Sunday, September 7, 2014

As the books cook...


As I pointed out recently, there is an endless exchange of insults and accusations taking place on Nalini's PacificaRadiowaves list. It rages still and is as stagnant and downright boring as most of WBAI's program offerings. In the offing, an interest-free loan allegedly earmarked for payment of WBAI's delinquent payroll taxes. Or is it? Like everything else these amateurs get Pacifica into, there is internal suspicion-in this case, we are talking about a loan that might not be as interest free as touted. The interest being personal rather than financial, which actually means financial, but not in any way that might benefit WBAI or Pacifica.  If you haven't already listened to it, I suggest that you use this link to access the audio excerpt from last week's meeting of the WBAI LSB Finance Committee.



The following two observations come from the dying BlueBoard, the first having been posted by R. Paul Martin (who can use his brain when he isn't engaged in frivolous censorship):

We have the below E-mail from faction operative, serial assailant and PNB Secretary Cerene Roberts.

At local Finance Committee meetings earlier this year the WBAI General Manager told us that the tax burden from the severance pay that was finally paid in March amounted to at most $90-95,000. This was the tax on approximately $140,000 in severance payments made to former Staff.

So with Pacifica taking out a loan for $156,000 that must mean that the current PNB is going to be looking to pay off something in the neighborhood of $60,000 in other tax obligations. Interesting that the description of the reason for this loan is only cited as being the WBAI payroll tax obligation. Has WBAI not been paying routine payroll tax obligations? If that's been the case then it hasn't been reported to the local Finance Committee, nor to the NFC. I'm going to have to ask Pacifica and WBAI Management, along with some Directors, about this stuff.

I wonder if anyone is actually expecting Pacifica to pay this loan off?

On a related topic, since Lydia Brazon is an employee of the person offering this loan then why was she allowed to vote on the motion?

Here is Indigo's response to Martin:

As you and others rightly pointed out at the lfb meeting an audio of which has been posted elsewhere, with accounts being a mad jumble of cash and accrual – which factor alone renders them completely useless – and there being no consistent chart of accounts, all numbers are imaginary numbers.
Further, it’s well established on the record that Reimers' numbers are particularly imaginary.

Pacifica’s cfo was unclear in his recent presentation with respect to the numbers, but he seemed to be either uncertain or waffling as to the components making up the amount of the loan said to be needed. He seemed, I think, to be attempting to mumblemunge something about the withholding for the severance per se and quite possibly other overdue employee withholdings.

A few board members at the most recent national meeting expressed their quite reasonable concern as to personal liability if the monies overdue weren't paid immediately – there was a very clear sense of urgency, if not panic.

There may, in fact, also be criminal liability.

As you know, the IRS takes a particularly intolerant view toward fucking with employees' taxes which are to be withheld. They are in all circumstances to be segregated from other funds, never used (not even temporarily) for any other purpose – people literally go to jail for those things, even temporary misallocation if it comes to light. They get very serious, very fast, and the jail time is nontrivial. Of course, it is in a nice, sweet federal low-security prison.

If you’re in any way doubtful, feel free to check with your accountant or attorney.

As for the loan being repaid: One way or another, it will be, if the lender wants the money repaid – you know that.

This is all also grounds for conspiracy charges, of course, but you know that, too, as that's ground WBAI/Pacifica have collectively trod for at least a few years now.

No one’s taken you down so far, so I’m sure it will all be fine :)

Here, supplied by Brian Edwards-Tiekert, is a payroll preview test with some details

And here is a response/request from Tracy Rosenberg. of the opposing faction:


I don't think this sheet is credible. 

According to the NY State Department of Labor, SDI (unemployment) taxes are only due in New York on the first $10,300 in salary. So why does this "practice run" allocate $14K in SUI taxes and another 13K in NY-ER? ? At least $100K of this salary is likely exempt from SDI and NY-ER taxes and I don't see any allocation for that. 

The flat rate federal witholding rate for lump sum severance payments (supplementary wages) is 25%. 25% of $261,000 is $65,000, not $73,000

The figures on the severance pay due were not generated in March. They were presented to AFTRA in June and July of 2013 during the negotiations regarding the layoffs and a final number was settled upon and agreed to. That number was described at the time as approximately $230K, not $262K. The number would not have gone up. The employees worked no hours after July of 2013 so the severance payments due have not changed.

