SEC Uncovers Halliburton May Have Rigged Contracts

[LowerCaseRepublican]

http://halliburtonwatch.org/news/bid_rigging.html

 

In a filing with the SEC, the company said "information has been uncovered" that former employees of KBR

"may have engaged in coordinated bidding with one or more competitors on certain foreign construction projects

and that such coordination possibly began as early as the mid-1980s...."

 

"Coordinating" with competitors to secure contracts with foreign governments is anticompetitive and a violation

of U.S. antitrust law. The practice, known as "bid rigging," is punishable by criminal fines and denial of future

contracts with the U.S. government.

 

KBR became a subidiary of Halliburton in 1998 when Cheney orchestrated the merger with Dresser Industries.

 

Not a swipe @ Cheney since KBR didn't get in the Halliburton boat until '98 but still interesting corporate crime watch nonetheless.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Sure, Cheney and the larger Haliburton entity should be held accountable for what KBR did before the acquisition, but there are other issues that should bear scrutiny. First, why did Cheney not do his homework at the time of the merger, shed light on the dubious practices of KBR and walk away from the deal? More likely, Cheney/Haliburtin DID do their homework and DID find slime under the rocks but chalked it up to business as usual and proceeded with the merger.

 

As for today, how Cheney and the Administration facillitates or impedes an investigation will be interesting. I personally don't have an issue with the $7 billion no-bid Iraq contract per se, because I think there was justification for sole-source contracting there. How they have handled things since the contract award is another matter entirely. But I do take issue with Cheney's extreme lack of forthcoming on how much contact he has had with Haliburton since 2000. Clearly he still has a major economic interest in the company, he has standing options to buy up more stock, etc., and because of the potential conflict of interest there needs to more transparency in that relationship and there is not.

 

I'm sure Cheney will be asked if he knew anything about KBR's business practices prior to the Haliburton acquisition. There sure as hell had better not be any invoking of executive privilege and whatnot to allow him to stay quiet on the issue.

 

An interesting side note is that Haliburton was poised to sell off KBR in 2003.

[TheBigHurt35]

Sure, Cheney and the larger Haliburton entity should be held accountable for what KBR did before the acquisition, but there are other issues that should bear scrutiny.  First, why did Cheney not do his homework at the time of the merger, shed light on the dubious practices of KBR and walk away from the deal?  More likely, Cheney/Haliburtin DID do their homework and DID find slime under the rocks but chalked it up to business as usual and proceeded with the merger.

 

Unless KBR engaged in these illegal practices AFTER being purchased by Haliburton, there's no legal basis for holding Haliburton responsible. And what makes you think that Haliburton could've uncovered any evidence of bid rigging?

 

I realize that you dislike Cheney but, come on. Let's be reasonable.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Anyone else read the title of the thread and wonder why the Southeastern Conference was investigating Halliburtin? lol

[Queen Prawn]

Unless KBR engaged in these illegal practices AFTER being purchased by Haliburton, there's no legal basis for holding Haliburton responsible.  And what makes you think that Haliburton could've uncovered any evidence of bid rigging?

 

I realize that you dislike Cheney but, come on.  Let's be reasonable.

 

Any company that is "buying" or "mergering" does a great deal of investigative work to uncover any "loose threads" in regards to said company on the block.

 

You would be surprised at how much investigating a company does into another company that they are looking to buy or merger with - at least the ones that I have seen happen.

[Texsox]

Unless KBR engaged in these illegal practices AFTER being purchased by Haliburton, there's no legal basis for holding Haliburton responsible.  And what makes you think that Haliburton could've uncovered any evidence of bid rigging?

 

I realize that you dislike Cheney but, come on.  Let's be reasonable.

 

Think about it first.

 

KBR violates a bunch of laws then is purchased by Halliburton. Are you saying no one should be held accountable? KBR doesn't exist anymore, it IS Haliburton.

 

So a company could break a bunch of laws, then sell, and be off the hook?

