Wednesday, May 3, 2006

KPMG Defendants Receive Unfavorable Ruling

The NYTimes reports here that KPMG defendants were unsuccessful in their bid to dismiss the charges.  The defense claim made in the motion was that the tax shelters were not illegal, and therefore there was no basis of law to bring the criminal action. A refusal to dismiss this matter does not mean that the tax shelters might not later be shown to be legal (and therefore there would be no basis for this action), it merely means that the government will have its day in court to prove its case.  (correction added in light of comment)

This is not the first round of motions lost by the KPMG defendants. (see here; see also here) But the defendants have had one bright light and that is that the judge ordered a hearing on the Thompson Memo (see here). Will the defense be calling David Anders to testify at this hearing?  After hearing his comments on the Thompson Memo at the Maryland Roundtable one wonders where he might stand on the issue of whether the Memo is coercive to companies when faced with possible government prosecution.

(esp) 

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/2006/05/kpmg_defendants.html

News | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d834bcef0869e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference KPMG Defendants Receive Unfavorable Ruling:

Comments

"A refusal to dismiss this matter does not mean that the tax shelters were legal"?

Surely, "a refusal to dismiss this matter does not mean the tax shelters were illegal", right?

Posted by: Eh Nonymous | May 3, 2006 10:39:46 AM

Post a comment