sum2llc

assessing risk|realizing opportunities

Sustainable Economics

We have put our good mother through a lot over the past few million years. Ever since we walked out of the great rift the biospheres dominant species has really left a mark. I know that mark is but a tiny spec on the archaeological record of the earth which spans a few billion years but our impact is unmistakable.
 
I guess it started with the invention of hand tools, fire, wheels, shelter construction, water cultivation and agriculture. You can’t forget hunting in packs, weaponry, domestication of animals, speech, art and writing. A consciousness of a portfolio of skills, specialization, division of labor and the ability to discern exchange value within the community birthed a notion of governance. Our social nature was crowned with our ability to transmit craft and knowledge to successive generations, assuring continuity and cohesion with a common history and a well articulated cosmology. Put it all together and I think you got your basic modern Homo sapien.
Oh yeah, we also developed a psychology, an ego, that incorporates the primacy of ourselves and our selfish needs. It rationalizes and guides our interactions with nature, transforming the intention of our labor into a transaction that alters the conditions of the environment. It also serves as indisputable empirical evidence of the master species, elevated above all others as time marks the progress and dominion of the human race.
 
Our dominion has been codified into our sacred literature. Our creation stories and cosmic mission statements expressly state to exercise our dominion over nature, to propagate the species and to be fruitful and multiply. The screaming unencumbered id, left to its own devises, unchecked in the grand supermarket. We human’s have succeeded beyond our wildest expectations and the species continues to be fruitful and multiplying. 
 
We sojourn on, notching the ladder of history with marks of our progression through the ages. Along the way we Cro-Magnons expropriated the Neanderthals and moved into their Mediterranean digs complete with fire pits, burial chambers and the best take on modern art until Picasso came along.
 
I guess that’s the point. Our survival comes at the expense of other creatures and things. I’m no Malthusian, but Tom Friedman’s flat world is getting crowded.    And as we celebrate the 44th Earth Day a midst the greatest die off of species since mankind coronated himself as master and commander of all things earth; it may be time to consider how our dominion is hampering the well being of the lesser flora and fauna kingdoms and what we can do to begin the practice of a more sustainable economics.
 
When I look at Las Vegas, I behold a garish mecca of capitalism on steroids.  I’m overwhelmed by the banality of the the things we so highly esteem. A community venerated and propped up on the foundation of vice, hedonism and the radical pursuit of money. Unbridled development of a crystal neon city constructed in the middle of a desert, recklessly consumes water and energy resources and misdirects human capital to maintain the facade of an unsustainable economy. 
 
Phoenix poses the same paradox. Darling child of the credit boom, Phoenix is a city consuming itself. The rising threat of climate change, blistering heat, dwindling water supplies and raging haboobs would give any urban planner reason to pause. A bustling city of many millions of striving citizens consuming energy, water and human capital built on the unsustainable foundation of excessive consumption and an unrealistic valuation of the capital required to maintain it. 
 
The explosion of fracking natural gas deposits in the Marcellus Shale formation is another example of sacrificing long term sustainability for the immediacy of shareholder returns. The Marcellus Deposit has proven reserves that only last a decade. As evidenced by the hyper development occurring in North Dakota,  economies tied to resource extraction are prone to experience classic boom bust cycles. During boom times all is well. But the good times don’t last all that long and communities are left in the wake of the bust cycle to deal with the aftermath. 
 
The Keystone XL Pipeline and the rapid expansion of the LNG extraction industries are being touted as the foundation of American energy independence. But this energy resource extracts a high cost on the land and its natural bounty. It poses significant risk to water aquifers, air quality, wildlife and the storage of waste-water byproducts will present long term remediation challenges to communities for many decades after the last well is capped.
 
Our new found fortune of LNG comes with a significant opportunity cost to develop alternative energy sources as it continues to tether our economic dependence on a dwindling supply of fossil fuels. Perpetuating this dependence also requires us to expend huge sums of money on the military. The political arrhythmia in the Ukraine and the keen interest of the United States has much to do with the changing political economy of fossil fuels and the protection and accession of markets.
 
Sustainability requires a new approach to the emerging realities of the global political economy. Recognition that competing interests bring important capital to the table, and that all must be recognized and fully valued in the new algorithms of sustainability is the keystone and pipeline of sustainability. The practice of unfettered development is unsustainable. Regulation, arbitration and revitalization cannot be sacrificed at the altar of laissez-faire politics that only serves to widen the wealth gap at tremendous social cost. The politicization of economic policy cannot continue to be beholden to rampant monetization. Sustainability is the creation of long term value for a diverse community of stakeholders. It needs to become our guiding mantra as the global population approaches 8 billion souls. 

