Should US investors have rights offshore?
- February 03, 2012
US institutional investors are discouraged to diversify into offshore shares due to the outcome of ... [more]
The third largest fund in the US, the $122 billion New York state pension fund, has recently been embroiled in a tale of greed, fraud, bribery and corruption, with a number of its alternative investment funds allegedly tainted by the wrong-doing of former employees of the state comptroller’s officer, including its former CIO.
In this week’s “Have Your Say” column we ask you to consider the transparency of the investments in this sector, and have your say on how funds can better monitor their investments and the people that manage them.
An ongoing investigation, already two years old, has seen 123 charges laid against former employees of the New York State Comptroller’s office – the sole trustee of the State Pension Fund – including enterprise corruption, money laundering, securities fraud, grand larceny and bribery.
Hank Morris, former chief political adviser, and David Loglisci, former chief investment officer, have been charged with conspiring to sell access to billions of taxpayer dollars in exchange for millions of dollars in kickbacks.
It is alleged that Morris received more than $30 million in fees for himself and his business partners on investments which he had a role in approving, and that the two of them ran a pay-to-play scheme in which investment firms had to kick back part of their fees to get work with the New York pension fund. The payments allegedly went to Morris, who then distributed the money.
In one of the more outlandish allegations, it is alleged Loglisci steered hundred of millions of dollars worth of investment deals to Morris and to favoured firms, and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of benefits in the form of sham “investments” for the production by his brother of a low budget movie, “Chooch”.
According to the New York Attorney General’s office, more than 20 investment deals were allegedly tainted by the defendants kick-back schemes and fraudulent self-dealing, including:
Have your say and leave your comments below
Comments: 0