College Entrance Scam includes former Yale Women's Soccer Coach

surfrider said:
A court of law or this forum? I think you just established the value of your own posts
Click to expand...

Why don’t you look up the legal definition of mail fraud and fraud. it doesn’t matter what this forum thinks... if they are being charged with mail/wire fraud, what is the criteria for mail/wire fraud?

Legal definitions are there for a reason. Singer and the coaches certainly are guilty. They lied to the university to obtain money.

Regarding the parents, they can easily be charged with bribery because a coach (public official) got money in exchange for admission, but re: mail fraud, the prosecution would have to prove they did it to gain financial or property benefit. Prosecution argument would be that they were part of the financial transaction - but they weren’t the financial beneficiaries. It’s an interesting legal case. In a typical mail fraud case, the person that paid the money is the victim...

The big question is, does admission to the university count as financial or property benefit?!? And if so, is it tangible? How much was defrauded?
 
Supermodel56 said:
Why don’t you look up the legal definition of mail fraud and fraud. it doesn’t matter what this forum thinks... if they are being charged with mail/wire fraud, what is the criteria for mail/wire fraud?

Legal definitions are there for a reason. Singer and the coaches certainly are guilty. They lied to the university to obtain money.

Regarding the parents, they can easily be charged with bribery because a coach (public official) got money in exchange for admission, but re: mail fraud, the prosecution would have to prove they did it to gain financial or property benefit. Prosecution argument would be that they were part of the financial transaction - but they weren’t the financial beneficiaries. It’s an interesting legal case. In a typical mail fraud case, the person that paid the money is the victim...

The big question is, does admission to the university count as financial or property benefit?!? And if so, is it tangible? How much was defrauded?
Click to expand...

It's "what is the criterion" or "what are the criteria". Your choice.
 
Mom's plea agreement was to attempted fraud (1349) - her plea letter is available online. The judge did express some concern about the fraud charge. Dad's plea agreement was for money laundering and tax fraud (in addition to attempted fraud, presumably; I have not seen his agreement). The tax fraud is easy since his payment to Singer was to Singer's non-profit. My guess is that part of the plea was to charge only one of them with that count.
 
dk_b said:
Mom's plea agreement was to attempted fraud (1349) - her plea letter is available online. The judge did express some concern about the fraud charge. Dad's plea agreement was for money laundering and tax fraud (in addition to attempted fraud, presumably; I have not seen his agreement). The tax fraud is easy since his payment to Singer was to Singer's non-profit. My guess is that part of the plea was to charge only one of them with that count.
Click to expand...

Yeah... they shouldn’t have pled so early. I don’t think money laundering was the right charge and tax fraud is a stretch... their intent for doing this was not to reduce their tax liability or hide money from the gov.

They shouldn’t have claimed it as a deduction because they received benefit (or intended to receive benefit)... but again, when it comes to charitable donations - you can deduct donations so long as you subtract the benefit you received. For example, if you donate $100 to a charity at a silent auction for an item that’s worth $75 You can only deduct $25. In this case, how do you quantify the value of admission?

Does that also mean the mega donors who donated to the college for a building can’t deduct the gift because their kid got in?

I think if they fought this, at the end of the day at most it would’ve resulted in paying the tax penalties to offset any improper deductions and a fine for bribery w/maybe community service.

The tax part is a very common mistake because charities will simply send you a statement at the end of the year with your total donation and don’t disclose what the value of the benefit is. Most people just turn this doc over to their accountant and they have no idea what it was for and their accountant just deducts it all.
 
I think the tax fraud is what makes this all the more problematic - I have a hard time they did not know what they were doing and there is clear intent behind couching the bribes as charitable donations. It's hard for me to think of it as a common mistake - too much intent behind it but maybe I am giving too much credit to the uber-wealthy to know what they were doing was foul.

(And I do think there is a categorical difference between an above-board donation to the school - while greatly enhancing the possibility of admission, it is not a guarantee. As Singer himself said, that's the back door but it was his side door that was the guarantee.)
 
dk_b said:
I think the tax fraud is what makes this all the more problematic - I have a hard time they did not know what they were doing and there is clear intent behind couching the bribes as charitable donations. It's hard for me to think of it as a common mistake - too much intent behind it but maybe I am giving too much credit to the uber-wealthy to know what they were doing was foul.

(And I do think there is a categorical difference between an above-board donation to the school - while greatly enhancing the possibility of admission, it is not a guarantee. As Singer himself said, that's the back door but it was his side door that was the guarantee.)
Click to expand...

For Singer, it was definitely tax fraud, racketeering, money laundering, etc... the question is for the parents, I don’t think they cared if it was a charity or Singer himself, that’s just what Singer wanted them to do. He was the one hiding the money. They simply didn’t pay taxes on the money they paid Singer and improperly deducted the expense.