Happy Earth Day.

Music Selection:

Risk: fracking, political, water, air, war, opportunity cost, renewal clean energy, climate change

April 23, 2014 Posted by | business continuity, commodities, compliance, economics, environment, military, political risk, politics, psychology, regulatory, risk management, social unrest | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

To Regulate or Not To Regulate: Is That a Question?

Last year during the height of the banking crisis I remember Larry Kudlow stating that the US market has a choice. It could pursue the EU model of high regulated markets producing low consistent returns or the American model of less regulation and volatile cycles of high risk and potentially higher returns. If the sole focus of government was the peace of mind and well being of investors Mr. Kudlow’s observation would be valid. Government however must consider a larger community of stakeholders in its scope of concern. Regulatory oversight, the harmony of capital and labor and the incubation of an economic culture that is favorable to and supportive of SMEs are the critical questions confronting all governments particularly those in developed economies.

The EU’s social democratic economic models embody the best and worst aspects of these issues. The social democratic state attempt to combine entrepreneurial impulses of capitalism with the management and administration of social welfare for all its citizens. Democratically “elected administrators” use the apparatus of the state to facilitate and manage the competing interests of capital and labor, free markets and regulation while seeking to balance an entrepreneurship friendly culture with long term sustainability.

Yesterday a toxic tsunami of aluminum sludge coated 16 square miles of pristine Hungarian countryside. It is a telling example of a severe risk event that confronts modern life. A lassiaz-faire approach to the event is not viable and offers no solace to those harmed by this assault.  Communities cannot be asked to suffer a market response that promises to correct the problem of the next instance of this event.  The construction of better berms and the implementation redundant protection devises to safeguard against this risk  for the future is little compensation to those who were killed, injured and lost property or livelihoods as a result of MAL Zrt poor risk management practices.

Better to suffer a regulatory initiative that is based on an understanding of an economic ecosystem as complex and inhabited by competing interests of diverse stakeholders.  The ecosystem including the shareholders of MAL Zrt, residents of the surrounding communities, plant workers (also community residents), small businesses (SME) and down stream farmers making a living on arable land and access to clean water all have a stake,  albeit competing,  in the safe operation of the plant. The possibility that the toxic sludge may find its way into the Danube poses a threat to the water supply of other eastern European nations.  This elevates this catastrophic event to other EU jurisdictions. The inter-dependencies and interconnectedness of the pan-regional and larger global economy requires vigorous regulatory safeguards, mitigation initiatives and enforcement response.

The true cost of this event is potentially staggering. It supersedes the narrow interest and economic value of shareholders rights and capital invested in MAL Zrt.  Bad economic behavior exemplified by BP’s Horizon Deepwater failure to install redundant protective devises to keep production costs to a minimum, ended up costing BP shareholders and Gulf Coast stakeholders dearly.

State intervention in markets and the reemergence of managed economies is a reality of the global economy. The “managed economy” of the Peoples Republic of China places western style “free market” economies at a disadvantage. The managers of the PRC efficiently deploy and manage capital, effect trade and market protections and scrupulously manage currency valuation. It has created enormous social wealth for China and has contributed to its rapid rise as a preeminent world power.  China’s rise requires better coordination of private capital and government to marshal a competitive market response to the challenges posed by managed economies to free and open markets of western democracies. The massive pools of capital deployed by sovereign wealth funds of oil producing regencies and the growing insurgency and power of underground economic activity also pose significant challenges to the viability of unregulated markets.

America’s free market model that eschewed regulation since the 1980’s evolved into a mercantile economy with a weakened economic base. The outsourcing of manufacturing infrastructure loosened free market impulses that left in its place a debtor nation whose warped economy depended on housing/commercial real estate construction (collateral creation/securitization), credit marketing, retailing and a service sector that was designed to support the new economic paradigm. It is a model that has proven itself to be wasteful, costly and unsustainable.

