real veba get your money back, we can help Edit article Published on June 22, 2016 LikedUnlikereal veba get your money back, we can Engage Share All DOL OPA Advanced Search
Search… See more LikeReply 27s Stacey Arenas Assistant Managing Director, Marketing Manager at Vebaplan LLC real veba john koresko sued Published on January 28, 2016 LikedUnlikereal veba john koresko sued3Comment4ShareShare real veba john koresko sued6 Lance Wallach Lance Wallach Managing Director at VEBA LLC. The suit says tax attorney John Koresko retained MMWR to represent him in multiple lawsuits pertaining to his operation of a employer welfare arrangement, REAL VEBA. Koresko and his companies were converting assets held by the REAL VEBA Trust and the Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust (SEWBPT), the suit claims.
The trusts were allegedly meant to hold assets for the participants and their beneficiaries.
Within days of MMWR agreeing to represent Koresko, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a partial summary judgment against Koresko, Jeanne Bonney and PennMont Benefit Services, Inc., ruling that they had transferred trust assets to non-trust accounts.
MMWR did not withdraw its appearance on behalf of any of the parties and did not stop representing Koresko, his alleged co-conspirators or his companies.
MMWR allegedly billed and accepted payments of $1.4 million from the trusts for the representation of Koresko and his alleged co-conspirators.
LikedUnlikereal veba john koresko suedCommentShareShare real veba john koresko sued LikeReply
Economic Satire: Trust” “Penn Mont” “Real Veba” “United Financial Group” “Kenny Hartstein”… Economic Satire: Trust” “Penn Mont” “Real Veba” “United Financial Group” “Kenny Hartstein”… Posted by Lance Wallach at 6/15/2016 06:56:00 AM Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Labels: Expert Witness, Insurance, Lance Wallach, Lance Wallach Expert Witness, Life Insurance, Real Veba Trust
Contact Us (516) 938-5007 IRS 419.Tax Know current issues about protecting your clients. Learn how our Expert Witness Program, and team of top CPA's, Attorney's and retired IRS Agents can assist you. Tax Court Drops the Hammer on Employee Welfare Plan
What To Do Get into compliance so the IRS has no reason to attack you. Sue the agent, promoter, and/or insurance company that got you involved with the plan . How We Help You Get back all the money you put into the plan in the first place and reduce or eliminate the fines and penalties. Hiring Us To Protect You For the past 25 years, successful businesses and individuals have turned to Lance Wallach and his team of accountants, attorneys, ex-IRS agents, and financial experts for assistance, and they are glad they did!
"Protecting Your Clients"
What You Need To Know 419 plans are considered abusive tax shelters, the IRS can impose listed transaction penalties of $100,000 to $200,000 per year for simply having such a plan.
Contact Us (516) 938-5007 IRS 419.Tax Know current issues about protecting your clients. Learn how our Expert Witness Program, and team of top CPA's, Attorney's and retired IRS Agents can assist you. Tax Court Drops the Hammer on Employee Welfare Plan
What To Do Get into compliance so the IRS has no reason to attack you. Sue the agent, promoter, and/or insurance company that got you involved with the plan . How We Help You Get back all the money you put into the plan in the first place and reduce or eliminate the fines and penalties. Hiring Us To Protect You For the past 25 years, successful businesses and individuals have turned to Lance Wallach and his team of accountants, attorneys, ex-IRS agents, and financial experts for assistance, and they are glad they did!
"Protecting Your Clients"
What You Need To Know 419 plans are considered abusive tax shelters, the IRS can impose listed transaction penalties of $100,000 to $200,000 per year for simply having such a plan.
“Most Tax Firms will verbally promise you things that are different from what’s in their contract
Be sure to READ YOUR CONTRACT!”
Verbally guarantee you that they will waive your penalties –These Tax Firms will promise you this over the phone with certainty, but when you read their contract, if they even send you one, it clearly states differently. You will find things like ‘we will attempt to negotiate’ or to ‘please know that obtaining penalty abatement is difficult and many taxpayers do not qualify’. Do not take verbal promises with certainty; they are hoping you do not read the contract. Once the IRS has assessed your penalties, it is very difficult to have the penalties waived, unless the penalty has what is known as “reasonable cause” (Learn More). Verbally guarantee they will stop IRS wage garnishments, bank levies etc. immediately- These Tax Firms make you believe that they have some special method to stop IRS wage garnishments and bank levies. The truth is, in their contract, again if they even send you one; it clearly states that in order to stop levies you must be in compliance with IRS regulations. For example, you will need to have filed all tax returns and may need additional financial statements. They verbally portray the idea that giving them the Power of Attorney will mysteriously solve everything. They say they have a Flat Fee and can start with a minimal down payment and then small monthly payments and everything will be done for you immediately-The Flat Fee is all of a sudden an “Estimated fee”. They are offering small monthly payments making you think they will start your case and get everything resolved right away. Yet their contract states the work will not begin until 30% to 100% of the estimated fee is fully paid. Read your contract!
VEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards. Edit article Published on July 18, 2017 LikedUnlikeVEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards.1Comment0ShareShare VEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards.0 Lance Wallach Lance Wallach Business Owner at National Offices of Lance Wallach 3rd Circuit Affirms Judgment In Enforcement Action Against Fiduciary
(April 12, 2016, 10:44 AM EDT) -- PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge did not err in imposing liability on an individual fiduciary for breaching his duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act or in denying the fiduciary his request for a new trial, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 5 (Secretary United States Department of Labor v. John J. Koresko V, Nos. 15-2470, -3141, 3rd Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6227).
Never trust someone who takes an hour to text you back, but when you're with them they always have their phone in their hand.;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;tears have no weight but they carry heavy feelings. http://www.seoexpertssite.com/
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (2004 Jobs Act) imposed new penalties on taxpayers who fail to adequately disclose “reportable transactions” to the IRS. Before the 2004 Jobs Act, taxpayers were generally only penalized for not disclosing a reportable transaction if the IRS was successful in challenging the transaction. Accordingly, many taxpayers were not overly concerned about disclosing these transactions, especially if the tax benefits of the transaction were clearly legitimate and/or there was little chance of a successful IRS challenge.
In an attempt to curb the use of abusive tax shelters, the 2004 Jobs Act enacted new, stiff penalties for failure to adequately disclose a reportable transaction to the IRS on a return due after October 22, 2004 (the date the 2004 Jobs Act was signed into law). Under the 2004 Jobs Act, natural persons who failed to disclose a reportable transaction to the IRS were subject to a $10,000 penalty. Other nonreporting taxpayers were subject to a $50,000 penalty. The penalties increased to $100,000 and $200,000, respectively, for natural persons and other taxpayers who failed to disclose a reportable transaction that is a listed transaction.
In an effort to achieve proportionality between the penalty and the tax savings resulting from the reportable transaction, the 2010 Small Business Act revised the penalty structure for all reportable transaction penalties assessed after December 31, 2006. Under the Small Business Act, a participant in a reportable transaction who fails to disclose is subject to a penalty equal to 75 percent of the reduction in tax reported on the participant’s tax return as a result of participation in the transaction. Regardless of the amount determined under the general rule, the penalty for each such failure may not exceed $10,000 in the case of a natural person and $50,000 for all other taxpayers. For listed transactions, the maximum penalties are increased to $100,000 and $200,000, respectively, for natural persons and other taxpayers. The Small Business Act also establishes a minimum penalty with respect to failure to disclose a reportable or listed transaction. The minimum penalty is $5,000 for natural persons and $10,000 for all other taxpayers.
If a reportable transaction is not disclosed and results in an understatement of tax, an additional penalty in the amount of 30 percent of the understatement may be assessed.
If the reportable transaction is disclosed, taxpayers are still subject to a 20 percent penalty on the understatement of tax. In addition to the penalties, the statute of limitations is suspended for any listed transaction that is not disclosed.
Unlike most other penalties, the law significantly limits the IRS’s ability to rescind or abate these penalties for reasonable cause or other reasons. Accordingly, taxpayers should be extra vigilant in identifying and disclosing these transactions. Taxpayers should not fall into the trap of thinking reportable transactions are limited to abusive tax shelters. The definition of a reportable transaction is very broad and includes many transactions that are routine and perfectly legitimate.
The IRS has additional information available on its website (including Treasury Regulations discussed herein).
Reportable Transactions Defined Transactions of Interest Listed Transactions Tax-Exempt Entities Material Advisors It is very important that reportable transactions be adequately disclosed and material advisors timely register transactions as required and maintain sufficient documentation. A breach of these rules can result in significant penalties.