[soxman352000]

Anyone else read the title of the thread and wonder why the Southeastern Conference was investigating Halliburtin? lol

Me too, god we are stupid

[TheBigHurt35]

Think about it first.

 

KBR violates a bunch of laws then is purchased by Halliburton. Are you saying no one should be held accountable? KBR doesn't exist anymore, it IS Haliburton.

 

So a company could break a bunch of laws, then sell, and be off the hook?

 

So, how would have Haliburton known that KBR violated those laws? The SEC didn't know until just recently and it was allegedly going on since the mid-80's.

 

The people who voilated the laws at KBR should be held accountable. Unless these laws were violated after the Haliburton purchase, Haliburton has nothing to do with it.

 

Any company that is "buying" or "mergering" does a great deal of investigative work to uncover any "loose threads" in regards to said company on the block.

 

And what would this "investigative work" shown? For all we know, Arthur Anderson was cooking KBR's books.

 

Until someone can show me some concrete evidence that Haliburton actually DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL, this is just a partisan witch hunt.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

So, how would have Haliburton known that KBR violated those laws?  The SEC didn't know until just recently and it was allegedly going on since the mid-80's.

 

The people who voilated the laws at KBR should be held accountable.  Unless these laws were violated after the Haliburton purchase, Haliburton has nothing to do with it.

And what would this "investigative work" shown?  For all we know, Arthur Anderson was cooking KBR's books.

 

Until someone can show me some concrete evidence that Haliburton actually DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL, this is just a partisan witch hunt.

 

Yes, the SEC with its Bush appointees is on a partisan witch hunt.

[TheBigHurt35]

Yes, the SEC with its Bush appointees is on a partisan witch hunt.

 

No, I was talking about the people who are trying to hold Cheney responsible for what KBR did prior to 1998. And I don't mean you.

[Texsox]

So, how would have Haliburton known that KBR violated those laws?  The SEC didn't know until just recently and it was allegedly going on since the mid-80's.

 

The people who voilated the laws at KBR should be held accountable.  Unless these laws were violated after the Haliburton purchase, Haliburton has nothing to do with it.

And what would this "investigative work" shown?  For all we know, Arthur Anderson was cooking KBR's books.

 

Until someone can show me some concrete evidence that Haliburton actually DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL, this is just a partisan witch hunt.

 

KBR doesn't exist as a separate entity anymore! KBR = Halliburton. To hold KBR, you have to hold Halliburton. They are one in the same.

Legally, when you buy them, they are now you. The KBR that may have violated the law doesn't exist. Further, when you buy something for billions of dollars you spend millions of dollars on forensic accounting to track every penny going back a long time. That is why these mergers take months and months to complete.

 

The SEC didn't investigate them, but Halliburton sure as hell did. Would you spend a billion dollars without investigating?

 

Corporate responsibility does not stop somewhere below the top. Parent companies are help responsible for the actions of their subsidiaries. When they bought the company, they bought the problems as well.

 

I love the logic of your last line.

Until someone can show me some concrete evidence that Haliburton actually DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL, this is just a partisan witch hunt.

Until there is a "witch hunt" or investigation, there is no evidence. DUHH

[TheBigHurt35]

KBR doesn't exist as a separate entity anymore! KBR = Halliburton. To hold KBR, you have to hold Halliburton. They are one in the same.

Legally, when you buy them, they are now you. The KBR that may have violated the law doesn't exist. Further, when you buy something for billions of dollars you spend millions of dollars on forensic accounting to track every penny going back a long time. That is why these mergers take months and months to complete.

 

We seem to be confusing companies with individuals. The individuals who worked at KBR and allegedly committed these crimes should be punished if they are found guilty. The people who worked at Haliburton prior to the purchase of KBR have nothing to do with it and, therefore, should not be prosecuted.

 

The SEC didn't investigate them, but Halliburton sure as hell did. Would you spend a billion dollars without investigating?

 

You're assuming that bid rigging is easy to discover and that the individuals involved didn't go out of their way to destroy the evidence. I'm not so sure that's the case.