Deregulation has led to the dislocation of the capital markets from the real economy. It has contributed to the massive disparities in social wealth and a crumbling infrastructure.  Milton Friedman’s mistaken belief that free market impulses would preserve infrastructure investment has been proven incorrect. Ironically this has added to the government’s burden to provide social assistance to segments of the population disenfranchised from economic participation. Some believe that the basis for the prosecution of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are economic stimulus programs designed to keep the economy going due to the vacuum created by the loss of manufacturing.

China’s example nor the resurrection of the soviet socialist model is not a desirable alternative for western democratic capitalist societies. Centralized control and state economic planning is rife with inefficiencies. State run economies threatens liberty, stifles innovation and encumbers economic dynamism. The virtues of capitalism (innovation, dynamism, liberty) needs to be encouraged and blended into the new economic reality of a highly dependent and interconnected world that requires cooperation, coexistence, sustainability, fair asset valuation, and the equitable sharing of resource and responsibility. SME’s are at the forefront of innovation, value creation and dynamism and will play a leading role in the creation of new social-political values as sources of sustainable growth and wealth in the emerging economic paradigm.

You Tube Music Video: Chevy Chase and Mike Myers: I’m Looking Over a Four Leaf Clover

Risk: regulatory, capitalism, sustainability

October 6, 2010 Posted by | capitalism, compliance, economics, infrastructure, labor | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Deloitte’s Nine Principles of Risk Intelligence

risk_triangleIs your business risk intelligent?  A review of  the following principles offers company executives a concise outline of objectives central to a risk intelligent enterprise.   Deloitte recently published White Paper, Effective Integration, Enhanced Decision Making, The Risk Intelligent Tax Executive outlined the following nine fundamental principles.

Nine fundamental principles of a Risk Intelligence Program

1. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, a common definition of risk, which addresses both value preservation and value creation, is used consistently throughout the organization.

2. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, a common risk framework supported by appropriate standards is used throughout the organization to manage risks.

3. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, key roles, responsibilities, and authority relating to risk management are clearly defined and delineated within the organization.

4. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, a common risk management infrastructure is used to support the business units and functions in the performance of their risk responsibilities.

5. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, governing bodies (e.g., boards, audit committees, etc.) have appropriate transparency and visibility into the organization’s risk management practices to discharge their responsibilities.

6. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, executive management is charged with primary responsibility for designing, implementing, and maintaining an effective risk program.

7. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, business units (departments, agencies, etc.) are responsible for the performance of their business and the management of risks they take within the risk framework established by executive management.

8. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, certain functions (e.g., Finance, Legal, Tax, IT, HR, etc.) have a pervasive impact on the business and provide support to the business units as it relates to the organization’s risk program.

9. In a Risk Intelligent Enterprise, certain functions (e.g., internal audit, risk management, compliance, etc.) provide objective assurance as well as monitor and report on the effectiveness of an organization’s risk program to governing bodies and executive management.

Sum2’s business mission is to help small and mid-sized enterprises (SME) become risk intelligent enterprises.  Sum2’s product suites enables managers to implement sound risk management practices guided by these principles of risk intelligence.  We firmly believe that consistent practice of sound risk management  holds the key to profitability and long term sustainable growth.

Sum2’s Profit|Optimizer product series provides mangers a consistent framework and scoring methodology to assess, aggregate and price risk, identify actions, assign responsibility and align business functions to mitigate risks and achieve business goals.

Sum2’s IARP, helps managers to assess and manage the rising threat of tax risk exposures that present significant compliance risk to the enterprise.

We welcome an opportunity to help you erect a risk intelligence enterprise.

Risk: risk management, business intelligence, compliance, sustainability, profitability

November 11, 2009 Posted by | branding, business continuity, compliance, IARP, operations, regulatory, reputational risk, risk management, SME, sound practices, Sum2 | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Banking is Getting Expensive

screamThe severity of the banking crisis is evident in the 95 banks the FDIC has closed during 2009.  The inordinate amount of bank failures has placed a significant strain on the FDIC insurance fund.  The FDIC insurance fund protects bank customers from losing their deposits when the FDIC closes an insolvent bank.

The depletion of the FDIC Insurance fund is accelerating at an alarming rate.  At the close of the first quarter, the FDIC bank rescue fund had a balance of $13 billion.    Since that time three major bank failures, BankUnited Financial Corp, Colonial BancGroup and Guaranty Financial Group depleted the fund by almost $11 billion.   In addition to these three large failures over 50 banks have been closed during the past six months.   Total assets in the fund are at its lowest level since the close of the S&L Crisis in 1992.   Bank analysts research suggests that FDIC may require $100 billion from the insurance fund to cover the expense of an additional 150 to 200 bank failures they estimate will occur through 2013.  This will require massive capital infusions into the FDIC insurance fund.  The FDIC’s goal of maintaining confidence in functioning credit markets and a sound banking system may yet face its sternest test.

