Madoff’s Scheme
“The Whole Government is a Ponzi Scheme” is a quote by Bernard “Bernie” Madoff who was said to have ran the largest Ponzi Scheme in the U.S. Madoff was 71 years old when he was caught for running a Ponzi Scheme. He ran a family business and through that he ran his Ponzi Scheme. He told no one until 10 years after his family business took off. Madoff’s was quite successful in his life, before he made his mistake. His Ponzi Scheme hurt many people who invested in the company, not knowing that it was a swindle all along. Madoff could have avoided this whole issue if he would have just stuck to ethical business practices. He could have done business like he did at NASDAQ, he must have done something right for him to be at a high
…show more content…
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment business where the businessman, a person or company, pays returns to its investors from money by new investors, rather than from profit earned from a legitimate source. It is called a Ponzi Scheme after Charles Ponzi, the original Ponzi Schemer. Charles’ Ponzi Scheme was, he bought overseas stamps and exchanging them for U.S stamps which were more expensive. He sold the U.S stamps for a profit of about $250,000 per day. With those profits, he bought a mansion in Lexington, Massachusetts, which made others question how he had the money to pay for such a life. Ponzi was caught in August 1920, when The Boston Post began investigating his “company”. The investigators had investors go in and try to take their money out, but they couldn’t. Charles Ponzi was arrested on August 12, 1920, with 86 counts of mail fraud. He owed about $7 million, he pleaded guilty to mail fraud, and for that, spent 14 years in prison. His wife divorced him while he was in prison and he died impoverished in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, on January 18, 1949. Therefore, out of his scheme came the “Ponzi Scheme”, it publicized a hidden wrong doing. In fact, many people are participating in Ponzi Schemes throughout the world today. Charles Ponzi’s scheme inspired many, like Bernard Madoff. They both scammed people for their money, except the fact that Ponzi just served years and Madoff is serving 150 years in …show more content…
He got a reduced sentence, originally it was 85 years in prison. Yet he got a sentence of 10 months of house arrest, because he helped convict five of his co-workers. Kugel is very embarrassed and ashamed of what he had done to help Madoff go through with his scheme. Also as part of Kugel’s sentence he had to do 200 hours of community service and give up 7.17 million dollars. The five that Kugel turned in were all tried separately. One of which was JoAnn Crupi, 53, the last of the five that went to trial. She was sentenced to six years in prison, no bail, and the guilt weighing on her shoulders. Crupi claimed that she never knew that the business was fraud and she feels very guilty for taking part in the operation. Now Frank DiPascali, was Madoff’s “Chief Financial Officer” was the second mastermind in this Ponzi scheme. On August 11, 2009 DiPascali pleaded guilty to 10 federal charges after having admitted to knowing about the fraudulent behavior of Madoff’s company. He was facing a 125-year sentence, he got the second longest sentence in this case. DiPascali testified against all his coworkers that were involved in the scheme and died of lung cancer in 2015 before he was sentenced. The other five accomplices got the least sentences due to their lack of involvement in the Ponzi scheme. DiPascali was the courts gem in the Madoff case, at first, he
The case that was provided in the Stanwick textbook provided information on the Madoff Ponzi scheme which is said to be the largest of Ponzi schemes in the world. This case was a very interesting case. It showed how Bernard Madoffs massive falsehood created disaster for around 13,600 clients. The impact from Madoff did not end with his clients being impacted but also people far and in between. Madoffs Ponzi scheme was controlled through his company that consisted of his family being the head of the company, friends, and employees. This scheme was a result for the recession that hit in 2008. The two sons of Madoff that were top employees claimed to have no connections with the Ponzi scheme.
It took for the losing in the case with two Bear Stearns hedge fund managers for the government to realize that there was a problem within their justice system. If they couldn’t take down two people accused of deceiving investors, how did they assume that they would be able to take down numerous high-end executives within Wall Street? So in fall 2009, over a year after the initial hit of the financial crisis, Obama introduced the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task to oversee prosecution for fraud and financial crime a week before the hearing to discuss ’08 financial crisis prosecution. With such a department now put in place, the government believed they could go back and review the “fraud” that took place within Wall Street years before and place a blame somewhere, revealing another flaw of the US government and justice system. The government wasn’t taking the cases as serious as they should have. They weren’t finding ways to filter through Due Diligence underwriters and they weren’t calling forth whistleblowers. They were losing the case before it could even
In the Frontline documentary “The Madoff Affair”, it is revealed and painfully evident that the ability to predict, prevent, and prosecute white collar crime is flawed and highly complicated even for the government. Frontline takes a look at the first global Ponzi scheme in history and helps create a better understanding of the illegal conduct that led to the rise and fall of Bernie Madoff and those associated with his empire (Frontline, 2017). When the leadership at the top of any organization is founded on lies, secrecy, and empowered by the leaders within the industry, the corruption is deep and difficult to prosecute. The largest stock market fraud in history reinforces the need for better government regulations, enforcement of the regulations, and oversight, especially in it’s own backyard (Yang, 2014).
An inheritance from his father allowed Ponzi to attend the University of Rome, which only further perpetuated the goals his mother desired for him. From the stories his mother often told him of the aristocracy of the family, Ponzi sought after the wealth to accompany the reputation. At school he was accepted into a group of the wealthy elite, and often gambled to increase his monetary allowance. This however only bankrupted him, forcing him to drop out of the University. Urged by his uncle to leave Italy in pursuit of the United States because “he was refined and from a good family” and he could easily become wealthy in the United States. His uncle continued by telling young Ponzi, “in the United States, the streets are actually paved with gold. All you have to do is ...
