November 2024 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Advisory board goal for Post Office scandal victims to be returned to rightful financial position
by Gunnar Larson 06 Dec '24

06 Dec '24

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252529287/Advisory-board-goal-for-Post-… The board set up to monitor the compensation scheme for Post Office scandal victims agrees goal of returning them to the financial position they would be in had the scandal never happened Karl Flinders, Chief reporter and senior editor EMEA Published: 18 Jan 2023 12:15 The advisory board set up to oversee compensation awards to 555 victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal has agreed a goal of returning them to the financial position they would have been in had the scandal not happened. Thousands of former subpostmasters were blamed for accounting shortfalls caused by errors in the Post Office accounting software. They were forced to repay huge sums, and were often bankrupted as a result. Many were prosecuted and sent to prison. The scandal destroyed the lives and livelihoods of the former subpostmasters and their families for decades, with many suffering stress-related illness. Suicides have been linked with the scandal. In its first meeting, the GLO Compensation Scheme Advisory Board met representatives of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). The board agreed: “As with the general law, the goal should be to restore the claimants to the position that they would have been in if the scandal had not happened.” The 555 former subpostmasters and Post Office branch workers were part of a Group Litigation Order (GLO), which in 2019 proved that the software used by Post Office branches, known as Horizon, was causing the unexplained shortfalls they were blamed for. They proved the software, from Fujitsu, was to blame, and forced the Post Office to admit this was the case after nearly 20 years of denying it. The Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance The victory for the 555 subpostmasters in the High Court, all part of the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance (JFSA), were awarded £58m in damages, but after their legal costs – provided by a litigation funder that requires repayment with interest – were taken out, they were left with just £11m to share. This left people that had lost homes, businesses and huge sums of money with an average of a few thousand pounds each. The judgements in the High Court case, which was paid for by the victims, also triggered the unravelling of one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in British history. So far, more than 80 former subpostmasters have had wrongful convictions for theft and fraud overturned. The court ruling also forced the Post Office to set up a compensation scheme for any subpostmaster affected by the Horizon errors. But the Post Office and its government backer did not allow any of the 555 that took part in the court action to apply, citing that the compensation that was already paid was “full and final”. Alan Bates, the former subpostmaster who set up the JFSA in 2009 and has chaired it since, wrote to the government after the court victory, demanding it paid the legal costs to leave JFSA members with fairer compensation, but the government refused. But Bates and JFSA members kept pushing the government for justice, and through generating public pressure and instigating a judicial review forced the government to set up a statutory public inquiry into the Horizon scandal, which is ongoing. Although compensation was initially left out of the terms of reference of the public inquiry, the JFSA and its supporters forced the government to include an examination of compensation. Fair compensation The JFSA kept fighting for fair compensation, just as they had fought for justice for over a decade, and in June, the government was forced to agree to pay it. The GLO Compensation Scheme Advisory Board, set up to oversee the JFSA compensation scheme, is made up of University of Oxford professor Christopher Hodges, who is chair, peer James Arbuthnot and MP Kevan Jones, who have supported and campaigned for justice for victims of the Horizon scandal for two decades. Arbuthnot said he was encouraged by the first meeting of the board with BIES representatives. “Two key principles – the need for the goal to be to restore the claimants to the position that they would have been in if the scandal had not happened, and the imperative of speed of compensation – were agreed,” he said. “Now we need to ensure that both are carried out.” Jones said: “Good progress was made during the first meeting of the GLO Compensation Scheme Advisory Board, including the parameters of the scheme. The next meeting will be in February, where we will discuss setting up the scheme as soon as possible.” JFSA chair Bates said: “An oversight board was something very much missing in previous schemes and it offers reassurance to the scheme that people that have been so supportive over the years are involved. It also provides some transparency.” In 2009, Computer Weekly told the stories of seven subpostmasters affected by the problems (see timeline of Computer Weekly articles below). Read all Computer Weekly articles about the scandal since 2009 May 2009: Bankruptcy, prosecution and disrupted livelihoods – postmasters tell their story. September 2009: Postmasters form action group after accounts shortfall. November 2009: Post Office theft case deferred over IT questions. May 2010: A pilot of the new Horizon Online system at Royal Mail has been scaled back after connectivity problems and outages. February 2011: Post Office faces legal action over alleged accounting system failures. October 2011: 85 subpostmasters seek legal support in claims against Post Office computer system. June 2012: Post Office launches external review of system at centre of legal disputes. January 2013: Post Office admits Horizon system needs more investigation. January 2013: Post Office announces amnesty for Horizon evidence. January 2013: Post Office wants to get to bottom of IT system allegations. June 2013: Investigation into Post Office accounting system to drill down on strongest cases. July 2013: Post Office Horizon system investigation reveals concerns. October 2013: End in sight for subpostmaster claims against Post Office’s Horizon accounting system. October 2013: Former Lord Justice of Appeal Hooper joins Post Office Horizon investigation. November 2013: 150 subpostmasters file claims over “faulty” Horizon accounting system. September 2014: Fresh questions raised over Post Office IT system’s role in fraud cases. December 2014: MPs blast Post Office over IT system investigation and remove backing. December 2014: Why MPs lost faith in the Post Office’s IT investigation, but vowed to fight on. December 2014: MPs to debate subpostmaster IT injustice claims. December 2014: MP accuses Post Office of acting ‘duplicitously’ in IT investigation. January 2015: MPs force inquiry into Post Office subpostmaster mediation scheme. January 2015: Post Office faces grilling by MPs over Horizon accounting system. February 2015: Post Office CIO will talk to any subpostmaster about IT problems, promises CEO. March 2015: Post Office ends working group for IT system investigation day before potentially damaging report. March 2015: MPs seek reassurance over Post Office mediation scheme. March 2015: Retiring MP aims to uncover truth of alleged Post Office computer system problems. April 2015: Post Office failed to investigate account shortfalls before legal action, report claims. April 2015: Criminal Courts Review Commission set to review subpostmasters’ claims of wrongful prosecution. June 2015: Post Office looking to replace controversial Horizon system with IBM, says MP. July 2015: Campaigners call for independent inquiry into Post Office Horizon IT system dispute. October 2015: James Arbuthnot takes Post Office IT fight to House of Lords. November 2015: The union that represents Post Office subpostmasters has warned of a problem with the Horizon accounting system. November 2015: An email from Post Office IT support reveals a problem with the Horizon system and supporting processes that could lead to accounting errors. November 2015: Group litigation against Post Office being prepared in Horizon dispute. February 2016: Post Office faces group litigation over Horizon IT as subpostmasters fund class action. June 2016: Post Office chairman Tim Parker says there would be “considerable risk” associated with changing its Horizon computer system. November 2016: The legal team hired by a group of subpostmasters will take their case to the next stage. January 2017: The group action against the Post Office that alleges subpostmasters have been wrongly punished for accounting errors gets green light from the High Court of Justice. March 2017: 1,000 subpostmasters apply to join IT-related group litigation against Post Office. April 2017: Investigation into claims of miscarriages of justice in relation to a Post Office accounting system has appointed a forensic accountant firm. May 2017: Hundreds of subpostmasters have applied to join IT-related legal action since March. July 2017: Post Office defence in computer system legal case due this week. August 2017: Campaigners submit initial evidence in group litigation against Post Office over controversial Horizon IT system. October 2017: Subpostmasters’ group action against the Post Office reaches an important milestone. November 2017: An end is in sight for subpostmasters’ campaign against alleged wrongful prosecution, which they blame on a faulty computer system. November 2017: The High Court judge managing the subpostmasters versus Post Office legal case over an allegedly faulty computer system tells legal teams to cooperate. January 2018: Forensic investigation into Post Office IT system at centre of legal case nears completion. April 2018: Criminal Cases Review Commission forensic examination of the IT system at the centre of a legal case against the Post Office has raised further questions. May 2018: Post Office branches unable to connect to Horizon computer system for several hours after morning opening time. October 2018: After over a decade of controversy, next week marks the beginning of a court battle between subpostmasters and the Post Office. November 2018: Case against Post Office in relation to allegedly faulty computer system begins in High Court. November 2018: High Court case in which subpostmasters are suing the Post Office has revealed a known problem with a computer system at the core of the dispute. November 2018: A High Court trial, where subpostmasters are suing the Post Office for damages caused by an allegedly faulty IT system, ends second week. November 2018: Post Office director admits to Horizon errors and not sharing details with subpostmaster network. November 2018: The High Court trial in which subpostmasters are suing the Post Office has reached an important stage. December 2018: CCRC may hold off subpostmaster decision until after Post Office Horizon trial. December 2018: Court case where subpostmasters