FDIC Chairwoman  Sheila Bair is considering a number of options to recapitalize the fund.  The US Treasury has a $100 billion line of credit available to the fund.    Ms. Bair is also considering a special assessment on bank capital and may ask banks to prepay FDIC premiums through 2012.  The prepay option would raise about $45 billion.  The FDIC is also exploring capital infusions from foreign banking institutions, Sovereign Wealth Funds and traditional private equity channels.

Requiring banks to prepay its FDIC insurance premiums will drain economic capital from the industry.  The removal of $45 billion dollars may not seem like a large amount but it is a considerable amount of capital that banks will need to withdraw from the credit markets with the prepay option.  Think of the impact a targeted lending program of $45 billion to SME’s could achieve to incubate and restore economic growth.  Sum2 advocates the establishment of an SME Development Bank to encourage capital formation for SMEs to achieve economic growth.

Adding stress to the industry, banks remain obligated to repay TARP funds they received when the program was enacted last year.  To date only a fraction of TARP funds have been repaid.  Banks also remain under enormous pressure to curtail overdraft, late payment fees and reduce usurious credit card interest rates.  All these factors will place added pressures on banks financial performance.  Though historic low interest rates and cost of capital will help to buttress bank profitability, high write offs for bad debt, lower fee income and decreased loan origination will test the patience of bank shareholders.   Management will surely respond with a new pallet of transaction and penalty fees to maintain a positive P&L  statement.  Its like a double taxation for citizens.  Consumers saddled with additional tax liabilities to maintain a solvent banking system will also incur higher fees by their banks so they can repay the loans extended by the US Treasury to assure a well functioning financial system for the republic’s citizenry.

Risk: bank failures, regulatory, profitability, political, recession, economic recovery, SME

September 29, 2009 Posted by | banking, commerce, compliance, credit crisis, economics, FDIC, government, regulatory, risk management, SME, sovereign wealth funds, TARP, Treasury | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Tax Man Cometh

taxmanThe IRS has reached agreement with UBS over disclosure of the identity of US citizens holding private bank accounts with the firm in Switzerland.  The agreement calls for UBS to release the names of 4,450 clients who are suspected of using the bank to hide assets and avoid taxation.   UBS has private banking relationships with with over 52,000 US citizens with assets approximating $15 billion.

Private banking is an important pillar of the Suisse economy.  This action may pose a significant threat to the Suisee banking industry.   Compliance with the IRS request for the names of private bank account holders  damages the venerated wall of secrecy Suisse banks employ to attract assets and clientele.  Other EU banking centers like Luxembourg and Liechtenstein may also feel pressure to comply with news standards of transparency and disclosure.  This may have the effect of driving investors to seek more exotic havens to park assets.  Offshore domiciles in the  Indian Ocean, Southeast Asia and Latin America may benefit from this action.  It may also add to the risk of investors seeking safe havens for their assets.

For US taxpayers, the resolution signifies that the IRS is serious about its intention to ramp up enforcement of the tax code.  The IRS has enhanced its focus on US citizens and corporations utilizing foreign banks and offshore investment vehicles.  The agency is concerned that investment products and financial services offered by foreign banks have enabled US citizens and corporations to avoid tax liabilities.  Products such as credit cards, hedge funds and other investment partnerships are coming under the exacting microscope of the IRS.

The IRS is under pressure to enforce compliance with federal tax statutes.  The US Treasury coffers are seriously depleted given all the stimulus and economic recovery expenditures.  The IRS is mandated to assure that compliance is adhered to so taxpayers pay taxes on all legal capital gains and income.  As this blog reported, the IRS has developed an Industry Focus Issue, (IFI) audit strategy that  profiles investment partnerships and other corporations that use offshore domiciles to harbor assets.  IFI guides field audit personnel through a risk based assessment of investment partnerships.  The IFI aggregates and ranks  Three Tiers of high risk tax compliance issues.  Examiners will conduct rigorous reviews of these issue sensitive factors.  Many of the factors concern the recognition of income and assets in custody outside of the US and repatriation of revenue derived in foreign domiciles.

