By Jonathan R. Sigel, Mirick, O’Connell, DeMallie & Lougee, LLP
Businesses use staffng agencies to supplement their workforce with temporary workers, which saves money when meeting fluctuating production and staffng needs. However, companies can be held liable for the agencies’ violations of law (e.g. wage & hour laws) if the entities are found to be ‘joint employers’ – even when unaware of the violations!
By Nicole Elver, Dressman Benzinger LaVelle psc
The Trump Administration has not yet clearly defined its position on holding individual corporate offcers responsible for the conduct of their organisations. In 2015, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates issued a Memorandum, known as the ‘Yates Memo,’ addressing the Department of Justice’s policy regarding individual accountability for corporate wrong-doing. In it, she stressed that the most effective way to combat corporate wrong-doing is for prosecutors to hold individuals who perpetrate the wrong-doing accountable.
By Katharine Batista, Offt Kurman
Stay Tuned to New Legislation: New legislation is being proposed and advocated for. In fact, some has already passed.
By Edward Tolchin, Offit Kurman
Blockchain companies have raised billions of dollars through Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) this past year. Has it all been legal? Have all the correct taxes been paid? Are all the companies issuing the coins operating legally? The answer may likely be “no” to at least one, or perhaps all three, of these questions. If you are considering a blockchain enterprise and an ICO and want to abide by the law, or want to assure that any company in which you are participating is abiding by the law, here’s a five-part primer on the issues to consider.
By Edward Tolchin, Offit Kurman
Part 2: The Securities Quagmire Continued
On November 1, 2017, the SEC cautioned against illegal ICOs and their “unlawful promotion” by “celebrities and others.” You can read about one such scheme here, promoted by boxer Floyd Mayweather.
By Edward Tolchin, Offit Kurma
Part 3: The Pay-A-Lot-Of-Taxes Rule
There is a straightforward tax rule in the US: the IRS treats the proceeds of an ICO at taxable income. The amount of taxable income is also simple: the value of everything received in the ICO, though an accountant may be able to argue about some deductions for you. So, the general rule is that if you raise a dollar, you pay taxes on the dollar. Or, as the IRS explains, “the basis of virtual currency that a taxpayer receives … is the fair market value of the virtual currency in U.S. dollars as of the date of receipt.”
By Edward Tolchin, Offit Kurman
Part 4: Money Laundering 101
The United States Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) enforces the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and its anti-money laundering regime. Why is that applicable, or at least potentially applicable, to blockchain enterprises conducting ICOs? Simple: The BSA regulates “financial institutions” and neither Congress nor the Treasury has tightly defined that term, so enforcers have flexibility to expand the law to cover some developers of new blockchain token protocols selling tokens to US citizens. In other words, while you may think that a “financial institution” is a bank or broker-dealer, it may be more.
By Edward Tolchin, Offit Kurman
Part 5: Anti-Money Laundering and the Crypto World
As long ago as 2013, FinCEN published guidance on transactions involving cryptocurrency, which FinCEN termed “virtual currency.” BSA regulates, generally, a financial institution’s “currency” transactions, but the BSA and its regulations define “currency” as fiat currency, not virtual currency. There is a subcategory of financial institutions, however, which extends coverage to a “money services business” (MSB), which includes an entity involved in the transmission of “currency … or other value that substitutes for currency.” Because any cryptocurrency, by definition, is a “value that substitutes for” fiat currency, FinCEN has been able to reach the blockchain/token world.
By Marina Sonni, Bussoletti Nuzzo & Associati Avvocati
Since 2012, companies carrying their business in Italy can request and obtain from the Italian Competition Authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato - AGCM) the attribution of the so‐called Legality Rating, an innovative tool based on incentives aimed to increase the competitiveness of companies by promoting ethically principles in corporate conduct (see article 5-ter, Decree-Law 1/2012, converted into Law 62/2012).
By Dr Robin Leon Fritz, FPS
I. INTRODUCTION
Law firms today are businesses operating in a highly fragmented and intensely competitive environment. The market for legal services is a transparent one. Those interested in this market, potential future developments in the market and what firms need to do to successfully position themselves will find a large number of suitable publications. There is also a broad selection of consulting firms and training programs.