Can we get a list of the amounts due to each of the 19 employees, so someone can realistically check the numbers?

15 comments:

  1. The PINB seems to have said, "Whee!!! Free money!!!" and voted to take this loan without seeing a loan contract that specifies: 1) Rate of repayment, when and how much, 2) Consequence of non-payment according to the scheduled rate of repayment. From what any of us know, it could be OK, also could be a disaster for WBAI. No one will know until a loan contract has been made available for review.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is how these people operate, Ann. It's all about sucking up the money, whether it comes from a foolish foundation or a cancer patient sold false hope.

      I say foolish foundation, because it does not take much brain power to know that lending money to WBAI is tantamount to throwing it into into a bottomless pit. There is a reason why nobody can or is willing to account for WBAI's appropriation of ill-gotten funds. I am tempted to ask that they show all the books, but I realize that these funds often are not to be found in any book.

      Delete
  2. Mind boggling... Utterly mind boggling. I actually sent the link to this recording to an accountant friend of mine who never listens to WBAI. Hopefully, he will listen to this and give me a response. I have a feeling he will ask why Reimers isn't in prison yet. Maybe because he doesn't have the time...

    I want to be able to write checks and not know what money I have. Premiums they never send out costing more than expected? Hmmm... I think some money is getting pocketed.

    SDL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very likely pocketed, certainly misappropriated. I heard somewhere that the baloney sandwiches at Rikers Island are to die for—literally.

      Delete
    2. I was thinking more along the lines of...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Bw1a_O2m48

      SDL

      Delete
  3. As always, I’ll note first that I’m not an attorney.

    That said, they have serious exposure here, both civil and criminal.

    They appear to operate in the ‘it’s not a problem because it’s gone on forever and nothing bad has ever happened’ mode – which is, of course, classic.

    They fail to grasp that these are serious matters with potentially very serious life-altering consequences.

    For example (there are of course many others): Given a look at the books combined with Martin’s (and some other LFB members’) statements in that audio I’d say (again, I’m not an attorney) you’ve got an open and shut conspiracy case on that basis alone.

    The rest would unravel easily, an easy win, and it would all be easy gravy for the prosecutor(s) and/or agent(s) to add to the long lists of wins on their résumé(s), or constitute a nice little early entry in the list of wins for someone new to the game and building up their résumé.

    These folks tend to think that since they haven’t been caught and prosecuted yet all is good. One thing they fail to consider is that if any legal case is brought against them for any other reason, or any meaningful investigation for any other reason, or if they’re forced to seek bankruptcy protection – anything of that sort – it may become apparent en passant in the course of those actions or proceedings.

    Part of their reasoning if it may be called that is that not only has it not gone to hell so far, but that they’re small fry and not worth the trouble.

    They fail to consider that if it comes up incidentally in some other matter it’s actually no trouble at all, it’s a very easy win.

    They’re apparently just fine with that risk – more power to them, then :)

    ~ ‘indigopirate’

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jim Dingeman wants to use the loan to buy premiums.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, trank you for pointing to that. I will post more about this later this morning.

      Delete
    2. [The following statement contains frank language. If you feel you may be offended by such language, please avert your eyes until the following, presumably more gentle, (if only with respect to frank language) statement(s).]

      You are fucking kidding, right?

      ~ 'indigopirate'

      Delete
    3. What would be the point, since they don't deliver them anyway. Just another example of the problem: taking money meant for one thing and spending it on something else. These people just don't get it.

      SDL

      Delete
  5. Oh jeez... Geoff Brady is really way out there tonight, with his guest, Evie Lorgen. If this show had been around in The Sixties, it would have challenged LSD for popularity. Long John nebel couldn't hold a candle to this crap.

    SDL

    ReplyDelete
  6. As I've indicated on the infamous little 'ol blueboard I ran the description provided by Brian on Pacifica Radio Waves past a friend of mine who was CEO of a payroll processing outfit, just to verify that my understanding was correct.

    It was.

    They have criminal exposure.

    ~ 'indigopirate'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In spades, they do. Consider also the "premiums" scams and the marketing fraud involved.

      Delete
    2. Reimers should take a lesson from John Delorean, who was trying to save a sinking business... :)

      SDL

      Delete