Sum2 has published a product, IRS Audit Risk Program (IARP) that guides corporate tax managers and tax professionals through a risk assessment of their exposure to IFI risk factors.  The IARP is a strategic tool that corporate tax professionals utilize to score risk exposures, determine mitigation actions, estimate remediation expenses and manage tax controversy defense strategies.  The IARP is available for purchase on Amazon.com.

The IRS action against UBS is the opening salvo in the new era of enhanced compliance.  UBS is a marquee brand that indicates that the IRS is serious about compliance. As a result of the UBS settlement other Suisse banks are coming forward to make voluntary disclosures about US citizens suspected of tax-evasion.  Those bank  include, Credit Suisse, Julius Baer Holding, Zurcher Kantonalbank and Union Bancaire Privee.  UBS has  previously turned over approximately 250 names to the IRS.  It is believed that the IRS has issued indictments to 150 people from that list of names.

This high profiled action against UBS has helped to publicize the IRS amnesty program that expires September 23rd.  In an effort to encourage Americans to voluntarily disclose information about  accounts they illegally withheld, the IRS created an amnesty program. Under the amnesty program, any taxpayer who successfully completes the requirements will not be criminally prosecuted for their acts.  More details on the IRS amnesty program can be found here on the FIND LAW website.

Risk: tax, reputation, compliance,


August 21, 2009 Posted by | compliance, CTA, hedge funds, IARP, IRS, regulatory, reputational risk, Tax, Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

IRS Audit Risk Survey: Final Results

tax-returnSum2 is please to report the final results of the IRS Audit Risk Survey for Fund Managers. Sum2 has commissioned the survey to determine financial services industry awareness and readiness for IRS audit risk factors. The survey sought to determine industry awareness and readiness to address IRS Industry Focus Issue (IFI) risk exposures for hedge funds, private equity firms, RIAs, CTAs and corporations using offshore structures.

Survey Background

Due to the pressing revenue requirements of the United States Treasury and the need to raise funds by recognizing new sources of taxable revenue; hedge funds, private equity firms, CTA’s and other corporations that utilize elaborate corporate structures, engage in sophisticated transactions and recognize uncommon forms of revenue, losses and tax credits will increasingly fall under the considered focus of the IRS.

Since 2007 the IRS began to transition its organizational posture from a benign customer service resource to a more activist posture that is intent on assuring compliance and enforcement of US tax laws. Specifically the IRS has invested in its Large and Mid-Size Business Division (LMSB) to enhance its expertise and resources to more effectively address the tax audit challenges that the complexity and sophistication of investment management complexes present. The IRS has developed its industry issue competencies within its LMSB Division. It has developed a focused organizational structure that assigns issue ownership to specific executives and issue management teams. This vertical expertise is further enhanced with issue specialists to deepen the agencies competency capital and industry issue coordinators that lends administrative and agency management efficiency by ranking and coordinating responses to specific industry issues. IRS is building up its portfolio of skills and industry expertise to address the sophisticated agility of hedge fund industry tax professionals.

To better focus the resources of the agency the IRS has developed a Three Tiered Industry Focus Issues (IFI). Tier I issues are deemed most worthy of in depth examinations and any fund management company with exposure in these areas need to exercise more diligence in its preparation and response. Tier I issues are ranked by the IRS as being of high strategic importance when opening an audit examination. This is followed by Tier II and Tier III focus issues that include examination issues ranked according to strategic tax compliance risk and significance to the market vertical. Clearly the IRS is investing significant organizational and human capital to address complex tax issues of the industry. The IRS is making a significant institutional investment to discover potentially lucrative tax revenue streams that will help to address the massive budget deficits of the federal government.

Survey Results

The survey was open to fund management executives, corporate treasury, tax managers and industry service providers. CPAs, tax attorneys, compliance professionals, administrators, custodians and prime brokers were also invited to participate in the study. The survey was viewed by 478 people. The survey was completed by 43% of participants who began the survey.

Geographical breakdown of the survey participants were as follows:

  • North America 73%
  • Europe 21%
  • Asia 6%

The survey asked nine questions. The questions asked participants about their awareness of IFI that pertain to their fund or fund management practice and potential mitigation actions that they are considering to address audit risk.