On July 23, 2013, the same date that the Court enjoined the Koresko Defendants2 in Perez v. Koresko, No. 09-cv-988 (Docket No. 436), from, among other things, taking any action that would reduce the value of the underlying policies, the Pennsylvania Debtors filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.3 Each petition was signed by Mr. John J. Koresko in his capacity as "debtor." See, e.g., In re Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust, No. 13-bk-16441 (Docket No. 1).
On July 23, 2013, the same date that the Court enjoined the Koresko Defendants2 in Perez v. Koresko, No. 09-cv-988 (Docket No. 436), from, among other things, taking any action that would reduce the value of the underlying policies, the Pennsylvania Debtors filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.3 Each petition was signed by Mr. John J. Koresko in his capacity as "debtor." See, e.g., In re Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust, No. 13-bk-16441 (Docket No. 1).
as an expert witness lance wallach has never lost www.lance wallach.com Raymond Ankner says he moved his company to Naples seven years ago for the balmy weather. Raymond Ankner says he moved his company to Naples seven years ago for the balmy weather. Here’s an option for entrepreneurs looking to control insurance premiums: Start your own insurance company.
RELATED HEADLINES: Predictions for 2014 Out of the zone Buying brokers Find the veins
Raymond Ankner, a veteran of the insurance industry, is helping closely held, medium-sized companies create their own insurance companies and self-insure. Besides controlling costs, there are some estate-planning reasons to do so as well, he says.
Setting up your own insurance company — “captive insurance,” in
VEBA Koresko get ur money back Published on April 6, 2018 Edit article View stats Lance Wallach Lance Wallach Abusive tax shelters, 419, section 79, 412i micro captive insurance, VEBA, expert witness, author, speaker 811 articles Unlike 1 Comment 0
A Pennsylvania federal judge did not err in imposing liability on an individual fiduciary for breaching his duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act or in denying the fiduciary his request for a new trial, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 5 (Secretary United States Department of Labor v. John J. Koresko V, Nos. 15-2470, -3141, 3rd Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6227).
real veba get your money back, we can help
ReplyDeleteEdit article
Published on June 22, 2016
LikedUnlikereal veba get your money back, we can
Engage
Share
All DOL OPA Advanced Search
Search… See more
LikeReply
27s
Stacey Arenas
Assistant Managing Director, Marketing Manager at Vebaplan LLC
real veba john koresko sued
Published on January 28, 2016
LikedUnlikereal veba john koresko sued3Comment4ShareShare real veba john koresko sued6
Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach
Managing Director at VEBA LLC.
The suit says tax attorney John Koresko retained MMWR to represent him in multiple lawsuits pertaining to his operation of a employer welfare arrangement, REAL VEBA. Koresko and his companies were converting assets held by the REAL VEBA Trust and the Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust (SEWBPT), the suit claims.
The trusts were allegedly meant to hold assets for the participants and their beneficiaries.
Within days of MMWR agreeing to represent Koresko, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a partial summary judgment against Koresko, Jeanne Bonney and PennMont Benefit Services, Inc., ruling that they had transferred trust assets to non-trust accounts.
MMWR did not withdraw its appearance on behalf of any of the parties and did not stop representing Koresko, his alleged co-conspirators or his companies.
MMWR allegedly billed and accepted payments of $1.4 million from the trusts for the representation of Koresko and his alleged co-conspirators.
LikedUnlikereal veba john koresko suedCommentShareShare real veba john koresko sued
LikeReply
419 Problems
ReplyDeleteEconomic Satire: Trust” “Penn Mont” “Real Veba” “United Financial Group” “Kenny Hartstein”…
Economic Satire: Trust” “Penn Mont” “Real Veba” “United Financial Group” “Kenny Hartstein”…
Posted by Lance Wallach at 6/15/2016 06:56:00 AM
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Share to Pinterest
Labels: Expert Witness, Insurance, Lance Wallach, Lance Wallach Expert Witness, Life Insurance, Real Veba Trust
Contact Us
ReplyDelete(516) 938-5007
IRS 419.Tax
Know current issues about protecting your clients. Learn how our Expert Witness Program, and team of top CPA's, Attorney's and retired IRS Agents can assist you.
Tax Court Drops the Hammer on Employee Welfare Plan
What To Do
Get into compliance so the IRS has no reason to attack you. Sue the agent, promoter, and/or insurance company that got you involved with the plan .
How We Help You
Get back all the money you put into the plan in the first place and reduce or eliminate the fines and penalties.