 

The SEC filing also revealed that the Justice Department is investigating "whether former employees may have received payments in connection with bidding practices on some foreign projects."

 

You don't think that would be difficult to cover up? All they'd have to do is have the employees set up personal accounts.

 

And what's wrong with purchasing a company that may have done something illegal in the past? Are we to demonize Verizon for purchasing MCI/WorldCom? Hell, Verizon was fully aware of the fraud going on there.

[Texsox]

We seem to be confusing companies with individuals.  The individuals who worked at KBR and allegedly committed these crimes should be punished if they are found guilty.  The people who worked at Haliburton prior to the purchase of KBR have nothing to do with it and, therefore, should not be prosecuted.

You're assuming that bid rigging is easy to discover and that the individuals involved didn't go out of their way to destroy the evidence.  I'm not so sure that's the case.

You don't think that would be difficult to cover up?  All they'd have to do is have the employees set up personal accounts.

 

And what's wrong with purchasing a company that may have done something illegal in the past?  Are we to demonize Verizon for purchasing MCI/WorldCom?  Hell, Verizon was fully aware of the fraud going on there.

 

 

The laws are in place to stop the shell game that happens when corporations, big and small, are caught. Get convicted of bid rigging, "sell" the company to your right hand, and continue as if nothing happened.

 

There are corporate punishments for this activity, one of which is being suspended from bidding on government contracts. Any corporate punishments, will have to be dealt with by Halliburton as the owner. This type of crime is systematic, not individual, and corporations are help accountable. That corporate entity is now Halliburton.

 

I am not assuming that they didn't make bid rigging difficult to detect, and Halliburton may have missed it. But they are still responsible because they are KBR.

[TheBigHurt35]

The laws are in place to stop the shell game that happens when corporations, big and small, are caught. Get convicted of bid rigging, "sell" the company to your right hand, and continue as if nothing happened.

 

There are corporate punishments for this activity, one of which is being suspended from bidding on government contracts. Any corporate punishments, will have to be dealt with by Halliburton as the owner. This type of crime is systematic, not individual, and corporations are help accountable. That corporate entity is now Halliburton.

 

You are correct that Haliburton may be suspended from bidding on government contracts, fined, etc. But individuals at Haliburton prior to 1998, such as Cheney, are free from prosecution for crimes committed by individuals at KBR. That was my point.

[Texsox]

You are correct that Haliburton may be suspended from bidding on government contracts, fined, etc.  But individuals at Haliburton prior to 1998, such as Cheney, are free from prosecution for crimes committed by individuals at KBR.  That was my point.

 

I agree 100%.

[TheBigHurt35]

I agree 100%.

 

Apologies for not explaining my point clearly in the first place.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Unless KBR engaged in these illegal practices AFTER being purchased by Haliburton, there's no legal basis for holding Haliburton responsible.  And what makes you think that Haliburton could've uncovered any evidence of bid rigging?

 

I realize that you dislike Cheney but, come on.  Let's be reasonable.

 

Oops, that was a big typo on my part -- that should have read Cheney and co. should NOT be held responsible... Big difference. i know.

 

As far as whether they could have uncovered anything in doing their research before the merger, what would it be saying about the abilities of a CEO if he was completely unable to look into KBR's financial doings and not see something wasa amiss?

[TheBigHurt35]

what would it be saying about the abilities of a CEO if he was completely unable to look into KBR's financial doings and not see something wasa amiss?

 

It would say that he's probably a better Vice President than a CEO.

[Rex Kickass]

That's a scary thought.

[Texsox]

That's a scary thought.

 

I would contend he is the best VP we have had in a long time.

[TheBigHurt35]

I would contend he is the best VP we have had in a long time.

 

No, Bea Arthur would be a much more effective VP.

[Rex Kickass]

Damn straight!

[Texsox]

Damn straight!

[TheBigHurt35]

Damn straight!

 

BTW, what's the deal with your Bea Arthur thing? Are you related to her or something? Just curious...

[southsider2k5]

 

You beat me to it