The survey posed the following questions:

  • Are you aware of the Industry Focus Issues (IFI) the IRS has developed to determine a fund managers audit risk profile?
  • Are you aware of the organizational changes the IRS has made and how it may effect your firms response during an audit?
  • Are you aware of the Three IFI Tiers the IRS has developed to assess a funds audit risk profile?
  • Are you aware of how the Three IFI Tiers may affect your audit risk exposures?
  • Have you conducted any special planning sessions with internal staff to prepare for IFI audit risk exposures?
  • Has your outside auditor or tax attorney notified you of the potential impact of IFI risk?
  • Have you held any special planning meetings with your outside auditors or tax attorneys to mitigate IFI risk?
  • Have you had meetings with your prime brokers, custodians and administrators to address the information requirements of IFI risk?
  • Have you or do you plan to communicate the potential impact of IFI risk exposures to fund partners and investors?

Survey highlights included:

  • 21% of survey participants were aware of IFI
  • 7% of survey respondents planned to implement specific strategies to address IFI audit risk
  • 6% of survey respondents have received action alerts from CPA’s and tax attorney’s concerning IFI audit risk
  • 26% of survey respondents plan to alert fund investors to potential impact of IFI audit risk

Recommendations

Sum2 believes that survey results indicate extremely low awareness of IFI audit risk. Considering the recent trauma of the credit crisis, sensational fraud events and the devastating impact of last years adverse market conditions; fund managers and industry service providers must remain vigilant to mitigate this emerging risk factor.

These market developments and the prevailing political climate surrounding the financial services sector will bring the industry under heightened scrutiny by tax authorities and regulatory agencies. Unregulated hedge funds may be immune from some regulatory issues but added compliance and disclosure discipline may be imposed by significant counter-parties, such as prime brokers and custodians that are regulated institutions.

Market and regulatory developments has clearly raised the tax compliance and regulatory risk factors for hedge funds and other fund managers. Issues concerning FAS 157 security valuation, partnership domiciles and structure, fund liquidation and restructuring and complex transactions has increased the audit risk profile for the industry. Significant tax liabilities, penalties and expenses can be incurred if this risk factor is not met with a well considered risk management program.

In response to this industry threat, Sum2 has developed an IRS Audit Risk Program (IARP) that prepares fund management CFOs and industry service tax professionals to ascertain, manage and mitigate its IRS risk exposures within the Three IFI Tiers. The IARP provides a threat scoring methodology to ascertain risk levels for each IFI risk factor and aggregates overall IFI Tier exposures. The IARP uses a scoring methodology to determine level of preparedness to meet each of the 36 audit risk factors.

The IARP helps managers to outline mitigation actions required to address audit risk factors and determine potential exposures of each risk. The IARP calculates expenses associated with mitigation initiatives and assigns mitigation responsibility to staff members or service providers. The IARP links users to issue specific IRS resources, forms and documentation that will help you determine an IFI risk relevancy and the resources you need to address it.

The IARP will prove a valuable resource to help you manage your response to a tax audit. It will also prove itself to be a critical tool to coordinate and align internal and external resources to expeditiously manage and close protracted audit engagements, arbitration or litigation events. The IARP product is a vertical application of Sum2’s Profit|Optimizer product series.

The Profit|Optimizer is a C Level risk management tool that assists managers to uncover and mitigate business threats and spot opportunities to maintain profitability and sustainable growth.

The IARP product is available for down load on Amazon.com.

The product can also be purchased with a PayPal account: Sum2 e-commerce

Sum2 wishes to thank all who anonymously took part in the survey.

If you have any questions or would like to order an IARP please contact Sum2, LLC at 973.287.7535 or by email at customer.service@sum2.com.

April 20, 2009 Posted by | compliance, CPA, CTA, FASB, hedge funds, IARP, IRS, legal, NP, private equity, regulatory, risk management, Tax, Treasury | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

IRS Audit Risk Survey for Hedge Funds (Interim Update 3)

irs-and-capitol21The IRS has developed a methodology to determine an audit risk profile for hedge funds, private equity firms, CTAs, RIAs and corporations using offshore structures. Sum2 has commissioned a survey to determine financial services industry awareness and readiness for IRS audit risk factors.

The survey seeks to determine industry awareness of IRS Industry Focus Issue (IFI) risk exposures for hedge funds, private equity firms, RIAs, CTAs and corporations using offshore structures. The survey is open to fund management executives, corporate treasury, tax managers and industry service providers.