All in all, I believe and the evidence points to the Madoff scheme taking place because of an ethical dilemma. It’s important to stand strong in your values and do the right thing because not only does that benefit you, but also it benefits the organization you are a part of and with enough ethical people ponzi schemes like the Madoff case can be prevented.
Bernard Madoff had full control of the organizational leadership of Bernard Madoff Investments Securities LLC. Madoff used charisma to convince his friends, members of elite groups, and his employees to believe in him. He tricked his clients into believing that they were investing in something special. He would often turn potential investors down, which helped Bernard in targeting the investors with more money to invest. Bernard Madoff created a system which promised high returns in the short term and was nothing but the Ponzi scheme. The system’s idea relied on funds from the new investors to pay misrepresented and extremely high returns to existing investors. He was doing this for years; convincing wealthy individuals and charities to invest billions of dollars into his hedge fund. And they did so because of the extremely high returns, which were promised by Madoff’s firm. If anyone would have looked deeply into the structure of his firm, it would have definitely shown that something is wrong. This is because nobody can make such big money in the market, especially if no one else could at the time. How could one person, Madoff, hold all of his clients’ assets, price them, and manage them? It is clearly a conflict of interest. His company was showing high profits year after year; despite most of the companies in the market having losses. In fact, Bernard Madoff’s case is absolutely stunning when you consider the range and number of investors who got caught up in it.
In modern times, society is still burdened by individuals seeking to get rich quick. Names such as Marty Frankel and Robert Rooney, with their modern form of the Ponzi scheme, have appeared in the news. Although modern con-artists may enjoy the short success Ponzi did, none may ever possess the charm, the demeanor, or the ability to touch the hearts of individuals intended to be swindled.
Bernie Madoff is one of the greatest conman in history. The Bernie Madoff scandal takes the gold as one of the top ponzi scheme in America. Madoff started the Wall Street firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, in 1960. Starting off as a penny stock trader with five thousand dollars, earned from his workings as a lifeguard and sprinkler installer, his firm began to grow with the support of his father-in-law, Saul Alpern, who helped by referred a group of close friends and family. Originally, his firm made markets by the National Quotations Bureau’s Pink Sheets. However, in order to compete with the bigger firms that were trading on the New York Stock Exchange floor, his firm started to use very intelligent computer software that help distributed their quotes in second’s rater then minutes. This software later became the NASDAQ that we know today. In December of 2008 Bernard Madoff confessed that he had embezzling billions of dollars from investors. It is estimated to have lasted nearly two decades, and stolen approximately $64.8 billion. On December 11, 2008 he was arreste...
Bernie Madoff, “a former American stock broker, investment advisor, non-executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock market, and the admitted operator of what has been described as the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of the world”. (Bernard Madoff, 2011, para. 1) Bernie was able to convince investors to give him large sums of money with the promise that they would received between eight percent to twelve percent return a year. Bernie ran a pyramid scheme where Bernie kept the large sums of money for himself, and then he used the new investors funds to pay off the o...
A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of returns to previous investors from funds paid by new investors.With little or no legal earnings, Ponzi schemes require a consistent flow of money from new investors to operate. Ponzi schemes tend to collapse when the operator is unable to recruit new investors ,when a large number of investors ask to cash out or if the operator disappears.These types of financial fraud have had a tremendous affect on the accounting profession, in the form of forensic accounting.
In previous years the big financial institutions that are “too big to fail” have come to realize that they can “cheat” the system and make big money on it by making poor decisions and knowing that they will be bailed out without having any responsibly for their actions. And when they do it they also escape jail time for such action because of the fear that if a criminal case was filed against any one of the so called “too big to fail” financial institutions it...
This case illustrated that there were real consequences to white collar crime. In addition to paying the fifty million dollar fine, he relinquished another fifty million dollars of his illegal trading profits. (He still had millions remaining, however, from his illegal gains.) His actual prison sentence was three years, yet he served only twenty-two months in the federal prison at Lompoc, California, which was known to have a “country-club” atmosphere.
Jordan Belfort is the notorious 1990’s stockbroker who saw himself earning fifty million dollars a year operating a penny stock boiler room from his Stratton Oakmont, Inc. brokerage firm. Corrupted by drugs, money, and sex, he went from being an innocent twenty – two year old on the fringe of a new life to manipulating the system in his infamous “pump and dump” scheme. As a stock swindler, he would motivate his young brokers through insane presentations to rile them up as they defrauded investors with duplicitous stock sales. Toward the end of this debauchery tale he was convicted for securities fraud and money laundering for which he was sentenced to twenty – two months in prison as well as recompensing two – hundred million in restitution to any swindled stock buyers of his brokerage firm. Though his lavish spending and berserk party lifestyle was consumed by excessive greed, he displayed both positive and negative aspects of business communications.
“When a company called Enron… ascends to the number seven spot on the Fortune 500 and then collapses in weeks into a smoking ruin, its stock worth pennies, its CEO, a confidante of presidents, more or less evaporated, there must be lessons in there somewhere.” - Daniel Henninger.
Over the last few years, the issue of corruption--the abuse of public office for private gain--has attracted renewed interest, both among academics and policymakers. There are a number of reasons why this topic has come under recent inspection. Corruption scandals have toppled governments in both major industrial countries and developing countries. In the transition countries, the shift from command economies to free market economies has created massive opportunities for the appropriation of rents, excessive profits, and has often been accompanied by a change from a well-organized system of corruption to a more chaotic and deleterious one. With the end of the cold war, donor countries have placed less emphasis on political considerations in allocating foreign aid among developing countries and have paid more attention to cases in which aid funds have been misused and have not reached the poor. And slow economic growth has persisted in many countries with malfunctioning institutions. This renewed interest has led to a new flurry of empirical research on the causes and consequences of corruption.