特朗普集團吃官司，頗似當年麥道夫案
葛繼甫（Geoff Colvin）
2021-07-09
乍看起來，特朗普集團（Trump Organization）及其首席財務官艾倫?魏塞爾貝格最近面臨的指控似乎微不足道，但事實并非如此，對美國前總統唐納德?特朗普及其同僚而言，這些指控的殺傷力要比表面看起來大得多。
在起訴書中，曼哈頓地區檢察官小塞勒斯?R?萬斯指控魏塞爾貝格與特朗普集團涉嫌欺詐聯邦、紐約州和紐約市的稅務當局。魏塞爾貝格被控在15年的時間里共計逃稅90多萬美元，考慮到美國每年逃稅的規模可達數十億美元，這點錢似乎不足為道。
魏塞爾貝格的律師堅稱，相關起訴純粹出于政治動機。“這是地方檢察官針對聯邦政府政敵的公然攻擊”，其律師說道。特朗普集團在一份聲明中表示：“美國國稅局（IRS）或其它地區的地方檢察官根本不會發起此類指控。”起訴書中包括這樣一條指控：特朗普集團在為魏塞爾貝格支付車庫費用時并未將相關款項列入員工補貼，魏塞爾貝格也未將相關款項作為收入進行上報，對此，特朗普的前顧問賈森?米勒笑稱，這就像在指控魏塞爾貝格“可能享受了免費停車待遇”。
經過接近三年的調查，檢察官們就調查出了這么點問題？
然而，只要看看這些指控內容與伯納德-麥道夫投資證券公司（Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities）施行多年的舉措是何其相似，就知道其意義有多么深遠。
此案的核心指控是，特朗普集團為魏塞爾貝格和其他高管直接支付了某些費用，而并未將相關款項納入后者的收入，并且無人將相關款項作為員工補貼上報美國國稅局。相同做法在麥道夫公司同樣司空見慣。例如，此案的起訴書稱，特朗普集團多年來一直在為魏塞爾貝格直接支付紐約市公寓的租金，外加電費、電話費、有線電視費、網費和停車費。而在麥道夫案件中，麥道夫公司也為首席財務官丹尼爾?邦文特雷直接支付了紐約市三套公寓的維修費用。
起訴書稱，特朗普集團為魏塞爾貝格的兩名家人支付了在曼哈頓一所私立學校就讀的學費。而在麥道夫案中，麥道夫公司同樣為邦文特雷支付了其兒子在曼哈頓一所私立學校就讀的學費。起訴書稱，特朗普集團應魏塞爾貝格的要求為其支付了許多個人開支，包括其佛羅里達宅邸中的床具、平板電視、地毯和家具的購置費用。而麥道夫公司也為邦文特雷支付了許多個人開支，包括鄉村俱樂部會費、曲棍球隊新澤西魔鬼隊（New Jersey Devils）季票費用等。
那么問題來了，這些人收入極為豐厚，上面提到的開支也不算多。為什么還要費這么大勁讓公司支付呢？答案顯然不是錢的問題。
“從某種意義上看，本案與麥道夫案中出現的情況可以與黑道的做法相提并論，只不過是發生在白領世界而已。”紐約南區辯護律師、前聯邦檢察官羅蘭?里奧佩爾說。“公司通過這種方式鼓勵共謀成員犯罪、利用公司為個人謀利，并最終將公司與個人綁定在一起，確保個人對公司的忠誠。”
里奧佩爾將之稱之為“虛假的慷慨”，他表示，“（公司做出）虛假慷慨行為的目的是籠絡人心，而接受者每接受一份饋贈，就會在犯罪的泥潭中越陷越深。”
里奧佩爾認為，本次起訴并非無足輕重，而應該被視為“第一步棋”，是“具有戰略意義的明智之舉”。這不僅因為對魏塞爾貝格的起訴會加大其與檢方合作的可能，還將“破壞特朗普集團的合法銀行關系，甚至可能極大削弱特朗普為自己辯護的能力。”里奧佩爾指出，令他感到驚訝的是，起訴書中并未涉及《受敲詐勒索和腐敗組織法》（Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act）的相關指控。他說：“留這一手可能是為了敲打（特朗普集團）。我認為，未來某個時間點上，特朗普集團將會面臨相關指控。對個人而言，此類指控的刑期更長，也更難辯護。”
至于特朗普集團聲稱“其它檢察官不會發起此類訴訟”的主張，里奧佩爾表示，情況“絕非如此”。他指出，本案指控的逃稅行為“相當常見，經常有人因此遭到起訴。”他還舉出了一個頗為值得注意的案例，1986年，特朗普的前任律師兼長期導師羅伊?科恩便因為“相同行為”而遭到時任聯邦檢察官魯道夫?朱利安尼的起訴。科恩受審后被判無罪。魏塞爾貝格與特朗普集團可能也會在這場法律戰中獲勝。但本案與麥道夫案的相似之處注定會讓其感到不安。（財富中文網）
譯者：梁宇
審校：夏林
乍看起來，特朗普集團（Trump Organization）及其首席財務官艾倫?魏塞爾貝格最近面臨的指控似乎微不足道，但事實并非如此，對美國前總統唐納德?特朗普及其同僚而言，這些指控的殺傷力要比表面看起來大得多。