are suing the Post Office set to span at least four trials and extend into 2020. January 2019: Subpostmasters’ campaign group attacks Post Office CEO Paula Vennells’ New Year honour amid ongoing court case. January 2019: Thousands of known errors on controversial Post Office computer system to be revealed. March 2019: Tech under spotlight at High Court in second subpostmasters versus Post Office trial. March 2019: Post Office considered Horizon IT system “high-risk”, court told. March 2019: CCRC watching Post Office Horizon trial closely. March 2019: Judge rules that Post Office showed “oppressive behaviour” in response to claimants accused of accounting errors they blamed on Horizon IT system. March 2019: Post Office “lacked humanity” in the treatment of subpostmasters, says peer. March 2019: A High Court judge heard that the Post Office did not investigate a computer system error that could cause losses, despite being offered evidence. March 2019: The Post Office legal team in the case brought by more than 500 subpostmasters has called for the judge to be recused after questioning his impartiality. March 2019: A senior civil servant asked the Post Office to repay public money it had wrongly allocated to paying legal costs. April 2019: Subpostmaster claimants’ legal team makes application for the Post Office to pay millions of pounds of costs associated with trial. April 2019: Post Office to appeal judgment from first Horizon trial. April 2019: The Post Office’s claim that the judge overseeing the case concerning its controversial Horizon IT system was biased has been dismissed. April 2019: MP questions government over Post Office Horizon case. April 2019: Government says no conflict of interest in trial despite Post Office chairman’s dual role. May 2019: The Court of Appeal has refused the Post Office’s application to appeal a major decision in the Horizon IT trial. May 2019: The Post Office has applied for permission to appeal judgments from the first trial in its IT-related legal battle with subpostmasters. May 2019: The judge in the Post Office Horizon trial has ordered the organisation to pay the legal costs of its courtroom adversaries, and refused to give permission to appeal a major judgment. June 2019: Post Office asks Court of Appeal for permission to appeal judgment in first Horizon trial. July 2019: The Post Office has admitted that some subpostmasters are at risk of accounts not balancing due to an error it does not understand. July 2019: Problem revealed during High Court trial left subpostmaster with £18,000 surplus after IT system failed to register full amount of cash scanned in. August 2019: Subpostmasters suffering slow running and frozen terminals while Post Office searches for a fix to issues apparently caused by a software update. August 2019: The Post Office has fixed the latest problems with its Horizon system, affecting hundreds of branches. October 2019: A High Court judgment for a trial that focused on the Post Office’s IT system at the centre of a multimillion-pound litigation will be announced early next month. November 2019: The Court of Appeal has rejected a Post Office application to appeal judgments made in its multimillion-pound battle with subpostmasters over IT system failures. November 2019: Peer calls for clear-out of Post Office board after Court of Appeal confirms major court defeat. December 2019: The Post Office has settled its long-running legal dispute with subpostmasters, and will pay £57.75m in damages. December 2019: Subpostmansters ended their legal battle with the Post Office at the optimal time, according to the lawyer that managed the High Court action. December 2019: Subpostmansters proved right on IT system failures as calls for full public inquiry mount. December 2019: Criminal Courts Review Commission to review Horizon judgment “swiftly”. December 2019: National Federation of Subpostmasters cries foul after court ruling on controversial computer system. December 2019: Former Post Office CEO apologises to subpostmasters over Horizon scandal. December 2019: Call for former Post Office CEO to step down from public roles after IT court battle lost. January 2020: Fujitsu must face scrutiny following Post Office Horizon trial judgment. January 2020: Subpostmaster group calls for government to pay legal costs for Horizon trial. January 2020: Why subpostmasters are calling on the government to pay Horizon trial costs. January 2020: Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy says it did not make decisions in the Post Office’s recent court battle. January 2020: Government should not be allowed to dismiss subpostmasters’ claims over Horizon IT scandal. January 2020: Police sent information about potential Fujitsu staff perjury in subpostmaster prosecutions. January 2020: Prosecutions are a significant step closer to being sent to the Court of Appeal as Criminal Courts Review Commission forms a group of commissioners to review them. January 2020: Alan Bates: The “details man” the Post Office paid the price for ignoring. February 2020: The government has refused to pay the huge legal costs subpostmasters incurred in their battle with the government-owned Post Office, which they won. February 2020: Members of Parliament seeking a public inquiry into the Post Office Horizon scandal face huge challenges, but pressure and time could force justice. February 2020: Calls for inquiry into Post Office IT scandal increase in Parliament, with cross-party support. February 2020: Care Quality Commission to review concerns over Paula Vennells’ appointment after they were raised by a former NHS consultant psychiatrist. February 2020: Government admits it was too passive managing Post Office as parliamentary pressure builds. February 2020: Minister says Post Office IT experts misled the government when it asked questions about subpostmasters’ concerns over Horizon IT system. March 2020: Boris Johnson commits to “getting to the bottom of” Post Office Horizon IT scandal. March 2020: Boris Johnson’s commitment to inquiry into Post Office scandal in doubt. March 2020: MPs call on PM to commit to full public inquiry into Post Office Horizon IT scandal. March 2020: Those who did not play by the rules in Post Office Horizon scandal “should face prosecution”. March 2020: MPs told to hold to account those responsible for Post Office Horizon IT scandal. March 2020: The Post Office has sparked anger with secret settlements with subpostmasters outside the recent legal action against it. March 2020: Labour MP Karl Turner tells Computer Weekly that the Post Office Horizon scandal is the most grotesque version of predatory capitalism he has ever seen. March 2020: MP Kevan Jones has warned a government minister not to repeat the mistakes of predecessors in relation to the Post Office Horizon IT scandal. March 2020: Criminal Cases Review Commission to use Microsoft Teams to ensure review of subpostmaster prosecutions is held on time. March 2020: Post Office postpones subpostmaster compensation scheme amid Covid-19 crisis. March 2020: Meeting reviewing subpostmaster applications to appeal criminal prosecutions moves into second day. March 2020: Subpostmaster prosecutions to be considered by Court of Appeal for miscarriages of justice. March 2020: How subpostmasters made legal history with biggest referral of potential miscarriages of justice. April 2020: Met Police examines information about evidence given in court by Fujitsu staff on the Horizon IT system. May 2020: Subpostmasters who had their lives ruined by the Post Office’s faulty IT system have received their damages after a High Court victory. May 2020: A senior Post Office executive at the centre of an IT scandal, who tried to mislead a High Court judge in relation to it, has left the organisation without fanfare despite many years of service. May 2020: Post Office re-examines hundreds of prosecutions that could have resulted from faults in Horizon IT system. June 2020: A campaign group representing subpostmasters wrongly prosecuted for theft and false accounting by the Post Office is raising money to help clear the names of victims of the scandal. June 2020: Subpostmasters to force scrutiny of government’s role in Post Office IT scandal. June 2020: The Criminal Cases Review Commission sends 47 more subpostmaster cases to Court of Appeal and asks government to review private prosecution powers. June 2020: Select committee chair writes to former Post Office CEO demanding answers over her role in IT scandal. June 2020: The government has been accused of launching a review that fails in getting to the bottom of one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in UK history. June 2020: Subpostmasters will not cooperate with government review into IT scandal. June 2020: The government’s proposed review of the Post Office IT scandal has received a further setback as forensic accountants join subpostmasters in refusing to back it. June 2020: Call for government review of Post Office Horizon scandal to have the power to force individuals to give evidence under oath. June 2020: Subpostmasters seeking justice in the Post Office Horizon IT scandal are regaining momentum in Parliament. June 2020: Healthcare regulator will be discussing concerns about former NHS boss chairing an NHS trust at an upcoming meeting. June 2020: Second Sight is working with law firm in appeals by subpostmasters against criminal convictions in Horizon IT scandal. June 2020: Post Office and Fujitsu blame each other for many of the failings in the Horizon IT scandal that wrecked lives. June 2020: Parliamentary Justice Committee to hold short inquiry into the rules and regulations surrounding private organisations’ ability to initiate criminal proceedings. July 2020: Victims of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal need to raise thousands of pounds in a week or those responsible for their suffering will avoid scrutiny. July 2020: The government is set to face scrutiny over its involvement in the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, described as one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in modern UK history. September 2020: The government repeats that it won’t pay victims’ legal costs and confirms review into the scandal will not have the power to call witnesses. September 2020: Subpostmasters still not being told about all the known errors in the controversial Post Office branch accounting and retail system that they use. October 2020: The Post Office has chosen not to contest 44 out of 47 appeals, meaning most are likely to have their names cleared, but others still face a Court of Appeal battle for justice. October 2020: MPs are demanding the government holds a full statutory public inquiry into the Post Office IT scandal. October 2020: NHS regulator continues enquiries about the appointment of former Post Office CEO at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust as more damning details emerge. October 2020: Government minister met with former subpostmaster online in an attempt to get victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal involved in government review. October 2020: The Post