CPAs, tax attorneys, compliance professions, administrators, custodians and prime brokers are also welcomed to participate in the study. The study’s purpose is to determine the level of industry preparedness and steps fund managers are taking to mitigate potential exposures to IFI audit risk.

Sum2 will share weekly interim results of the surveys findings. The survey will run for four weeks. This is the second weekly report.

Survey Highlights

  • 76% of survey respondents are from North America
  • 6% are from Great Brittan
  • 13% are from other EU countries
  • 5 % are from Asia
  • 85% of respondents indicate an unawareness of IFI
  • 11% of respondents indicate they plan to alert investors to IFI impact
  • 10% of respondents indicated that they initiated actions to address IFI
  • 8% of respondents indicated that they have received action alerts from industry service providers

    Take the Survey

    We invite you to participate in a survey to determine industry awareness of IRS Industry Focus Issue risk for hedge funds, private equity firms, RIAs, CTAs and offshore corporate structures.

    The survey can be accessed here: IRS Audit Risk Survey for Hedge Funds

    The survey is open to fund management executives and industry service providers to the industry. CPAs, tax attorneys, compliance professions, administrators, custodians, consultants and prime brokers are welcome to take the study. The study’s purpose is to determine the level of industry preparedness and steps fund managers are taking to mitigate potential exposures to IRS Industry Focus Issue risk.

    Sum2 is looking to use the survey to better respond to the critical needs of fund managers and the alternative investment management industry by improving our just released IRS Audit Risk Program (IARP).

    This survey asks ten questions. The questions concern your awareness of IFI and how it pertains to your fund or fund management practice.  The survey seeks to determine overall industry risk awareness, potential exposure to IFI risk factors and any mitigation initiatives you plan to address IFI risk factors.

    It should take no more then 5 minutes to complete the questionnaire. Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There are no foreseeable risks associated with this project. However, if you feel uncomfortable answering any questions, you can withdraw from the survey at any point. It is very important for us to learn your opinions. Your survey responses will be strictly confidential and data from this research will be reported only in the aggregate. Your information will be coded and will remain confidential.

    If you have questions at any time about the survey or the procedures, you may contact Sum2 at 973.287.7535 or e-mail us at customer.service@sum2.com

    Thank you for your participation.

    March 29, 2009 Posted by | compliance, hedge funds, IARP, IRS, risk management | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

    IRS Has Hedge Funds in its Crosshairs

    irs_logo-bwThe earths axis seemed to have tilted way off course last year. The global capital and credit markets crashed. Venerated banking institutions moved dangerously close to insolvency forcing mergers with better capitalized banks. The bulge bracket investment banking institutions disappeared. Some were acquired by traditional banks, others converted to a bank holding company structure; while others declared bankruptcy. In response the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department and SEC initiated unprecedented concerted interventionist actions. The passage of EESA legislation and the implementation of the $750bn TARP program are the first in many expected moves by the government to maintain the solvency of the banking system as a national economic security issue. In addition to these initiatives the government has also passed a massive $750bn economic stimulus bill to kick start the economy. All told over $1.5 trillion dollars has recently been appropriated by the federal government to address the economic crisis. This massive capital infusion has ratcheted up the federal budget deficit. It will be incumbent on the Treasury Department and the IRS to make a concerted effort to uncover new sources of revenue to finance these massive spending programs.

    Hedge funds, private equity firms, CTA’s and other corporations that utilize elaborate corporate structures, engage in sophisticated transactions and recognize uncommon forms of revenue, losses and tax credits will increasingly fall under the considered focus of the IRS. Times have changed and so has the posture and practice of the IRS. The agency is transitioning its organizational posture by moving away from a benign customer service resource and assuming the form of an activist body that is intent on assuring compliance and enforcement of US tax laws. In particular it is building up its expertise and resource to more effectively address the audit challenges the complexity and sophistication hedge funds present.

    The IRS has developed its industry issue competencies. It has developed a focused organizational structure that assigns issue ownership to specific executives and issue management teams. This vertical expertise is further enhanced with issue specialists to deepen the agencies competency capital and industry issue coordinators that lends administrative and agency management efficiency by ranking and coordinating responses to specific industry issues. Clearly the IRS is building up its portfolio of skills and industry expertise to address the sophisticated agility of hedge fund industry tax professionals.

