Articles Posted in State Whistleblower Laws

Published on:

iStock-1350595566-300x174The technology firm was found to have knowingly included false pricing, rebate, and discount information in disclosures to become a GSA Schedule contractor.

NortonLifeLock (Nasdaq: GEN) has been ordered by a federal court to pay $1.7 million in damages for defrauding the U.S. General Services Administration and the State of California in connection with contracts to provide government agencies with technology services and equipment.

A federal judge found following a bench trial that the company, which is now known as Gen Digital, Inc., violated the False Claims Act by knowingly submitting incorrect commercial sales information to the GSA, which is the federal government’s contracting and procurement agency.

Published on:

As the IRS and state tax authorities cracking down on crypto investors and traders, cryptocurrency tax fraud whistleblowers stand to receive significant awardsCryptocurrency tax fraud

Mark A. Strauss Law, PLLC, a whistleblower law firm, is encouraging individuals with information regarding tax evasion in connection with cryptocurrency transactions to contact whistleblower attorney Mark A. Strauss for a free consultation.

In Notice 2014-21, the IRS made clear that convertible digital currencies comprise intangible “property”—just like shares of stock or other financial assets—for tax purposes.   What that means is that when crypto currencies like Bitcoin (BTC), Etherium (ETH), Ripple (XRP) are sold or exchanged—or simply used as a means of payment—the transaction in question is a taxable event.  Capital gains taxes are owed on any price increases realized.  Parties accepting crypto as payment for goods or services must include the value thereof in their gross income.  Moreover, a wide range of transactions involving cryptocurrencies are potentially taxable, including staking, mining, and crypto-to-crypto trading.

Published on:

Insurance fraud (arson)Court holds that whistleblower standing under the Insurance Claims Fraud Prevention Act—like the federal False Claims Act—does not require that the qui tam relator suffered injury

The Supreme Court of Illinois has upheld the qui tam whistleblower provisions of the Illinois Insurance Claims Fraud Prevention Act, affirming the reversal of a trial court decision that would have essentially gutted them. The court agreed that a whistleblower need not have suffered harm to be an “interested person” with standing—and therefore able to sue—under the Act. Instead, the phrase “interested person” in the statute simply refers to a party with material information about insurance fraud who brings a qui tam lawsuit and may be eligible for a whistleblower award, the court held in State ex rel. Leibowitz v. Family Vision Care, LLC.

Rooting out insurance fraud