Hiring Us To Protect You
For the past 25 years, successful businesses and individuals have turned to Lance Wallach and his team of accountants, attorneys, ex-IRS agents, and financial experts for assistance, and they are glad they did!
"Protecting Your Clients"
What You Need To Know
419 plans are considered abusive tax shelters, the IRS can impose listed transaction penalties of $100,000 to $200,000 per year for simply having such a plan.
Contact Us
ReplyDelete(516) 938-5007
IRS 419.Tax
Know current issues about protecting your clients. Learn how our Expert Witness Program, and team of top CPA's, Attorney's and retired IRS Agents can assist you.
Tax Court Drops the Hammer on Employee Welfare Plan
What To Do
Get into compliance so the IRS has no reason to attack you. Sue the agent, promoter, and/or insurance company that got you involved with the plan .
How We Help You
Get back all the money you put into the plan in the first place and reduce or eliminate the fines and penalties.
Hiring Us To Protect You
For the past 25 years, successful businesses and individuals have turned to Lance Wallach and his team of accountants, attorneys, ex-IRS agents, and financial experts for assistance, and they are glad they did!
"Protecting Your Clients"
What You Need To Know
419 plans are considered abusive tax shelters, the IRS can impose listed transaction penalties of $100,000 to $200,000 per year for simply having such a plan.
“Most Tax Firms will verbally promise you things that are different from what’s in their contract
ReplyDeleteBe sure to READ YOUR CONTRACT!”
Verbally guarantee you that they will waive your penalties –These Tax Firms will promise you this over the phone with certainty, but when you read their contract, if they even send you one, it clearly states differently. You will find things like ‘we will attempt to negotiate’ or to ‘please know that obtaining penalty abatement is difficult and many taxpayers do not qualify’. Do not take verbal promises with certainty; they are hoping you do not read the contract. Once the IRS has assessed your penalties, it is very difficult to have the penalties waived, unless the penalty has what is known as “reasonable cause” (Learn More).
Verbally guarantee they will stop IRS wage garnishments, bank levies etc. immediately- These Tax Firms make you believe that they have some special method to stop IRS wage garnishments and bank levies. The truth is, in their contract, again if they even send you one; it clearly states that in order to stop levies you must be in compliance with IRS regulations. For example, you will need to have filed all tax returns and may need additional financial statements. They verbally portray the idea that giving them the Power of Attorney will mysteriously solve everything.
They say they have a Flat Fee and can start with a minimal down payment and then small monthly payments and everything will be done for you immediately-The Flat Fee is all of a sudden an “Estimated fee”. They are offering small monthly payments making you think they will start your case and get everything resolved right away. Yet their contract states the work will not begin until 30% to 100% of the estimated fee is fully paid. Read your contract!
VEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards.
ReplyDeleteEdit article
Published on July 18, 2017
LikedUnlikeVEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards.1Comment0ShareShare VEBA, John Koresko, get ALL your money back from the insurance company, sue the bastards.0
Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach
Business Owner at National Offices of Lance Wallach
3rd Circuit Affirms Judgment In Enforcement Action Against Fiduciary
(April 12, 2016, 10:44 AM EDT) -- PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge did not err in imposing liability on an individual fiduciary for breaching his duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act or in denying the fiduciary his request for a new trial, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 5 (Secretary United States Department of Labor v. John J. Koresko V, Nos. 15-2470, -3141, 3rd Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6227).
(Decision available. Document #54-160413-101Z.)
veba audits, 4322 views, 55 likes
ReplyDeleteEdit article
Published on July 14, 2017
Never trust someone who takes an hour to text you back, but when you're with them they always have their phone in their hand.;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;tears have no weight but they carry heavy feelings.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.seoexpertssite.com/
Reportable Transactions
ReplyDeleteThe American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (2004 Jobs Act) imposed new penalties on taxpayers who fail to adequately disclose “reportable transactions” to the IRS. Before the 2004 Jobs Act, taxpayers were generally only penalized for not disclosing a reportable transaction if the IRS was successful in challenging the transaction. Accordingly, many taxpayers were not overly concerned about disclosing these transactions, especially if the tax benefits of the transaction were clearly legitimate and/or there was little chance of a successful IRS challenge.
In an attempt to curb the use of abusive tax shelters, the 2004 Jobs Act enacted new, stiff penalties for failure to adequately disclose a reportable transaction to the IRS on a return due after October 22, 2004 (the date the 2004 Jobs Act was signed into law). Under the 2004 Jobs Act, natural persons who failed to disclose a reportable transaction to the IRS were subject to a $10,000 penalty. Other nonreporting taxpayers were subject to a $50,000 penalty. The penalties increased to $100,000 and $200,000, respectively, for natural persons and other taxpayers who failed to disclose a reportable transaction that is a listed transaction.
In an effort to achieve proportionality between the penalty and the tax savings resulting from the reportable transaction, the 2010 Small Business Act revised the penalty structure for all reportable transaction penalties assessed after December 31, 2006. Under the Small Business Act, a participant in a reportable transaction who fails to disclose is subject to a penalty equal to 75 percent of the reduction in tax reported on the participant’s tax return as a result of participation in the transaction. Regardless of the amount determined under the general rule, the penalty for each such failure may not exceed $10,000 in the case of a natural person and $50,000 for all other taxpayers. For listed transactions, the maximum penalties are increased to $100,000 and $200,000, respectively, for natural persons and other taxpayers. The Small Business Act also establishes a minimum penalty with respect to failure to disclose a reportable or listed transaction. The minimum penalty is $5,000 for natural persons and $10,000 for all other taxpayers.
If a reportable transaction is not disclosed and results in an understatement of tax, an additional penalty in the amount of 30 percent of the understatement may be assessed.
If the reportable transaction is disclosed, taxpayers are still subject to a 20 percent penalty on the understatement of tax. In addition to the penalties, the statute of limitations is suspended for any listed transaction that is not disclosed.
Unlike most other penalties, the law significantly limits the IRS’s ability to rescind or abate these penalties for reasonable cause or other reasons. Accordingly, taxpayers should be extra vigilant in identifying and disclosing these transactions. Taxpayers should not fall into the trap of thinking reportable transactions are limited to abusive tax shelters. The definition of a reportable transaction is very broad and includes many transactions that are routine and perfectly legitimate.
The IRS has additional information available on its website (including Treasury Regulations discussed herein).
Reportable Transactions Defined
Transactions of Interest
Listed Transactions
Tax-Exempt Entities
Material Advisors
It is very important that reportable transactions be adequately disclosed and material advisors timely register transactions as required and maintain sufficient documentation. A breach of these rules can result in significant penalties.
On July 23, 2013, the same date that the Court enjoined the Koresko Defendants2 in Perez v. Koresko, No. 09-cv-988 (Docket No. 436), from, among other things, taking any action that would reduce the value of the underlying policies, the Pennsylvania Debtors filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.3 Each petition was signed by Mr. John J. Koresko in his capacity as "debtor." See, e.g., In re Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust, No. 13-bk-16441 (Docket No. 1).
ReplyDeleteOn July 23, 2013, the same date that the Court enjoined the Koresko Defendants2 in Perez v. Koresko, No. 09-cv-988 (Docket No. 436), from, among other things, taking any action that would reduce the value of the underlying policies, the Pennsylvania Debtors filed voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.3 Each petition was signed by Mr. John J. Koresko in his capacity as "debtor." See, e.g., In re Single Employer Welfare Benefit Plan Trust, No. 13-bk-16441 (Docket No. 1).
ReplyDeleteas an expert witness lance wallach has never lost www.lance wallach.com
ReplyDeleteRaymond Ankner says he moved his company to Naples seven years ago for the balmy weather.
Raymond Ankner says he moved his company to Naples seven years ago for the balmy weather.
Here’s an option for entrepreneurs looking to control insurance premiums: Start your own insurance company.
RELATED HEADLINES:
Predictions for 2014
Out of the zone
Buying brokers
Find the veins
Raymond Ankner, a veteran of the insurance industry, is helping closely held, medium-sized companies create their own insurance companies and self-insure. Besides controlling costs, there are some estate-planning reasons to do so as well, he says.
Setting up your own insurance company — “captive insurance,” in
VEBA Koresko get ur money back
ReplyDeletePublished on April 6, 2018
Edit article
View stats
Lance Wallach
Lance Wallach
Abusive tax shelters, 419, section 79, 412i micro captive insurance, VEBA, expert witness, author, speaker
811 articles
Unlike 1
Comment
0
A Pennsylvania federal judge did not err in imposing liability on an individual fiduciary for breaching his duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act or in denying the fiduciary his request for a new trial, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 5 (Secretary United States Department of Labor v. John J. Koresko V, Nos. 15-2470, -3141, 3rd Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6227).
(Decision available. Document #54-160413-101Z.)