在起訴書中，曼哈頓地區檢察官小塞勒斯?R?萬斯指控魏塞爾貝格與特朗普集團涉嫌欺詐聯邦、紐約州和紐約市的稅務當局。魏塞爾貝格被控在15年的時間里共計逃稅90多萬美元，考慮到美國每年逃稅的規模可達數十億美元，這點錢似乎不足為道。
魏塞爾貝格的律師堅稱，相關起訴純粹出于政治動機。“這是地方檢察官針對聯邦政府政敵的公然攻擊”，其律師說道。特朗普集團在一份聲明中表示：“美國國稅局（IRS）或其它地區的地方檢察官根本不會發起此類指控。”起訴書中包括這樣一條指控：特朗普集團在為魏塞爾貝格支付車庫費用時并未將相關款項列入員工補貼，魏塞爾貝格也未將相關款項作為收入進行上報，對此，特朗普的前顧問賈森?米勒笑稱，這就像在指控魏塞爾貝格“可能享受了免費停車待遇”。
經過接近三年的調查，檢察官們就調查出了這么點問題？
然而，只要看看這些指控內容與伯納德-麥道夫投資證券公司（Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities）施行多年的舉措是何其相似，就知道其意義有多么深遠。
此案的核心指控是，特朗普集團為魏塞爾貝格和其他高管直接支付了某些費用，而并未將相關款項納入后者的收入，并且無人將相關款項作為員工補貼上報美國國稅局。相同做法在麥道夫公司同樣司空見慣。例如，此案的起訴書稱，特朗普集團多年來一直在為魏塞爾貝格直接支付紐約市公寓的租金，外加電費、電話費、有線電視費、網費和停車費。而在麥道夫案件中，麥道夫公司也為首席財務官丹尼爾?邦文特雷直接支付了紐約市三套公寓的維修費用。
起訴書稱，特朗普集團為魏塞爾貝格的兩名家人支付了在曼哈頓一所私立學校就讀的學費。而在麥道夫案中，麥道夫公司同樣為邦文特雷支付了其兒子在曼哈頓一所私立學校就讀的學費。起訴書稱，特朗普集團應魏塞爾貝格的要求為其支付了許多個人開支，包括其佛羅里達宅邸中的床具、平板電視、地毯和家具的購置費用。而麥道夫公司也為邦文特雷支付了許多個人開支，包括鄉村俱樂部會費、曲棍球隊新澤西魔鬼隊（New Jersey Devils）季票費用等。
那么問題來了，這些人收入極為豐厚，上面提到的開支也不算多。為什么還要費這么大勁讓公司支付呢？答案顯然不是錢的問題。
“從某種意義上看，本案與麥道夫案中出現的情況可以與黑道的做法相提并論，只不過是發生在白領世界而已。”紐約南區辯護律師、前聯邦檢察官羅蘭?里奧佩爾說。“公司通過這種方式鼓勵共謀成員犯罪、利用公司為個人謀利，并最終將公司與個人綁定在一起，確保個人對公司的忠誠。”
里奧佩爾將之稱之為“虛假的慷慨”，他表示，“（公司做出）虛假慷慨行為的目的是籠絡人心，而接受者每接受一份饋贈，就會在犯罪的泥潭中越陷越深。”
里奧佩爾認為，本次起訴并非無足輕重，而應該被視為“第一步棋”，是“具有戰略意義的明智之舉”。這不僅因為對魏塞爾貝格的起訴會加大其與檢方合作的可能，還將“破壞特朗普集團的合法銀行關系，甚至可能極大削弱特朗普為自己辯護的能力。”里奧佩爾指出，令他感到驚訝的是，起訴書中并未涉及《受敲詐勒索和腐敗組織法》（Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act）的相關指控。他說：“留這一手可能是為了敲打（特朗普集團）。我認為，未來某個時間點上，特朗普集團將會面臨相關指控。對個人而言，此類指控的刑期更長，也更難辯護。”
至于特朗普集團聲稱“其它檢察官不會發起此類訴訟”的主張，里奧佩爾表示，情況“絕非如此”。他指出，本案指控的逃稅行為“相當常見，經常有人因此遭到起訴。”他還舉出了一個頗為值得注意的案例，1986年，特朗普的前任律師兼長期導師羅伊?科恩便因為“相同行為”而遭到時任聯邦檢察官魯道夫?朱利安尼的起訴。科恩受審后被判無罪。魏塞爾貝格與特朗普集團可能也會在這場法律戰中獲勝。但本案與麥道夫案的相似之處注定會讓其感到不安。（財富中文網）
譯者：梁宇
審校：夏林
The allegations in the recent indictment of the Trump Organization and CFO Allen Weisselberg seem like penny-ante charges. They’re not. For Trump and his colleagues, they’re more ominous than they appear.
The indictment by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. accuses Weisselberg and the Trump Organization of defrauding federal, New York State, and New York City tax authorities. In a world of multi-billion-dollar scams, the numbers are not mind-boggling. Weisselberg is accused of evading $901,112 of taxes over a 15-year period.
His lawyers insist the indictment is purely politically motivated. “It is now open season for local prosecutors to target federal political opponents,” they said. In a statement, the Trump Organization says this is a case “that neither the IRS nor any other district attorney would ever think of bringing.” Former Trump adviser Jason Miller ridiculed the case for accusing Weisselberg of “maybe taking free parking” since it includes a charge that the Trump Organization paid his garage expenses without reporting the payments as employee compensation, and Weisselberg didn’t report them as pay.
After almost three years of investigation, this is what they’ve got?
But these allegations could mean much more. To see why, consider how strikingly they resemble what went on for years at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities.
The central accusation in the indictment is that the Trump Organization directly paid certain expenses of Weisselberg and other senior executives rather than putting that money in their paychecks, without anyone reporting those payments to the IRS as employee compensation. The same practice was routine at the Madoff firm. For example, the Trump Organization for years directly paid the rent on Weisselberg’s New York City apartment, plus electricity, telephone, cable, Internet, and parking, says the indictment. At the Madoff firm, the company directly paid the maintenance costs of three New York City apartments for CFO Daniel Bonventre.
The Trump Organization paid the tuition for two of Weisselberg’s family members at a private school in Manhattan, says the indictment. The Madoff firm paid the tuition of Bonventre’s sons at a private school in Manhattan. The Trump Organization paid many Weisselberg personal expenses at his request, the indictment alleges: new beds, flat-screen TVs, carpeting and furniture for his Florida home, for example. The Madoff firm paid many of Bonventre’s personal expenses at his discretion: country club dues, season tickets to the New Jersey Devils hockey team, for example.
The obvious question is why? These men were making a lot of money, and those expenses weren’t crushing. Why go through such financial contortions? Answer: It wasn’t about the money.
“What allegedly happened here and happened in the Madoff case is a white-collar equivalent of what goes on in a Mafia gangster case,” says Roland Riopelle, a defense attorney and former federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York who represented a Madoff employee, Annette Bongiorno, in that scandal’s aftermath. “Members of the conspiracy are encouraged to commit crimes, using the organization for their own benefit. That ultimately becomes the way in which the organization binds the individual to it and encourages loyalty.”
It’s what Riopelle calls “false generosity as a way of keeping people in place. It’s false generosity because with each gift, the recipient is sinking deeper into criminality.”
Riopelle doesn’t believe the indictment is insignificant. On the contrary, he says, it’s “just the first move on the chessboard” and “a smart strategic move.” That’s not only because it’s a clear attempt to “flip” Weisselberg. It will also “disrupt the legitimate banking relationships of the company, cripple it, and probably have a crippling effect on Mr. Trump’s ability to defend himself.” He says he was surprised that the indictment didn’t include a charge under New York State’s equivalent of the federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) law. “That may have been held back as a threat,” he says. “I expect we’ll see that charge levied against the Trump Organization at some point. It carries a heavier criminal penalty in terms of imprisonment for an individual, and it’ll be much more difficult to defend against.”
As for the Trump Organization’s claim that other prosecutors wouldn’t have brought this case, Riopelle says, “That really is not true.” What’s alleged in the indictment is “a fairly common type of tax evasion. It is often prosecuted.” A notable example, he observes, was Trump’s former lawyer and longtime mentor, Roy Cohn, who in 1986 was “indicted for exactly this conduct” by then-U.S. Attorney Rudolph Giuliani. Cohn went to trial and was acquitted. Weisselberg and the Trump Organization may likewise prevail in this legal battle. But the parallels are not reassuring.
財富中文網所刊載內容之知識產權為財富媒體知識產權有限公司及/或相關權利人專屬所有或持有。未經許可，禁止進行轉載、摘編、復制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