Office is focusing urgently on fixing an IT error suffered by a subpostmaster amid the ongoing IT scandal. October 2020: Labour politicians are calling for the government to give the Post Office Horizon scandal inquiry the power to force witnesses to give evidence if they don’t cooperate. October 2020: Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust has asked for external review of its process when appointing controversial executive. November 2020: Government faces scrutiny of its handling of the Post Office IT scandal that destroyed subpostmasters’ lives and livelihoods. November 2020: Post Office branches offline during busy business hours after suffering an IT error that the Post Office said related to IT from supplier Fujitsu. November 2020: Fujitsu is refusing to explain what caused a national system outage in Post Office branches last week, despite the Post Office confirming the issue was the fault of the supplier. November 2020: The Metropolitan Police opens criminal investigation into Fujitsu staff who gave evidence in trials of subpostmasters wrongly prosecuted and even imprisoned for financial crimes. November 2020: Post Office criticised over vagueness of its explanation of the cause of a UK-wide IT failure that saw subpostmasters unable to do business. November 2020: Post Office says planned firmware update caused the problem that left branches unable to do business for 90 minutes. November 2020: Court documents reveal the names of the Fujitsu employees under investigation for potentially providing misleading information in criminal trials. November 2020: The government allowed the Post Office to ‘run amok’ and destroy lives, says complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman. November 2020: Campaigning politician demands access to documents that could prove that the Post Office lied. December 2020: Government denies responsibility for the abuse inflicted on subpostmasters by the Post Office over faulty IT system. December 2020: CEO at the centre of the scandal that saw innocent people bankrupted and some sent to prison steps down from NHS role as pressure for her resignation grows. December 2020: History made as subpostmasters wrongly prosecuted in Horizon IT scandal have convictions quashed. December 2020: The appointment of a former Post Office executive, who tried to mislead a judge, in the Football Association of Wales has been questioned by an MP. December 2020: Court of Appeal indicates subpostmasters can pursue appeal route that could do more damage to Post Office’s reputation. January 2021: NHS trust defends its director appointment process following an external review of its recruitment of former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells. January 2021: Lawyers call for changes to digital evidence rule that made it easier for the Post Office to ‘bamboozle courts’ and make subpostmasters pay a heavy price for its IT failings. January 2021: The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has referred four more subpostmasters’ criminal convictions to appeal, as part of the biggest miscarriage of justice in modern UK history. February 2021: A former senior developer who worked for Fujitsu on the Post Office IT system that led to subpostmasters being falsely accused of fraud, has claimed bosses knew of fundamental flaws before going live. February 2021: Subpostmasters call for Boris Johnson to pause and reshape the government’s Horizon inquiry. February 2021: Vote of no confidence in Football Association of Wales boss triggered by recruitment of former Post Office executive who tried to mislead a judge in IT trial. March 2021: Government agrees to change private prosecution rules that were abused by the Post Office in its pursuit of subpostmasters wrongly accused of financial crimes. March 2021: Subpostmaster victims who have spent millions bringing the Post Office IT scandal to light have received no reply to their concerns from Boris Johnson. March 2021: MP condemns department’s ‘bizarre’ rejection of freedom of information request linked to Post Office IT scandal. March 2021: Football Association Wales boss steps down after losing confidence motion triggered by appointment of an executive involved in the Post Office IT scandal. March 2021: The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is reviewing five cases of potential miscarriage of justice in relation to subpostmaster prosecutions. March 2021: Subpostmasters heading to Court of Appeal to clear their names in what is potentially the biggest miscarriage of justice in English legal history. March 2021: The Post Office does not have enough money to pay compensation to the subpostmasters it wrongfully prosecuted. March 2021: Angela van den Bogerd has left her role at the Football Association of Wales, following criticism of her part in Post Office IT scandal. March 2021: Court of Appeal hearing reveals Post Office instructed employees to destroy documents that undermined an insistence that its Horizon computer system was robust. March 2021: The Post Office was warned that a former Fujitsu employee had misled courts when giving evidence on its behalf. March 2021: Boris Johnson agrees with MP that those responsible for the Post Office Horizon scandal should be brought to book. March 2021: Former Post Office chief was paid over £400,000 when she left despite the organisation being involved in what would become the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK history. April 2021: The UK government faces a potential judicial review over its Post Office Horizon IT scandal inquiry, after subpostmasters formally wrote to the government seeking one. April 2021: The government is listening to calls for changes in how digital evidence is considered in court, as Post Office IT scandal spells out current rule’s inadequacy. April 2021: The Post Office's controversial contract with Fujitsu has been extended another year to help the organisation manage its exit. April 2021: The Post Office is to move work done by Fujitsu in-house when its outsourcing contract ends, and is already recruiting IT experts. April 2021: The Post Office has revealed the end to its controversial Horizon IT system which, through its errors and the Post Office's denial of them, caused huge suffering. April 2021: The UK government is the only block to fair compensation for subpostmasters who were wrongly punished for accounting shortfalls. April 2021: The Court of Appeal has overturned the criminal convictions of 39 subpostmasters who were blamed and punished for accounting shortfalls caused by computer errors. April 2021: Former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells has left roles in the church, Morrisons and Dunelm after postmasters’ convictions were overturned in the Court of Appeal. April 2021: The biggest miscarriage of justice in UK history is set to get bigger as more subpostmasters take their cases to the Court of Appeal. May 2021: Post Office IT scandal CEO has no excuse for her inaction in preventing the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK history, says Criminal Cases Review Commission chairperson. May 2021: Subpostmasters, MPs and the public call for a full statutory judge-led public inquiry into the Post Office Horizon scandal, following another damning court judgment. May 2021: Government says it wants to ensure a fair pay-out for the 555 subpostmasters who defeated the Post Office in a legal battle. May 2021: The Post Office has contacted hundreds of people it might have wrongly prosecuted for financial crimes. May 2021: The miscarriages of justice involving subpostmasters are the most disturbing element of the Post Office Horizon scandal – but it goes much deeper. May 2021: The supplier at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal has so far escaped the ramifications of its role in the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK history. May 2021: Another two former subpostmasters have had their convictions for financial crimes overturned, following a hearing in Southwark Crown Court. May 2021: The government inquiry into the Post Office Horizon scandal is set to be made statutory with the power to compel witnesses and evidence. May 2021: The government confirmed that the inquiry into the Post Office Horizon IT scandal will be given statutory status and wider scope. May 2021: The Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance has agreed to meet the former judge heading up the inquiry into the Post Office scandal that ruined the lives of hundreds of subpostmasters. May 2021: Criminal Cases Review Commission will not allow pressure on its resources to prevent subpostmasters seeking a review of their criminal convictions. May 2021: Professional IT body wants changes to how computer evidence is used in court in the wake of the Post Office case. June 2021: The Post Office Horizon scandal inquiry begins with subpostmaster campaign group waiting for full details before committing its support. June 2021: Whatever the Post Office told government about its decision to sack investigators examining subpostmaster prosecutions for theft could identify if the government was part of a cover-up. June 2021: The Post Office has so far compensated about 400 subpostmasters who suffered losses as a result of computer errors that they were wrongly blamed for. July 2021: Another 10 subpostmasters are set to have their criminal convictions quashed as part of one of the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history. July 2021: The government has made no contact with subpostmasters two months after it said it would work with them to ensure they get speedy and fair compensation. July 2021: The cost of a scheme set up to compensate subpostmasters who were victims of the Horizon IT scandal will exceed £300m. July 2021: The government will pay interim compensation within weeks to subpostmasters who were wrongly convicted of crimes due to computer errors. August 2021: A further four subpostmasters are set to have their wrongful convictions overturned in the latest development in the Post Office Horizon scandal. August 2021: The government has failed to provide fair compensation to the subpostmasters who exposed the full extent of the Horizon scandal to the world. August 2021: Subpostmasters demand more clarity on Horizon public inquiry before committing their support. September 2021: Six more subpostmaster convictions referred for appeal in Post Office IT scandal. September 2021: Government minister holds secret meeting with Post Office Horizon scandal victims. October 2021: The public inquiry into a scandal that saw subpostmasters imprisoned after being blamed for accounting shortfalls will hold its first public hearing early next month. October 2021: A government minister investigating the controversial Horizon IT project in 2000 described the Post Office board of directors as ‘appalling, short-sighted and partisan’. November 2021: The behaviour of Post Office senior management during the Horizon scandal was so egregious that the supplier of the faulty software has escaped a large financial penalty. November 2021: Former Fujitsu staff who gave evidence