Just read that Huffman plead guilty to honest services fraud which I think is the most appropriate charge for most parents - however, if you read the wiki, there’s a lot of debate as to whether this statute is even constitutional as it’s so vague, any type of influence to gain preference could be construed as such. They gave the example of a government official getting a priority reservation or table at a restaurant as violating this law. There are no limits here....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honest_services_fraud
 
I follow and maybe I'm giving them too much credit but I think that they absolutely knew what they were doing was wrong and figured, "what the F? I'm cool also getting a tax benny out of this. I will pay to Singer's charity".

I know some folks who have had contact with Singer up here in the Bay Area (extended) and he did offer legit services. If you considered paying $500K or more for "guarantees", you can't be that naïve to believe it was on the up and up. My guess is the mental calculus was, "well, I can make a $5MM donation to School X and enhance my kid's chance to get admitted or I can pay this guy $500K to guarantee it. If I do this through his charity, I'll take a deduction, too. A good use of my money. And worth the risk." It's only a problem b/c they got caught - just like in so many other contexts when people express remorse (remorse they got caught, not of the act itself).
 
dk_b said:
I follow and maybe I'm giving them too much credit but I think that they absolutely knew what they were doing was wrong and figured, "what the F? I'm cool also getting a tax benny out of this. I will pay to Singer's charity".

I know some folks who have had contact with Singer up here in the Bay Area (extended) and he did offer legit services. If you considered paying $500K or more for "guarantees", you can't be that naïve to believe it was on the up and up. My guess is the mental calculus was, "well, I can make a $5MM donation to School X and enhance my kid's chance to get admitted or I can pay this guy $500K to guarantee it. If I do this through his charity, I'll take a deduction, too. A good use of my money. And worth the risk." It's only a problem b/c they got caught - just like in so many other contexts when people express remorse (remorse they got caught, not of the act itself).
Click to expand...

I’m with you here, 100%. It’s very possible, if not likely, they thought “hey cool, tax deduction too!”

I’m just not sure if that qualifies as tax fraud... It’s murky and just like we’re wrestling with this, it’d probably be hard for a jury to agree beyond reasonable doubt that they did this with that intent.

At the end of the day, you have parents who would do anything to help their kids and lost sight of the line. If nothing else, the kids who worked their asses off and got in on their own merit should be extremely proud of themselves. They are the ones who gained the most because it’s the journey that shapes who you are more than the destination.
 
Supermodel56 said:
I’m with you here, 100%. It’s very possible, if not likely, they thought “hey cool, tax deduction too!”

I’m just not sure if that qualifies as tax fraud... It’s murky and just like we’re wrestling with this, it’d probably be hard for a jury to agree beyond reasonable doubt that they did this with that intent.

At the end of the day, you have parents who would do anything to help their kids and lost sight of the line. If nothing else, the kids who worked their asses off and got in on their own merit should be extremely proud of themselves. They are the ones who gained the most because it’s the journey that shapes who you are more than the destination.
Click to expand...
These parents surely had good lawyers - so you have to assume that they didn't plea out if there wasn't a decent case.

I believe this one could have had to do with their kid. Even though the prosecutors don't seem to be after the kids, in this case, there was a clear path to charge her. The player helped facilitate the conspiracy that the men's coach was a part of. She can't claim that she was not involved.

So I suspect part of the parents settling fast was a guarantee that there would be no charges for their daughter. And they have to cooperate (their daughter too) about the exact details of what happened and who else helped facilitate.
 
Supermodel56 said:
At the end of the day, you have parents who would do anything to help their kids and lost sight of the line.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree with this - I think the parents in this scheme want to convince themselves they were doing it to help their kids but I think it is 100% about the parents' ego. These are wealthy enough people that dropping $1/2 Million is something they can do. Wealth is the ultimate safety-net for any kid so whether that kid attended Yale or USC or Chico State, his/her future is largely secure and the difference of one school over another (and the resulting impact on the kid's future) is marginal at best. So why wouldn't a parent just help the child find the right spot for the kid based on the kid's interest, abilities, drive, future dreams? Because the parents' EGO is all about telling their buddies at the club that "my kid got into Yale. She really is amazing" or "my kid got into USC. He's sure to be a leader. Fight on!"

Would the parents do anything? Yes. But it is for themselves. The kids are afterthoughts.
 
these rich people see elite college admission as jewelry. Just want bragging rights and love to show off their kids.

Immoral as it is, admitting a handful of rich kids whose parents donate money to the school to improve conditions for existing students is ........ugh....ugh...ok as I can see value for the whole. “The whole is greater than it’s parts”.

Trying to get out of paying taxes by deducting these donations that are affecting the “whole” is what I have an issue with.
 
Supermodel56 said:
I’m with you here, 100%. It’s very possible, if not likely, they thought “hey cool, tax deduction too!”

I’m just not sure if that qualifies as tax fraud... It’s murky and just like we’re wrestling with this, it’d probably be hard for a jury to agree beyond reasonable doubt that they did this with that intent.

At the end of the day, you have parents who would do anything to help their kids and lost sight of the line. If nothing else, the kids who worked their asses off and got in on their own merit should be extremely proud of themselves. They are the ones who gained the most because it’s the journey that shapes who you are more than the destination.
Click to expand...

It's tax fraud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top