    To better focus the resources of the agency the IRS has developed a Three Tiered Industry Issue Focus. Tier I issues are deemed most worthy of in depth examinations and any fund management company with exposure in these areas need to exercise more diligence in its preparation and response. Tier I issues are ranked by the IRS as being of high strategic importance when opening an examination of hedge funds and other sophisticated corporate structures. This is followed by Tier II and Tier III focus areas that include significant examination issues but are ranked according to the agencies strategic significance of the market vertical. Clearly the IRS is investing significant organizational and human capital to address an industry that will no longer fly beneath the agencies radar. This institutional investment will be called upon to generate a considerable return on the investment in the hopes that the discovery of lucrative tax revenue streams will help to pay down the massive spending deficits of the federal government.

    This development has clearly raised the tax compliance and regulatory risk factors for hedge funds and other fund managers. Significant tax liabilities, penalties and expenses can be incurred if this risk factor is not met with well a well considered risk management program. In response to this industry threat, Sum2 has developed an IRS Audit Risk program that allows a hedge fund CFO to quickly ascertain its IRS risk exposures within the Three Industry Focus Tiers.

    The IRS Audit Risk program provides a threat scoring methodology to ascertain level of risk within each Tier item and aggregates overall Tier exposures. The product also uses a scoring methodology to determine your level of preparedness to meet the audit risk, mitigation actions required and potential exposures of the risk. The IRS Audit Risk calculates expenses associated with mitigation initiatives and assigns mitigation responsibility to staff members or service providers. The IRS Audit Risk links to issue specific IRS resources and documentation that will help you determine if the issue is a audit risk factor for your firm and the resources you will need to addresses it.

    The IRS Audit Risk for Hedge Funds product is a vertical application of Sum2’s Profit|Optimizer product series. The Profit|Optimizer is a C Level risk management tool that assists managers to uncover and mitigate business threats and spot opportunities to maintain profitability and sustainable growth.

    The IRS Audit risk for Hedge Funds product is available for down load on Amazon.com.

    The product can be purchased here: Sum2 e-commerce

    You Tube Music Video: Beatles, Taxman

    Risk: tax liability, penalties, reputation

    March 3, 2009 Posted by | compliance, EESA, hedge funds, IRS, legal, NP, off shore, private equity, regulatory, reputational risk, risk management, SEC, TARP | , , , , | Leave a comment

    PCA Goes To The Lonesome Valley

    PCA RIP

    PCA RIP

    On Monday came the not surprising news that Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) has filed for bankruptcy.

    The practice of selling food additives laced with salmonella bacteria makes it difficult to win back the trust of customers that had been so grievously violated.

    PCA’s actions to knowingly ship contaminated products that have resulted in nine deaths and have sickened 637 people in 44 states. PCA’s salmonella laced peanut paste has contaminated 2,226 processed food products. A full list of recalled products can be found on the FDA website. These potentially criminal acts by PCA’s management has demolished the PCA corporate brand making it impossible to continue as a going concern.

    The Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing will liquidate the company. This strategy will protect the PCA shareholders in the privately held firm from the significant legal liability that this event has created. It does not however protect PCA’s company management and accomplices that knowingly shipped contaminated products from potential criminal prosecution. Criminal persecution of those involved should be pursued and if anyone is found guilty punishment must be severe.PCA released its contaminated product into a large and extensive supply chain. Many leading brand food processing manufacturers that use PCA’s peanut paste as an ingredient in their packaged goods products have suffered severe reputational damage to their product and company brands. Though PCA’s corporate liability may be mitigated with the bankruptcy filing, aggrieved consumers will continue to have have legal recource by filing suits against the major consumer product companies that are still in business. This could make for a record breaking class action product liability suit.

    Unfortunately this tragic occurrence could have been prevented. PCA’s actions demonstrate a disturbing ambivalence toward effective sound corporate governance practices. Companies that willingly sacrifice risk management and ethical business practices for the sake of short term profits consistently undermine corporate sustainability. All may not result in a dramatic corporate implosion like PCA. But ultimately the song of corporate liquidations remains the same. Unemployment for workers, aggrieved consumers, community desertion, tortured consciences and and in some instances criminal prosecution.

    RIP PCA.

    You Tube Video: Fairfield Four, Lonesome Valley

    Risk: corporate goverance, ethics, risk management, legal

    February 18, 2009 Posted by | associations, compliance, manufacturing, Peanut Corporation of America, product liability, supply chain, sustainability | , , , , , | Leave a comment