in subpostmaster trials have been questioned by police for a second time. November 2021: Former subpostmasters convicted of crimes based on data from error-prone Post Office computer system continue to embark on appeals. November 2021: The first hearing in the Post Office Horizon scandal public inquiry hears why victims should be paid compensation immediately. November 2021:The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is investigating eight potential miscarriages of justice linked with faulty Post Office IT system. November 2021: The Post Office will waive professional legal privilege for documents relating to legal advice it received regarding subpostmaster prosecutions. November 2021 A total number of 65 subpostmasters have now had criminal convictions overturned in Post Office Horizon scandal. November 2021 Subpostmasters asked to withdraw support for Post Office scandal inquiry. November 2021: Seven more subpostmasters have been cleared after the Post Office charged them for crimes caused by its faulty Horizon software. November 2021: The Post Office made clear its support for a change in UK law regarding computer evidence that was making prosecution ‘onerous’ – a change which later helped to wrongfully convict subpostmasters. November 2021: The chair of the Post Office scandal public inquiry has confirmed the compensation of a group of subpostmasters will be revisited. December 2021: Government must go further after agreeing to pay compensation for wrongly convicted subpostmasters. December 2021: Pressure on government to pay fair compensation to subpostmasters left out of current schemes. January 2022: Almost 100 MPs have backed a call for the government to reverse its decision to exclude 555 subpostmasters from fair compensation. January 2022: A parliamentary select committee was told that the Post Office is unable to access information to accurately calculate compensation for some Horizon scandal victims. January 2022: The Post Office received subsidies worth over £1bn last year, including a £685m payment just last month, in a scheme labelled Post Office Historical Matters Compensation. January 2022: Government widens subpostmaster miscarriage of justice compensation scheme in Horizon scandal. January 2022: Government officials are open to finding a way to properly compensate victims of the Horizon scandal without setting a dangerous legal precedent. January 2022: The subpostmaster campaign group responsible for exposing the Post Office Horizon scandal is to meet with the government to discuss fair compensation for their suffering. January 2022: Fujitsu cannot hide away as taxpayers pick up the bill for the Post Office scandal triggered by its IT system, say peers. February 2022: Victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal are being denied the millions of pounds they are owed as the government delays compensation resolution. February 2022: Victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal are due to tell their devastating stories to the statutory inquiry. February 2022: MPs are demanding urgent action by the government to provide full compensation to a group of 555 Post Office Horizon scandal victims who have so far been left out. February 2022: Victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal have been suffering in silence for many years, but the current public inquiry is giving them a voice, and people are listening. February 2022: Horizon inquiry questioning raises hopes of fair compensation for victims so far left out. February 2022: Government set to backtrack on untenable position on subpostmaster compensation. March 2022: The Post Office and Fujitsu failed to alert subpostmasters to a software error that caused them to be wrongly blamed for accounting shortfalls. March 2022: Horizon inquiry hearing sheds light on subpostmaster federation’s role in hushing up IT problems. March 2022: 555 subpostmasters to get fair compensation after government U-turn on its stance on High Court settlement. March 2022: Compensation goal finally in sight for 555 Post Office scandal victims, after 13 year campaign. April 2022: Fujitsu bags £430m government contracts despite rising cost of Post Office Horizon scandal. April 2022: The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission expects more subpostmasters with potential wrongful convictions to come forward. April 2022: Former subpostmasters who were wrongfully convicted and punished for crimes have not yet received full compensation over a year after their convictions were overturned. April 2022: A former Fujitsu worker has been questioned under caution for the third time as police investigate potential perjury in trials of subpostmasters wrongfully convicted of financial crimes. May 2022: Paula Vennells could be stripped of her CBE as the Honours Forfeiture Committee commits to reconsider its award in the light of the Post Office Horizon scandal. May 2022: Lawyer negotiating compensation for victims of Post Office scandal says the two sides are ‘poles apart’ on valuations. May 2022: Inquiry into Post Office scandal moves to Scotland, with differences in English and Scottish law raising further serious questions about subpostmaster prosecutions. May 2022: The chair of the Post Office Horizon scandal inquiry has brought forward hearings about compensation as victims warn that at this rate “people will die” before they get anything. May 2022: The Criminal Cases Review Commission is to contact 88 more potentially wrongfully convicted Post Office workers. May 2022: The Post Office Horizon IT system at the centre of a national scandal will be replaced by 2025, with a supplier expected to be named in August. May 2022: Victims of the Post Office Horizon scandal in Scotland raise further questions about Post Office and government conduct. May 2022: Government accused of ‘passing the buck’ and ‘not knowing what it is talking about’ after stating it has no plans to review court rules on computer evidence. May 2022: Computer Weekly spoke to the barristers at Henderson Chambers that fought the Post Office in the High Court to expose the widest miscarriage of justice in UK history. June 2022: Two more Post Office Horizon scandal victims have had their wrongful convictions overturned. June 2022: The 555 subpostmasters who exposed the depth of the Post Office Horizon scandal could finally be fairly compensated. June 2022: Forensic accounting firm that ‘knows where the bodies are buried’ will be released from confidentiality obligations by the Post Office to give evidence to public inquiry. June 2022: Lawyers negotiating the compensation valuations for former subpostmasters who suffered wrongful convictions have brought in independent judicial scrutiny to break an impasse. June 2022: Subpostmaster campaign group is a step closer to achieving what it was originally set up to do as government launches compensation scheme for its members who did not receive fair payouts. July 2022: More former subpostmasters have their wrongful convictions for theft and fraud overturned in the Court of Appeal. July 2022: When the Post Office’s lie about the Horizon system failed to silence subpostmaster critics, it took more extreme measures, say victims of the scandal. September 2022: The Met Police have interviewed a former subpostmaster as part of an investigation into potential perjury by former Fujitsu staff. September 2022: Chair of statutory public inquiry into the Post Office Horizon scandal has aired his disappointment over the slow progress in making interim payments to victims. October 2022: The public inquiry into the Post Office scandal has begun phase two with a request for adjournment amid allegations that the Post Office is failing to disclose relevant documents. October 2022: Victims demand that the perpetrators of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal face the public inquiry. October 2022: Fujitsu’s part in causing the extreme suffering of subpostmasters will be made clear as the IT supplier begins giving evidence at a statutory inquiry. October 2022: A dereliction of duty saw subpostmaster federation ignore its members when IT problems hit and allowed the Post Office destroy their lives. October 2022: Politicians are keeping up the pressure to block government contracts being awarded to Fujitsu because of its role in the Post Office Horizon scandal. October 2022: Problems reported with the Post Office’s Horizon IT system before its roll-out should have been regarded as a “show-stopper”. October 2022: Horizon system code writers lacked basic programming skills, according to the task force set up to investigate reported problems with the controversial software. October 2022: Trials of the Horizon computer system in Post Office branches in 1999 led to a warning from subpostmasters that software problems meant “a tragedy was not far away”. November 2022: ‘Hardball’ negotiations between the government, the Post Office and ICL meant subpostmasters were ignored and thrown into a tragedy that could have been averted. November 2022: Post Office investigators were so convinced that subpostmasters were cooking the books that they failed to investigate alleged IT problems, a public inquiry has been told. November 2022: SCCRC has referred six cases of potential wrongful convictions of subpostmasters to the High Court of Justiciary. November 2022: A former Fujitsu technology expert who defended the Horizon system’s robustness in court was unhappy after being ‘manoeuvred’ into acting as an expert witness. November 2022: Insider tells public inquiry that the Post Office continued to roll out the controversial Horizon system despite a ‘considerable’ number of errors, because it was too committed. November 2022: Former members of the ICL team developing software for the Post Office Horizon EPOSS system were unqualified and engaged in poor software development practices. November 2022: The Post Office IT scandal inquiry’s appointed expert IT witness was “troubled” by the lack of integrity of data from the Horizon system that was used to send people to prison. November 2022: Telegram from British Embassy in Tokyo to UK government reveals pressure on ministers to sign off controversial contract. November 2022: The National Federation of Subpostmasters (NFSP) deliberately kept stories of Horizon errors quiet because it “did not want to kill the project”. December 2022: The Post Office was ‘keen’ to make subpostmasters cover unexplained accounting shortfall as its business struggled, public inquiry hears. December 2022: The second phase of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal raised more questions over who did what, when and where, with shocking revelations at every turn. December 2022: The Criminal Cases Review Commission wants former subpostmasters to come forward if they think they were prosecuted by the Post Office based on data from the Horizon computer system. January 2023: Alan Bates, who fought for decades to expose the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, says it would be inappropriate to accept an OBE when former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells holds

1 3

Law Society of Scotland on Post Office Scandal Litigation - Litigation Finance Journal
by Gunnar Larson 06 Dec '24

06 Dec '24

Check out my recent article: https://litigationfinancejournal.com/law-society-of-scotland-on-post-office… The Law Society of Scotland shares a new debrief of the Post Office scandal. The story goes: When the Horizon computer system found over 736 sub-postmasters were allegedly grifting from the United Kingdom’s postal budgets, they were summarily punished. However, Horizon’s back office capabilities were later found to contain bugs and other system defects that allegedly found workers at fault by mistake. Enter litigation funding, a utility that many of the former post office workers found necessary to clear their name. According to the Law Society of Scotland, February of 2022 saw the initiation of a public debate and investigation on the totality of the Post Office scandal’s effects. The whole affair is being dubbed an extreme case of United Kingdom justice malfeasance. Furthermore, the Law Society explains that about 10% of the 736 criminal records have been overturned. A class of 555 claimants have won restitution, totaling £20,000 each. Click here to read more about the Law Society of Scotland’s take on the Post Office Scandal.

1 3

Enron’s Board of Directors: Contemporary Lessons on Crypto Marketplace Manipulation Computer Crimes - Crypto Computer Crimes Manual (W/183 Highlights)
by Gunnar Larson 05 Dec '24

05 Dec '24

A few years ago, I wrote an essay titled: "Enron’s Board of Directors: Contemporary Lessons on Crypto Marketplace Manipulation Computer Crimes - Crypto Computer Crimes Manual (W/183 Highlights)" https://thecapital.io/article/crypto-computer-crimes-manual-w183-highlights… Working references on disclosure controls and procedures, as well as strategic initiatives including mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and management restructurings (including public/private board of directors). Full, fair, and accurate disclosures from all parties in a battle for corporate influence or control are critically important to investors, particularly when they are called upon to make decisions about their investments. Contemporary crypto computer crimes likely are key considerations relevant to making informed investment decisions by sophisticated investors, underscoring protection of pension assets via keen planning. BitLicense marketplace manipulation techniques and potential cross-border computer crimes has been a major focus of xNY.io's scholar research/innovation communication and Bank.org's business plan execution strategy. The World Bank (WorldBank.org) notes that vulture funds endanger the gains made by debt relief to poorest countries. "The Bank has already delivered more than $40 billion in debt relief to 30 of these countries...thanks to this, countries like Ghana can provide micro-credit to farmers, build classrooms for their children, and fund water and sanitation projects for the poor," wrote World Bank Vice President Danny Leipziger in 2007. World Bank directors warn that strategies adopted by vulture funds divert much needed debt relief away from the poorest countries on earth and into the bank accounts of the wealthy. Bank.org is clear-eyed; microcredit lending fraud is a major issue for developing economies. Likewise, in western developed economies, market history warns that when boards of directors approve of and/or ignore the misuse of computer software programs which compute values based upon data input formulas from active cross-border manipulation structures, the results can lead to scandals like Enron. Such outcomes cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of affected companies collapse, while also shaking public confidence in the United States securities markets. Enron’s Board of Directors: Contemporary Lessons on Crypto Marketplace Manipulation Computer Crimes In its 2000 review of best corporate boards, Chief Executive Magazine included Enron among its five best boards. Even with its complex corporate governance and network of intermediaries, Enron was still able to "attract large sums of capital to fund a questionable business model, conceal its true performance through a series of accounting and financing maneuvers, and hype its stock to unsustainable levels."On paper, Enron had a model board of directors comprised predominantly of outsiders with significant ownership stakes and a talented audit committee of various state and federal regulators. Two decades later, in 2021, it is clear that cryptocurrency and blockchain computer software systems require contemporary, ethically pure and sound cultivation to support the realization of a "generation of innovation," maximizing the full potential of blockchain software technologies. Board directors that will pioneer the next chapters of the meaningful New York legacy of global, cross-border banking will agree: Close scrutiny of corporate governance and greater responsibility placed on directors to vouch for the reports submitted to the SEC and other federal agencies have resulted in the growth of computer software solutions such as blockchain systems and processes. Cryptocurrency and Blockchain computer software products allow corporate directors and internal auditors to assemble and analyze financial and other relevant data—including unstructured data—and create reporting required by New York BitLicense regulators and various Federal counterparts. Before its demise, Enron was lauded for its sophisticated software, including financial risk management tools powered by computer software. Risk management was crucial to Enron not only because of its regulatory environment, but also because of its business plan. Enron established long-term fixed commitments which needed to be hedged to prepare for the invariable fluctuation of future energy prices. Enron's downfall was attributed to its reckless use of derivatives and special purpose formulas manipulated by computer accounting software tools. To engage in probable computer crimes, Enron hedged its risks with special purpose entities which it owned, and Enron retained the risks associated with the transactions. Enron's aggressive accounting practices were not hidden from the board of directors, as later learned by a Senate subcommittee. The board was informed of the rationale for using the Whitewing, LJM, and Raptor transactions, and after approving them received status updates on the entities' operations. Although not all of Enron's widespread improper accounting practices were revealed to the board, the practices were dependent on board decisions. Eliminating Bad Board of Director Schemes Ranging from additional corporate board responsibilities to criminal penalties, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) implemented disclosure requirements to comply with the law. A recent SEC order reiterated the importance of the disclosures, noting that the requirements were adopted in order to alert the market to large and rapid accumulation of shares that might represent a possible change in corporate control so that shares can be valued accordingly. The SEC order also noted that the requirements were designed to provide an issuer’s management with timely information to appropriately protect its shareholders’ interests (including pension protections). The SEC’s recent enforcement actions relate to disclosure obligations in connection with M&A transactions and fights for corporate control. In 2015, the SEC brought forth a number of similar enforcement actions alleging that filers had failed to update their disclosures after taking steps towards certain plans and proposals. These types of enforcement actions continue to create challenging issues for practitioners, particularly when potential transactions are still in the early stages of planning and preliminary negotiation. The SEC’s historic actions serve as a reminder to investors, including vulture activists, that Schedule 13D violations can result in monetary liability and, in the case of registered funds and investment advisers, can also have other regulatory consequences. Care must be taken to avoid those communications constituting group activities with disclosure consequences. It should be noted that in some cases, coordination among the parties or sharing of information is sufficient to form prompts for disclosure purposes. Intention of Disclosing Crypto Computer Crimes Manual (W/183 Highlights) Published by the Office of Legal Education Executive office for United States Attorneys, the “Prosecuting Computer Crime Manual” has been xNY.io’s reference guide as international scholars researching Crypto Computer Crimes and how to best position corresponding Bank.org business innovation moving forward. The SEC encourages the description of any plans or proposals such as Proof of Burn (PoB) or Short Selling market activities which may relate to or would result in: The acquisition by any person of additional securities of the issuer, or the disposition of securities of the issuer; An extraordinary corporate transaction, such as a merger, reorganization or liquidation, involving the issuer or any of its subsidiaries; A sale or transfer of a material amount of assets of the issuer or any of its subsidiaries; Any change in the present board of directors or management of the issuer, including any plans or proposals to change the number or term of directors or to fill any existing vacancies on the board; Any material change in the present capitalization or dividend policy of the issuer; Any other material change in the issuer's business or corporate structure, including but not limited to, if the issuer is a registered closed-end investment company, any plans or proposals to make any changes in its investment policy for which a vote is required by section 13 of the Investment Company Act of 1940; Changes in the issuer's charter, bylaws or instruments corresponding thereto or other actions which may impede the acquisition of control of the issuer by any person; Causing a class of securities of the issuer to be delisted from a national securities exchange or to cease to be authorized to be quoted in an inter-dealer quotation system of a registered national securities association; A class of equity securities of the issuer becoming eligible for termination of registration pursuant to section 12(g)(4) of the Act; or Any action similar to any of those enumerated above. Below we share 183 highlights to the Computer Crimes Manual as per best disclosure practices to illustrate various potential scenarios when market conditions are met and a board of directors potentially exploits blockchain technological software innovation with forecastable reckless consequences. https://thecapital.io/article/crypto-computer-crimes-manual-w183-highlights…

2 24

Directorates Who Discredit Truthful Witnesses (W/80 Highlights)
by Gunnar Larson 05 Dec '24

05 Dec '24

“And the persons who ultimately are harmed by all of this, of course, is the average consumer, the average citizen, who has no knowledge, unless it paid attention to this hearing, of the extent of the manipulations that have been carried out by the largest financial institutions in America and, indeed, probably the world.” - Senator John McCain *Highlights and working notes on the ethical limits of discrediting the truthful witness, observing modern directorates and ethics rules that fail to prevent truth distortion by unethical means (Source research by Marquette Law Review).* History provides the epic example of Enron and a cunning Board of Directors of misleaders, a team of flimflam artists who used sly rhetorical skills to bamboozle the public, turning night into day. In this conception, directorates tell stories only in order to seduce and beguile regulators who fall prey to the advocate’s star-crossed tricks. Why do company Directors employ unethical, false story techniques to advance a false defense when ethical means are available? The exponential effects of this troublesome behavior requires that the firm’s every word, action and attitude be consistent with the conclusion that is dishonest. Board directors are the ultimate self policing body of an organization, responsible for setting the tone for ethical rules and standards. Not only are modern ethical rules unable to prevent directorates who use of false-story techniques, but little can be done in the way of reforming the rules themselves so that they can more effectively regulate the unethical means by which honesty is systematically discredited and made to look untruthful. - As witnessed in New York State recently, top leaders sometimes ignore ethical rules by rationalizing away conduct known to be unethical standards of professional behavior. - More abstract-oriented discussions concerning whether society’s best interests are advanced with attempts to distort outcomes by discrediting the truth has even impacted virtual currency innovation out of New York. These points simply seem invented as an outrageous scenario presented to the public by way of question, yet they are indeed true. - There is a pattern of routinely using an arsenal of tricks to subvert the truth. The culprit may argue that the version of events is untruthful, because of a motive to fabricate the truth. In actuality, incompetence is the only true motive to fabricate directorate supported dishonesty. Now more than ever, honest and ethical leaders know that each time a directorate uses talents and skills to pollute the marketplace with lies (either explicit or implicit) to manipulate profits is an act that initially diminishes the chances of a prosperous society. Such practice of engaging in conduct that involves dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation is impermissible and should not be tolerated. Without swift action, the public may lose confidence in both system wide innovation and maximizing the whole human potential of our species. - Alternatively, employing truthful answers to string together a series of inferences that collectively weaken the case of interlocking directorates. - Vigorously defending potentially problematic interlocking directorates can be systematically re-purposed with the goal of protecting the innocent. We share 80 highlights to Todd A. Berger’s (published by Marquette Law Review) “The Ethical Limits of Discrediting the Truthful Witness: How Modern Ethics Rules Fail to Prevent Truthful Witnesses from Being Discredited Through Unethical Means.” ---- Directorates Who Discredit Truthful Witnesses (W/80 Highlights): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XzfRqxxDD5OzQgkH1Ok2wdO25JZiqVev/view?usp=… -- *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* MSc <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - Digital Currency MBA <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) G(a)xNY.io +1-917-580-8053 New York, New York 10001

1 14

Will The UK Supreme Court Decision In PACCAR Affect Hong Kong Litigation Funding? - Litigation Finance Journal
by Gunnar Larson 05 Dec '24

05 Dec '24

Check out my recent article: https://litigationfinancejournal.com/will-the-uk-supreme-court-decision-in-… The Hong Kong Department of Justice’s approach to litigation finance and third party funding is coming into greater focus following the UK Supreme Court’s July 26, 2023 ruling on R. (on the Application of PACCAR Inc) v Competition Appeal Tribunal [2023] UKSC 28. Mondaq reports that PACCAR has defined “damaged-base agreements” or “DBAs” in the United Kingdom. DBAs are strictly regulated in the UK, now including litigation funding agreement contract law. Many UK courts have operated under the assumption that funding of litigation agreements does not fall under the purview of DBAs. PACCAR’s Supreme Court decision has sparked a fervent debate around this topic. Mondaq says that Hong Kong DBA relevancy differs from the UKs DBA approach. Specifically, in Hong Kong, champerty and maintenance are illegal factors that can lead to a fine and prison sentence. It’s important to note that Hong Kong does allow waivers to the general prohibition of litigation investment if: 1. Third parties share a common interest in funding the outcome of a case. 2. Accessible justice is a prime consideration. 3. Insolvency proceedings are necessary.

1 2

Bloomberg Crypto Summit, July 19, 2022 | New York
by Gunnar Larson 04 Dec '24

04 Dec '24

Dear FBI Director: Today we have a huge problem with Jay Clayton (Former Chairman, SEC, Advisory Board Member, Fireblocks; Of Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP) and we will sue out of Asia before he sues out of SDNY. Here is the 2022 Bloomberg Crypto Summit as a piece of evidence. Love, Gunnar ✌️ -- https://drive.google.com/file/d/16qFehYvdK0b1bCtjgJ_GDH__7curSPEt/view?usp=… Building the Future July 19, 2022 | New York REGISTER NOW About the Event 2022 is promising to be a historic year for the global cryptocurrency industry. After starting the year on a high, renewed recession fears in May, coupled with the collapse of stablecoin TerraUSD and its sister currency Luna, rattled the broader crypto markets causing additional drops in coins such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. Then in June we witnessed further price drops, cost-cutting measures, liquidity events, and fortunes wiped away as fast as they were amassed. Despite the recent downdraft, there is no doubt crypto has firmly established itself in the global consciousness, with many characterizing it as no less than a complete revolution of internet commerce and social media. Still critics say it has little to show for all the action except a handful of new money kings and a long list of economic casualties. The truth, however, is always more complicated. For every meme coin rug pull, there is a legitimate project backed by serious people and discerning between the two is often not easy. At the 2022 Bloomberg Crypto Summit, we’ll bring together top names from the worlds of tokens, blockchain, Web3, NFTs, decentralized finance, economics, investing, venture capital, and more to talk about what’s real and what’s speculation, and what smart money should know about the next phases of growth in this ascendant industry. The Macro Forces in 2022 The recent pullback in digital assets has many questioning their confidence in the broader market. Financial markets overall are watching for signs of a recession, inflation is surging, and the world has been thrown further into chaos by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Amid the current environment, are Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies a future store of value for investors or are they a digital gamble during a period of renewed volatility? What can we take away from recent price swings, job cuts, coin collapses and liquidity events? Do the chills of this crypto winter remain or will seasons start to change? The Regulatory Outlook With some clear regulation in the US, the industry could finally achieve acceptance from the mainstream financial establishment 13 years after the first cryptocurrencies emerged. In 2022, we’ve already seen an executive order from US President Joe Biden, additional protections from the SEC, and a bi-partisan bill in Congress proposing a clamp down on the industry, calls for which only grew louder in May in the wake of the spectacular crash of algorithmic stablecoin TerraUSD. So what else is in store for this complex and risky market? Will new rules give increased legitimacy to the crypto industry or dampen the innovative and free-wheeling market the industry is used to? Cryptos and Sustainability The use and mining of cryptos like Bitcoin have a significant environmental impact. The drum is beating louder – sustainability needs to be a pressing part of the conversation. Can the world of crypto really ever be sustainable given its extensive energy consumption? By some measures, the process of generating new bitcoins uses as much electricity annually as small countries. However, for an industry with innovative talent and unlimited capital such as this one, we’ll bring together the bright ideas and big players that aim to bring real solutions to crypto's climate problem. Web 3.0, the Metaverse and Blockchain Gaming The controversial concept of Web3 as the next generation of the internet has fascinated the tech industry and potential investors for more than a year. Is it the truly decentralized idea the crypto ecosystem has dreamt of since its creation, or is it simply a smart re-branding of blockchain technology? Will Web3 take us a step closer to The Metaverse? Are “play to earn crypto” blockchain games poised to dominate the crypto world this year, or will the recent bridge hack endanger the entire ecosystem of Dapps and stall the explosive growth? Is DeFi Going to Weather a 'Crypto Winter?’ Despite it being summer in the US, chills of a crypto winter are being felt and the question is how will DeFi emerge from this season differently than it went in? Who will survive, and who will die? What will happen on the regulatory front, particularly after the TerraUSD fiasco and liquidity events at crypto firms? Can top players emerge to continue to scale this sector and on-board masses of users? Register Now Our Speakers Avery Akkineni President VaynerNFT Sam Bankman-Fried Founder & CEO FTX Kevin Beauregard Founder & CEO Atmos Labs Kathleen Breitman Co-Founder Tezos Kara Calvert Head of US Policy Coinbase Jay Clayton Former Chairman, SEC Advisory Board Member, Fireblocks; Of Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP Lule Demmissie US CEO eToro Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) New York Helen Hai Executive VP & Head of Charity Binance Brittany Kaiser Chair of the Board of Directors Gryphon Digital Mining Mary-Catherine Lader COO Uniswap Labs Chris Larsen Co-Founder & Executive Chairman Ripple Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R) Wyoming Jack Mallers Founder & CEO Strike Sarojini McKenna Co-Founder & CEO Dacoco Co-Founder Alien Worlds Michael Novogratz Founder & CEO Galaxy Digital Eric Peters Founder, CEO & CIO One River Asset Management William E. Quigley Co-Founder, Tether Co-Founder, WAX Matthew Roszak Chairman & Co-Founder Bloq Craig Salm Chief Legal Officer Grayscale Yat Siu Co-Founder & Executive Chairman, Animoca Brands Founder & CEO, Outblaze John Wu President Ava Labs Emily Yang aka pplpleasr Digital Artist

1 13

Donald Trump’s Treasury Nominee Made Big Bets this Year on Chinese Stocks and a Big Short on the U.S. Market
by Gunnar Larson 03 Dec '24

03 Dec '24

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2024/11/donald-trumps-treasury-nominee-made-… Donald Trump’s Treasury Nominee Made Big Bets this Year on Chinese Stocks and a Big Short on the U.S. Market By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: November 25, 2024 ~ Hedge Fund Manager, Scott Bessent, Is Trump’s Nominee for U.S. Treasury Secretary Last Friday, in a flurry of announcements of cabinet nominees, President-elect Donald Trump dropped the name that the entire world had been waiting to hear: his pick for U.S. Treasury Secretary. The man Trump chose, Scott Bessent, is the founder and majority owner of the hedge fund, Key Square Capital Management LLC. If confirmed by the Senate, Bessent will inherit sprawling powers. He will sit at the helm of a federal agency that includes the IRS; the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates national banks and reports on their hundreds of trillions of dollars in derivatives; the Bureau of Engraving and Printing; the U.S. Mint; the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) which is tasked with combating money laundering but has failed miserably in the job; and numerous other units. In addition, legislation passed by Congress will put Bessent in charge of the slush fund known as the Exchange Stabilization Fund; make him Chair of the Financial Stability Oversight Council; and, thanks to stealthy legislation passed during the first Trump administration, the Treasury Secretary is now a permanent member of the National Security Council (NSC). The National Security Council was created in 1947. For the next 70 years the Treasury Secretary was invited to sit on the NSC at the invitation of the President. Donald Trump’s Treasury Secretary in his first term, Steve Mnuchin, who came to that role after serving as National Finance Chairman of Trump’s presidential campaign, became the first Treasury Secretary to be a permanent part of the NSC thanks to a provision added to the 2018 Foreign Investment Regulatory Review Modernization Act. That provision is now codified into law at 50 U.S. Code § 3021. Also, as a result of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation, the Treasury Secretary is permitted to take the Federal Reserve hostage during a financial crisis. Section 1101 of the Dodd-Frank Act provides that the Federal Reserve Board, “may not establish any program or facility under this paragraph without the prior approval of the Secretary of the Treasury.” The referenced paragraph pertains to the Fed’s ability to enact emergency lending facilities during a financial crisis. In other words, assuming Bessent is confirmed, the Federal Reserve must now say “may I” to a career hedge fund manager (who has lots of powerful hedge fund pals on Wall Street) before structuring or implementing any new emergency lending programs. So much for Fed independence. Despite the sprawling duties and demands of the U.S. Treasury Secretary, Trump has chosen a man with no prior government experience. According to the most recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), his hedge fund employs less than 25 people. The U.S. Treasury has more than 100,000 workers. Equally troubling, Bessent’s hedge fund has made large, erratic bets over the past year according to the 13F forms it has filed with the SEC. When Key Square Capital Management filed its 13F form for year-end 2023, it had a portfolio value of $469,992,491. It had taken massive stakes in Chinese stocks – not a particularly patriotic thing to do for an American. Bessent had invested more than $170.7 million in call options in an iShares China Large Cap Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) and more than $121.8 million in call options in KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF, which invests in Chinese Internet companies. The long positions in Chinese stock exposure represented 62 percent of the hedge fund’s positions. Just three months later, when Key Square filed its next 13F form with the SEC for the quarter ending March 31, 2024, the long exposure to Chinese stocks was gone and, instead, Bessent was now shorting the U.S. stock market – also not a very patriotic thing to do. The 13F shows that out of a portfolio of $528,653,631, Bessent had a put option (betting on a decline) in the Nasdaq stock market via Invesco’s QQQ ETF. That put option was valued at $515 million on March 31, representing an astonishing 97 percent of the Key Square portfolio. We don’t know how Bessent’s positions worked out this year because the public isn’t informed as to when positions are bought and sold by hedge funds. But we do know this: in years past, Bessent managed billions of dollars. By June 30 of this year, his 13F showed just $14 million invested. By September 30, Key Square was showing zero invested.

1 1

Re: Meta Platforms, Inc. Board of Directors - USPTO, Digital Assets and Moscow Exchange
by Gunnar Larson 03 Dec '24

03 Dec '24

Ms. Chollet: Thank you again for opening the folder. We have been occupied recently and will fill the folder soon. Thank you, Gunnar On Mon, Oct 21, 2024, 5:01 PM Chollet, Nicki <NChollet(a)ktslaw.com> wrote: > Gunnar, > > I have opened a secure folder for you to put documents in. Please let me > know if you have any problems accessing the folder. > > Best, > > Nicki > > > > Nicki > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > Chollet > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > NChollet(a)ktslaw.com > Kilpatrick Townsend > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > & > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…>Stockton > LLP > > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…>1100 > Peachtree Street NE > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > | > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> Suite > 2800 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > | > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > Atlanta, > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > GA > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > 30309-4528 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%0D%0A+%7C+%0D%…> > *T* 404 815 6010 | *M* 404 906 6948 | *F* 404 541 3387 > My Profile <http://www.ktslaw.com/en/People/C/CholletNicholeDavis> | vCard > <http://www.ktslaw.com/vcard/NicholeDavisChollet.vcf> > > > > *From:* Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 9, 2024 5:12 AM > *To:* Chollet, Nicki <NChollet(a)ktslaw.com> > *Cc:* investor(a)fb.com; Meta_Defensive_Disputes < > Meta_Defensive_Disputes(a)kilpatricktownsend.com>; cypherpunks < > cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org>; Reader, Shaun <sreader(a)curtis.com> > *Subject:* Re: Meta Platforms, Inc. Board of Directors - USPTO, Digital > Assets and Moscow Exchange > > > > **CAUTION: External Email** > > > > > > > > Dear Ms. Chollet: > > > > We have the documents you are looking for concerning the Moscow Exchange. > > > > xNY.io - Bank.org would like to orgaize a secure channel to share this > information with Meta. > > > > How would you like to proceed? > > > > Best, > > > > Gunnar > > > > -- > > Gunnar Larson > > xNY.io - Bank.org > > 917-580-8053 > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 3:16 PM Chollet, Nicki < > NChollet(a)kilpatricktownsend.com> wrote: > > Dear Mr. Larson, > > We have reviewed your correspondence and are still unable to determine the > merits of your claim. Before we can properly evaluate or respond to your > claim, you will need to provide additional details regarding the basis for > your claim and documentation of your relationship with Moscow Exchange or > ownership in the Moscow Exchange mark (for example, trademark registration > certificates evidencing your ownership of the alleged marks in question). > > Meta Platforms reserves all rights. > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > > > *Nichole Davis Chollet **Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP* > Suite 2800 | 1100 Peachtree Street NE | Atlanta, GA > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > 30309-4528 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > > office 404 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > 815 6010 | cell 404 906 6948 | fax 404 541 3387 > nchollet(a)kilpatricktownsend.com | My Profile > <http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/en/People/C/CholletNicholeDavis> | > VCard <http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/vcard/NicholeDavisChollet.vcf> > > *From:* Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> > *Sent:* Thursday, April 7, 2022 2:45 PM > *To:* Chollet, Nicki <NChollet(a)kilpatricktownsend.com>; investor(a)fb.com > *Cc:* Meta_Defensive_Disputes < > Meta_Defensive_Disputes(a)kilpatricktownsend.com>; cypherpunks < > cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org> > *Subject:* Re: Meta Platforms, Inc. Board of Directors - USPTO, Digital > Assets and Moscow Exchange > > > > > > > > Ms. Chollet: > > Should we fly with the Red Cross to Menlo Park? > > Gunnar > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xny.io/> | Bank.org <http://bank.org/>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - > Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship > and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 4:07 PM Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> wrote: > > Ms. Chollet: > > Unfortunately, you receive this message with Meta's board of directors > under delinquency. > > > > Meanwhile, xNY.io would like to learn Meta's approach to USPTO filing > internationally in Jamaica. > > > > Ms. Chollet, Jamaica makes the story even so much more interesting and > important. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Gunnar > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xny.io/> | Bank.org <http://bank.org/>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - > Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship > and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 8:33 PM Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> wrote: > > Dear Ms. Chollet: > > > > Thank you again for your reply on Friday specific to Meta's USPTO mark > application definition exactness to Moscow Exchange. Ms. Chollet, for > reasons you may be aware of, xNY.io must kindly implore Meta's board of > directors to recall all eight USPTO applications by 5:00pm Tuesday April 4, > 2022 EST. > > > > Being very clear, to make sure there is no confusion to xNY.io's honest > aim to protect digital asset innovation, Meta must understand that its > USPTO mark filing is defined exactly to the Moscow Exchange mark. Ms. > Chollet, laws in Russia and the United States often describe principles > relating to integrity and ethical conduct. Anyone who is regulated > (anywhere in the world) is subject to fit and proper requirements that can > be interpreted at will. > > - Meta should understand that international peace and security is far > more important than unnecessarily urging Meta's board of directors to do > the right thing. > - Furthermore, xNY.io submits Citigroup's Metaverse and Money > whitepaper on regulation profiling Mr. Zuckerburg's idea that, "There are > different types of integrity questions." With additional comment from > Nadine Dorries, Member of the United Kingdom Parliament and Secretary of > State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, who says "... Rebranding does > not work. When harm is caused, we are coming after it." > - xNY.io has collated 33 highlights to Citigroup's Metaverse and Money > whitepaper for Meta's board as general reference > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1REoa87GCmt2uhDp7ZYswbTRw4ygQgjsL/view?usp=… > > xNY.io asks not whether Meta's mark would damage the market for the Moscow > Exchange (by, for example, devaluing it through parody or criticism), but > whether it *usurps* the market by offering a competing substitute, > potentially causing significant damage to digital asset purity and > blockchain software technology innovation. > > > > Sending you the very best regards. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Gunnar Larson > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xny.io/> | Bank.org <http://bank.org/>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - > Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship > and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 6:18 PM Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> wrote: > > Mr. Chollet: > > > > It would appear today's correspondence confirms that Meta is > seemingly aware of xNY.io's general concern. > > - Meta has no real advantage questioning xNY.io's relationship with > Moscow Exchange. Understand, xNY.io did not file USPTO application(s) > seeking approval for a mark that is defined near exact to that of Moscow > Exchange. > - Furthermore, on March 17, 2022 Sber announced > <https://www.sberbank.com/news-and-media/press-releases/article?newsID=cd44d…> digital > asset issuance. This is one day before Meta's March 18, 2022 USPTO > submission for mark approval relating to digital assets. > - Meta's board of directors may understand xNY.io's general concern of > coordination and/or lack of coordination that could risk global digital > asset marketplace purity. > - xNY.io asks not whether Meta's mark would damage the market for the > Moscow Exchange (by, for example, devaluing it through parody or > criticism), but whether it *usurps* the market by offering a competing > substitute, potentially causing significant damage to digital asset purity > and blockchain software technology innovation. > > Mr. Chollet, the last point is key to resolving any question of xNY.io's > relationship with Moscow Exchange. xNY.io's March 24, 2022 memo to Meta is > clear and honest. We expect that Meta will not aim to muddy the waters on > this important concern forward. > > > > With all due respect, Meta’s board of directors may understand xNY.io > cannot logically accept that the recent USPTO applications are not a > marketplace manipulation exercise at xNY.io’s overall expense. Meta’s board > of directors must ask itself, to the best of its knowledge, information, > and belief, if further inquiry is reasonable under the circumstances? > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Gunnar Larson > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xny.io/> | Bank.org <http://bank.org/>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - > Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship > and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:21 PM Chollet, Nicki < > NChollet(a)kilpatricktownsend.com> wrote: > > Dear Gunnar, > > > > We write to confirm we represent Meta Platforms, Inc. in connection with > this matter. Please direct all further correspondence on this matter to our > attention. > > > > We received your letter dated March 24, 2022 and your follow up from this > morning. We reviewed your correspondence, however, we are unable to > determine the merits of your claim. Specifically, your letter does not > provide any information regarding a specific application or registration > being asserted or any evidence of your relationship with any entity owning > rights in the alleged Moscow Exchange mark. Before we can properly evaluate > or respond to your claim, you will need to provide additional details > regarding the basis for your claim and documentation of your relationship > with Moscow Exchange or ownership in the Moscow Exchange mark. > > > > Meta Platforms reserves all rights. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > *Nichole Davis Chollet **Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP* > Suite 2800 | 1100 Peachtree Street NE | Atlanta, GA > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > 30309-4528 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > > office 404 > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> > 815 6010 | cell 404 906 6948 | fax 404 541 3387 > nchollet(a)kilpatricktownsend.com | > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Peachtree+Street+NE+%7C+Atlanta,+GA…> My > Profile > <http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/en/People/C/CholletNicholeDavis> | > VCard <http://www.kilpatricktownsend.com/vcard/NicholeDavisChollet.vcf> > > > > *From:* Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> > *Sent:* Friday, April 1, 2022 7:23 AM > *To:* investor(a)fb.com > *Cc:* MetaProsecution <MetaProsecution(a)kilpatricktownsend.com>; > cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org> > *Subject:* Re: Meta Platforms, Inc. Board of Directors - USPTO, Digital > Assets and Moscow Exchange > > > > > > > > Dear Meta Board of Directors: > > It has been eight days since our original correspondence, seeking clarity > between Meta's logo and the Moscow Exchange logo. > > > > Offering Meta the benefit of the doubt, noting this could simply be some > misunderstanding ... We seek Meta's clarification by 5:00pm today, Friday > April 1, 2022. > > > > Respectfully yours, > > > > Gunnar Larson > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xny.io/> | Bank.org <http://bank.org/>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - > Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship > and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 5:20 PM Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> wrote: > > Dear Meta Board of Directors: > > > > Please find the attached memo > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f_fq1GaKNaAUGEyztdm-oMtIuEW2yXj4C5aoN0G…> addressed > to your attention. > > - Today’s correspondence is to kindly submit xNY.io’s overall concern > of Meta Platforms, Inc. and Moscow Exchange mark similarities, > specifically, both marks seemingly resemble a geometric design consisting > of two loops and/orovals touching or intersecting. > > xNY.io kindly asks Meta’s Board to respond by Friday, March 25, 2022 at > 5:00pm EST. > > > > Respectfully yours, > > > > Gunnar Larson > > -- > > *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* > > MSc > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> > - Digital Currency > > MBA > <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> > - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) > > > > G(a)xNY.io > > +1-646-454-9107 > > New York, New York 10001 > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Confidentiality Notice: > This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the > meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section > 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by > the sender of this message. This transmission, and any attachments, may > contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and attorney > work product. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, > copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or > attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Please contact us > immediately by return e-mail or at 404 815 6500, and destroy the original > transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. > ------------------------------ > > > ***DISCLAIMER*** Per Treasury Department Circular 230: Any U.S. federal > tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is > not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of > (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, > marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter > addressed herein. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

1 3

Types of Wire Fraud - Google Search
by Gunnar Larson 30 Nov '24

30 Nov '24

"Wire fraud is a white-collar crime that involves using electronic communications to defraud someone. Here are some examples of wire fraud: Identity theft: Using someone else's personal information to open accounts, make purchases, or apply for loans Phishing: Scammers pretend to be a reputable business to steal credit card numbers or SSNs Employment fraud: Using electronic communications to exploit victims in hiring and job scams Imposter scams: Scammers ask for sensitive information or threaten legal action if victims don't send them money Wire transfer fraud: Using wire, radio, or television communication to defraud someone Social engineering attacks: Online or phone-based attacks to trick people Fake websites: Online stores or websites that are fake Catfishing: Using dating sites or social media to trick someone Social media scams: Scams that take place on social media Instant messaging scams: Scams that take place via instant messaging apps Ponzi schemes: Certain types of Ponzi schemes Bank or credit card fraud: Online or phone-based fraud Insurance fraud: Online applications for insurance Wire fraud is similar to mail fraud, but uses technology instead of mail. " https://www.google.com/search?q=types+of+wire+fraud&oq=types+of+wire+fraud&…

1 5

XNY.IO - BANK.ORG: 108 Highlights to The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) Congressional Budget Justification - Fiscal Year 2025
by Gunnar Larson 30 Nov '24

30 Nov '24

XNY.IO - BANK.ORG: 108 Highlights to The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) Congressional Budget Justification - Fiscal Year 2025: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gNz-SmoUpZdG9XxXlJ2ZUk_npxYK5Nkb/view?usp=… ---- FY 2025 DFC Request Executive Summary Program Budget and Policy Objectives The FY 2025 program budget request of $1,008 million will enable DFC to grow its portfolio by addressing the significant unmet financing needs in priority sectors and regions that align with U.S. development and foreign policy objectives. DFC leverages its resources to unlock private sector growth and contribute to bridging the $40+ trillion infrastructure need in the developing world. Congress created DFC through the BUILD Act in part to offer a better and more sustainable alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). DFC catalyzes investment from the private sector and empowers developing countries, helping them leverage their own resources—including human capital and commodities—to tackle poverty, accelerate sustainable economic growth for underserved populations, and become stable U.S. trading partners. Unlike the development approach of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which often burdens countries with unsustainable sovereign debt and projects that are unsuitable for local conditions, DFC’s efforts are directed toward supporting private entities, mobilizing private capital, and building resilient market economies. DFC emphasizes partnership with the private sector and looks for opportunities to support small businesses and underserved communities, with the goal of sustainable growth. DFC’s financing is a cost-effective way to make significant development and strategic impact around the world because DFC’s private investment model allows each dollar of appropriations to go further. In FY 2023, the agency leveraged $622.6 million in program funding to mobilize more than $9.28 billion in support of 132 projects. In three short years since DFC’s inception in FY 2020, the Corporation has achieved 92 percent growth in annual commitments by dollar value and 65 percent growth in the number of projects committed. To remain a competitive alternative to the PRC and other authoritarian governments, DFC will continue to need robust funding in FY 2025 and beyond to counter the aggressive posture that the PRC has taken in emerging markets. The $1,008 million budget request will support a long-term strategy that DFC has developed to focus on five key sectors that help promote vibrant economies, healthy populations, and stable societies. Administrative Expenses DFC requests $245 million for administrative expenses. This level will support necessary staffing and other support costs to advance U.S. development and strategic foreign policy goals. DFC will use the administrative budget to foster an effective and efficient organization, maintain a fiscally responsible agency, and strengthen its portfolio management capacity. Among other priorities, DFC’s FY 2025 funding will support the expansion of DFC’s overseas presence to continue sourcing quality and impactful projects in local markets, increase underwriting capacity to grow DFC’s portfolio, improve monitoring and evaluation of our developmental impact, and scale mission support functions to meet staff growth and the demands of the program. DFC will use administrative resources to attract and retain the skilled and professional workforce needed to achieve its development and foreign policy objectives. DFC will also direct administrative resources toward expanding stakeholder engagement and improving business development. In addition, administrative resources will enable the Corporation to strengthen management and oversight structures, especially for complex and higher value, higher impact transactions, ensuring DFC can manage risks and monitor results in a manner that maximizes the foreign policy and developmental value of its portfolio.

1 6