Mary had a little lamb a la Tchaikovsky
Garrett Harris 10:11 p.m., May 23
Entrepreneurs who made an enormous profit on environmental mediation at the former Naval Training Center, now Liberty Station, underpaid taxes significantly, according to a Nov. 28 decision by the U.S. Tax Court. Daren Barone and Gregory Watkins billed $14.1 million for an asbestos removal job, and made a whopping profit of $8.3 million. They had formed a complicated partnership. After a long tax case, Judge Harry Haines declared that there is a tax deficiency of $850,273 and a penalty to be paid of $170,054.60. Much of the focus of the case was on whether the convoluted partnership served to get the entrepreneurs off on tax obligations.
Comments
SurfPuppy619 Dec. 1, 2011 @ 8:03 a.m.
Daren Barone and Gregory Watkins billed $14.1 million for an asbestos removal job, and made a whopping profit of $8.3 million. == A PROFIT MARGIN OF 59%.
Obviously this was some sort of scam, a no bid contract most likely, a set up for these two connected dorks. And there MUST have been kick backs too.
This is why government is wrecking this great country, right here. These two losers should be in prison for fraud, along with the government employee who gave them the green light.
A 60% profit margin on a $14 million job. Un-friggen believable.
Don Bauder Dec. 3, 2011 @ 4:18 p.m.
Yes, that's an unconscionable profit, but the case did not revolve around that aspect. This kind of thing is bad, I agree, but I am more irate about the $16 trillion that the U.S. Federal Reserve doled out to banks around the world. And they just promised more, without a whimper from anybody. Best, Don Bauder
SurfPuppy619 Dec. 3, 2011 @ 9:09 p.m.
but I am more irate about the $16 trillion that the U.S. Federal Reserve doled out to banks around the world. And they just promised more, without a whimper from anybody." ==
After hearing of this I think the Federal Reserve needs to be dismantled. Dismantled ASAP. Lending that kind of money with no oversight or congressional approval is so dangerous it is beyond nuts.
Seriously, Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve need to be taken apart, as soon as possible. They could easily destroy this entire nation in a matter of days. I had never taken this view until recently when Judge Andrew Napalitano on his Fox show "Freedom Watch" outlined what the Federal reserve was doing, as in lending trillions to both domestic AND foreign banks, BIG BANKS-on their own with no approval from anyone or accountability to anyone.
Ben Bernanke is a pawn of Goldman Sachs and other Big Business frauds on Wall Street, Bernanke does not what is in the best interest of America or the country, but the best interest of Goldman Sachs and Big Business.
I cannot emphasize this enough, the Fed Reserve needs to be taken apart.
Don Bauder Dec. 4, 2011 @ 7:29 a.m.
One of the great economists of the 20th century, Milton Friedman, believed in getting rid of the Fed, although he considered monetary policy all-important. By and large, countries whose central banks are part of the government -- not independent such as the U.S. Fed -- have not had a good record. The secret $16 trillion handout to U.S. and foreign banks, and the Fed's battling to keep the gifts secret, certainly suggest that the Fed should come under more supervision. But it's the old question: oversight by whom? Congress? Look what it has done. Best, Don Bauder
SurfPuppy619 Dec. 4, 2011 @ 10:06 p.m.
It needs to be either controlled or disbanded, because the course of conduct the Fed has engaged in the last 5 years puts our entire nation at risk. Great risk, in the hands of one person.
Between Benanke and Paulson we are lucky we have not already had an apocoliptic meltdown;
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/hank-paulsons-crony-capitalism-20111201
Don Bauder Dec. 6, 2011 @ 10:56 a.m.
Don't heap all the blame on Bernanke and Paulson. Geithner, Summers, Levitt, others helped bring us to the brink. Best, Don Bauder
Ponzi Dec. 1, 2011 @ 9:30 a.m.
There was not a competition for bids on the environmental remediation project (which by the way included over 200 buildings). The city of San Diego awarded Corky McMillin as the master developer. Then McMillin hired Harper-Nielsen-Dillingham to manage the construction and oversee the demolition and remediation. Harper then hired WCI (Barone and Watkins) in an agreement that for a lump sum bid of $17,000,000 (later WCI billed $14,000,000).
The project posed significant construction and environmental risks, including unknown amounts of asbestos, lead-based paints, and other items. It was a risky venture for these guys since they had no idea of how extensive the work would be. Environmental remediation jobs are like black boxes and it’s hard to guess what’s inside. What would they dig up and how many tons of soil would have to be removed and remediated?
Anyway, they made some money but I’m not convinced these guys were trying to evade taxes. It looks more like the byzantine design of corporate shells and joint-partnerships created by their lawyer may have put them in hot water. They have probably spent a good deal of money on lawyers and forensic accountants to defend what the Tax Court is claiming.
Like I always say, the bottleneck is always at the top of the bottle. If there was too much money left on the table, look no further than the usual suspects in San Diego’s inner circle. In this case, Corky McMillin and the sweetheart deal from San Diego’s City Hall.
Don Bauder Dec. 3, 2011 @ 4:20 p.m.
There is no question that the tax case revolved around the byzantine design of the shells and partnerships. Best, Don Bauder
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID