4 ms·

Martha Stewart was jailed for avoiding a loss of ~$45k USD.

by timack 6y ago

ponker 6y ago
With a net worth of over $300 million.
- chihuahua 6y ago
  I thought it was interesting and inexplicable (to me) that she would even bother buying a handful of shares and then selling them based on insider information. It makes no sense to me that someone who already had that much money would want to waste her time and attention on making a few extra dollars. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying I don't understand why she would even be interested.
  - ponker 6y ago
    1) If you operate in the global super-elite you lose sight of the fact that actions can even have consequences. Especially before ubiquitous cell phone videos, you could scream obscenities at a poor store clerk and nothing would happen to you. There are very few things that $300 million can't buy your way out of. 2) There's a thrill of playing the stock market that's just like the thrill of playing the lottery or poker.
quantumcd 6y ago
I think she was jailed for obstruction of justice / lying to investigators. She had to pay civil penalties for the actual loss avoided.
- timack 6y ago
  True, but she wouldn't have had to lie to investigators if she hadn't tried to dodge the loss.
renewiltord 6y ago
Yeah, and it's weird but it turned out that Al Capone jeopardized his entire empire over just not paying taxes on $100k in income. Strange that despite his incredible business acumen he committed this one small crime.
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  The problem is that when you report the income the IRS wants to know where it came from. If you can't rightly say that's a red flag of its own. So you either admit(or strongly imply) that you run a criminal enterprise or you evade taxes. Hidden option 3 is buying a laundromat and a couple of video game arcades.
  - refurb 6y ago
    I’ve always heard the IRS doesn’t care where your income comes from, just that’s it’s reported. IRS website even talks about how to report “illegal income” and “bribes”. And the IRS has no authority beyond tax collection. They can’t do a (non-tax) criminal investigation. Now, could they flag it for the FBI? Sure.
    - bredren 6y ago
      The IRS accepts payments from those living illegally in the country. Not sure how it is now iirc proving a history of paying taxes was part of a successful naturalization process.
      - refurb 6y ago
        Good example. I had a friend go through naturalization. The illegal presence is dealt with separately, but the tax check is basically "Do you file taxes each year? Do you owe the IRS any money? Ok, you're good."
- dylan604 6y ago
  Except that was the one crime they could get him on. If that's the crime you have the evidence on, that's the crime you prosecute. Once he's in jail, he's in jail.
mc32 6y ago
I think she gets a bad rap. Obviously being wealthy makes her unsympathetic, but that's peanuts. And they 'got' he for 'lying' and not for securities fraud -among the original charges. But the thing is there are much bigger fish to fry --why not go after international investors who have sheel companies within shell companies, etc. But... I mean, I guess this is a career bump or bonus for someone doing investigations.
- mcny 6y ago
  I think Martha Stewart was a classic example of "do not talk to the police" but maybe I was wrong... woeirua said it best https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24622010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24622010 > This family will likely be ruined by these charges. Even if they successfully defend against these charges, the lawyer fees will wreck them financially. > Meanwhile, Mr. Musk has literally gotten a slap on the wrist for multiple flagrant violations of securities law. There are definitely two justice systems in the US. The ultra-rich do not play by the same rules that you and I do. I think I can extend it to Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn. > In December 2017, Flynn formalized a deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller to plead guilty to a felony count of "willfully and knowingly" making false statements to the FBI, and agreed to cooperate with the Special Counsel's investigation. > In January 2020. Flynn moved to withdraw his guilty plea, claiming government vindictiveness and breach of the plea agreement. > The United States Department of Justice announced that it intended to drop all charges against Flynn on May 7, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn What kind of circus is this?
- vmception 6y ago
  The SEC does charge those kind too They're pretty ambitious
- refurb 6y ago
  They do it “pour encourager les autres”.
kens 6y ago
One strange thing about the Martha Stewart incident is that she was a Wall Street stockbroker, from 1967 to 1972. Probably she should have known the rules, but I'm mentioning this because it strikes me as unexpected.
- boulos 6y ago
  That was part of the argument at the time: you aren’t a confused person, you were a registered professional. Clearly, it was also “we would like to make an example of someone high profile to discourage insider trading”.
t0mmyb0y 6y ago
She was jailed for that in a deal and was charged with much more.

Martha Stewart was jailed for avoiding a loss of ~$45k USD.

by timack 6y ago

Martha Stewart was jailed for avoiding a loss of ~$45k USD.

ponker 6y ago

With a net worth of over $300 million.

chihuahua 6y ago
I thought it was interesting and inexplicable (to me) that she would even bother buying a handful of shares and then selling them based on insider information. It makes no sense to me that someone who already had that much money would want to waste her time and attention on making a few extra dollars. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I'm just saying I don't understand why she would even be interested.
- ponker 6y ago
  1) If you operate in the global super-elite you lose sight of the fact that actions can even have consequences. Especially before ubiquitous cell phone videos, you could scream obscenities at a poor store clerk and nothing would happen to you. There are very few things that $300 million can't buy your way out of. 2) There's a thrill of playing the stock market that's just like the thrill of playing the lottery or poker.

quantumcd 6y ago

I think she was jailed for obstruction of justice / lying to investigators. She had to pay civil penalties for the actual loss avoided.

timack 6y ago
True, but she wouldn't have had to lie to investigators if she hadn't tried to dodge the loss.

renewiltord 6y ago

Yeah, and it's weird but it turned out that Al Capone jeopardized his entire empire over just not paying taxes on $100k in income. Strange that despite his incredible business acumen he committed this one small crime.

jschwartzi 6y ago
The problem is that when you report the income the IRS wants to know where it came from. If you can't rightly say that's a red flag of its own. So you either admit(or strongly imply) that you run a criminal enterprise or you evade taxes. Hidden option 3 is buying a laundromat and a couple of video game arcades.
- refurb 6y ago
  I’ve always heard the IRS doesn’t care where your income comes from, just that’s it’s reported. IRS website even talks about how to report “illegal income” and “bribes”. And the IRS has no authority beyond tax collection. They can’t do a (non-tax) criminal investigation. Now, could they flag it for the FBI? Sure.
  - bredren 6y ago
    The IRS accepts payments from those living illegally in the country. Not sure how it is now iirc proving a history of paying taxes was part of a successful naturalization process.
    - refurb 6y ago
      Good example. I had a friend go through naturalization. The illegal presence is dealt with separately, but the tax check is basically "Do you file taxes each year? Do you owe the IRS any money? Ok, you're good."
dylan604 6y ago
Except that was the one crime they could get him on. If that's the crime you have the evidence on, that's the crime you prosecute. Once he's in jail, he's in jail.

mc32 6y ago

I think she gets a bad rap. Obviously being wealthy makes her unsympathetic, but that's peanuts. And they 'got' he for 'lying' and not for securities fraud -among the original charges. But the thing is there are much bigger fish to fry --why not go after international investors who have sheel companies within shell companies, etc. But... I mean, I guess this is a career bump or bonus for someone doing investigations.

mcny 6y ago
I think Martha Stewart was a classic example of "do not talk to the police" but maybe I was wrong... woeirua said it best https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24622010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24622010 > This family will likely be ruined by these charges. Even if they successfully defend against these charges, the lawyer fees will wreck them financially. > Meanwhile, Mr. Musk has literally gotten a slap on the wrist for multiple flagrant violations of securities law. There are definitely two justice systems in the US. The ultra-rich do not play by the same rules that you and I do. I think I can extend it to Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn. > In December 2017, Flynn formalized a deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller to plead guilty to a felony count of "willfully and knowingly" making false statements to the FBI, and agreed to cooperate with the Special Counsel's investigation. > In January 2020. Flynn moved to withdraw his guilty plea, claiming government vindictiveness and breach of the plea agreement. > The United States Department of Justice announced that it intended to drop all charges against Flynn on May 7, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Flynn What kind of circus is this?
vmception 6y ago
The SEC does charge those kind too They're pretty ambitious
refurb 6y ago
They do it “pour encourager les autres”.

kens 6y ago

One strange thing about the Martha Stewart incident is that she was a Wall Street stockbroker, from 1967 to 1972. Probably she should have known the rules, but I'm mentioning this because it strikes me as unexpected.

boulos 6y ago
That was part of the argument at the time: you aren’t a confused person, you were a registered professional. Clearly, it was also “we would like to make an example of someone high profile to discourage insider trading”.

t0mmyb0y 6y ago

She was jailed for that in a deal and was charged with much more.