statement released by his spokeswoman Friday.

Often talked of as a potential successor to Oracle founder and CEO Larry Ellison, Phillips is one of the software company’s most senior and highly paid excecutives. On top of an $800,000 salary for 2009, he took home stock options and other compensation valued by Oracle at more than $18 million.

“”I had an 8½-year serious relationship with YaVaughnie Wilkins,” the statement said. “My divorce proceedings began in 2008. The relationship with Ms. Wilkins has since ended and we both wish each other well.”

Phillips is reportedly still married to his wife, Karen, and the two have a son together.

It seems that Charles Phillips did indeed have an affair that apparently is ending his marriage – as divorce proceedings are in the works.  But, obviously, the former mistress wanted the last word by posting a series of giant billboards in New York, San Francisco and Atlanta.

New Yorkers passing through midtown Manhattan this week saw the smiling faces of “Charles and YaVaughnie” beaming down upon them from one of two billboards in the city with the caption reading, “You are my soulmate forever! – cep.”

SO WHAT’S THE POINT?

As a business ethics speaker, I often speak to executive groups in major corporations and since I share my journey from Tax Partner in a CPA firm to federal prisoner, I, more times than not, see participants cop an attitude that they would never do something that would bring such dramatic consequences to themselves.  I imagine that Phillips felt the same way.  In fact, I would suspect that he would have felt that his private life had no effect on his business and that the first time he would be featured on CNN is when he took over the leadership of Oracle.

Instead the actions of his, obviously upset and less than ethical ex-mistress, is a perfect example of choices and consequences.  In fact, the first words that I speak to a group are – EVERY CHOICE HAS A CONSEQUENCE.

Consequences come in a variety of forms and in ways that we often don’t expect.  Appointed last year to President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, Phillips is finding himself dealing more than much needed economic recovery ideas.

Choices and consequences…sorry Mr. Phillips, but for those who read…this is just another example how ethical choices (or unethical as the case may be) has implications that are unavoidable.

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!

What Theory of Business Ethics do you follow? University Business Ethics Speaker Chuck Gallagher comments!

While standing in line for a dinner/reception at a well know Canadian University (I was there as their keynote speaker for a business ethics symposium), the Dean of the Business School asked me – “What theory of business ethics do you follow?”  Most of the time I’m fully prepared to answer questions posed about ‘ethics’, but in this case – that question caught me off guard.

I wanted to be respectful with my answer while thinking to myself – “the more academic we make ‘business ethics’ the less effective it will be for students to learn and apply.”  My response – “I follow the theory of business ethics that keeps one out of federal prison.”

The look I received in response was – priceless.  “I see,” he responded and from there the discussion seemed to change direction.

The next day it all made sense – not only to the Business School Dean, but the students in attendance – as I walked in dressed in an orange jump suit and handcuffs.  (you can see some of my presentation here).  As I explained I took 23 steps from the curb into federal prison, it became clear that every choice does have a consequence.  And, as I explain, the choices you make today create the consequences you experience tomorrow and into the future.

But…I was still plagued with the answer to the question…”What theory of Business Ethics do you follow?”

BUSINESS ETHICS THEORIES:

The other day, I ran across an excellent article that outlined different theories of business ethics in “the star online” – the full article written by John Zinkin is here.  The following is a reprint of excerpts from the various theories of business ethics he espouses.  Thanks and credit to Mr. Zinkin for his work.

Machiavellian ethics

These are pragmatic, weighing probable consequences and the likelihood of achieving given outcomes, often regardless of how the ends have been achieved. People practising this type of ethics will argue that the ends justify the means.

The merit of this system is that at least any decision being taken can be assessed in terms of whether it will achieve the desired ends; and if it fails this basic test, then it should not be taken.

However, there are two problems with this approach. First, it does not recognise that organisations need codes of conduct and rules to help people to make predictable and consistent decisions.

Second, it can lead to a failure of “Tone at the Top” with people encouraged to “do whatever it takes” – the kind of thinking that contributed to the recent failures of governance in Wall Street that have hurt us all so badly.

Utilitarian Ethics

These are a more moral extension of Machiavellian ethics, where the outcomes are weighed up by calculating how to “achieve the greatest good for the greatest number” for both the company and its customers. Principles are important only as rules of thumb.

The problem with this type of approach is that it encourages the tyranny of the majority and can lead to ignoring the needs of minorities and so be used to justify persecuting minority shareholders, which is poor governance.

Kantian rules-based ethics

Rules-based ethics (associated with the German philosopher Immanuel Kant) go one step further in that they also consider the effect actions have on the rules of the organisation and whether they adhere to given principles.

This approach tends to be bureaucratic and perhaps overly legalistic, sometimes with a rigid adherence to the rules without due regard for particular circumstances that may justify exceptions.

Of course, the problem is that if there are too many exceptions or waivers, the rules themselves and the system they represent are discredited; outcomes become unpredictable; and corruption and free riding are encouraged.

Rousseau’s social contract ethics

Social contract ethics recognise the need for mutuality and reciprocity if companies are to flourish: both within the organisation itself, where “Do unto others as you would be done by” is as good a rule as any for behaviour, and between the company and the community it serves.

They also recognise that no company is an island and it must therefore behave responsibly towards the community, minimising the external costs the company creates, lest it create a “tragedy of the commons” with its associated risk of systemic failure.

The problem with this type of approach is when it leads to the kind of loyalist, tribal thinking within a profession so that bad practices are covered up and justified in the name of loyalty to the group (a favourite topic of films with rogue cops who are protected from Internal Affairs for example).

Personalistic ethics

Personalistic ethics reflect what an individual feels about the decisions being taken. As such they often share the following three characteristics:

First, they are driven by the individual’s personal sense of virtue and how the decision will reflect on the person’s character and sense of self-worth;

Second, they may be based on empathy where the decision maker puts himself/herself in the shoes of the other person when deciding what to do;

Third, they may be based on intuition driven by conscience – asking the question “will I be able to sleep at nights” when making a decision.

Obviously it is important that board members must be personally comfortable with the decisions they are involved with.

The problem is that often people who decide on Personalistic ethical grounds become impatient with other people calculating what to do using either a rules-based or utilitarian approach, and may be uncomfortable with Machiavellian thinking.

SO – WHAT THEORY OF BUSINESS ETHICS DO YOU FOLLOW?  Having spent time in federal prison for unethical choices…I stand by my response to that question.  I follow the theory of ethics and choices that keep you out of prison.

COMMENTS WELCOME!

IRS E-Mail Notices – DON’T BE SCAMMED!

So, I’m driving down the road today and my Blackberry goes off.  I know I’m not supposed to, but I couldn’t resist.  I picked it up to check the email and there it was – a notice from the IRS that I was due a refund.  Yea!

Not so fast…  The IRS doesn’t do business via email.  Let me repeat…the IRS doesn’t do business via email.

Hum…must be a scam.

Here’s what I received:

Internal Revenue Service
United States
tax-refund@irs.gov

Dear Applicant:

Please note now you can get your tax refund, after the last annual calculation of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of $314.79.
Please take few minutes to fill your form attached to this message.

The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and as applicable, copyright in these is reserved to Internal Revenue Service.

Sincerely,
Internal Revenue Service
tax-refund@irs.gov

Of course attached was a form that I was to fill in – in order to claim my money.  Now, if I was dumb enough to fall for that, I would also find that my identity would have been compromised and I would have lost far more than my promised gain.

NOTE:  IRS NOTICES VIA EMAIL ARE SCAMS.  Do not fall for junk like this.