Group items tagged

In today's economic climate, who will help you protect your company and your clients from the devastating impact of fraud? Fraud can creep into your business in a number of ways. You may find you need an objective expert to deter potential problems, investigate allegations or provide resolution. A Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) offers anti-fraud knowledge and skills you need to: * Investigate allegations against one of your employees * Recommend strong anti-fraud internal controls * Conduct interviews related to sensitive issues * Provide assistance with financial dispute resolution * Resolve irregularities discovered during your company's audit * Provide expert testimony on financial and investigative matters A Unique Set of Skills Fraud Examiners have a unique set of skills that are not found in any other discipline; they combine knowledge of complex financial transactions with an understanding of law, criminology, investigation and how to resolve allegations of fraud. CFEs work in a variety of disciplines including accounting, auditing, fraud investigation and security, as well as in different industry segments including government, healthcare, financial services, manufacturing and retail distribution. CFEs are knowledgeable in four areas critical to the fight against fraud: * Fraudulent Financial Transactions * Criminology & Ethics * Legal Elements of Fraud * Fraud Investigation Reduce Fraud Risks and Costs Heightened fraud awareness, combined with new laws and regulations, has increased the already growing demand in the workforce for professionals who are highly skilled at deterring, detecting and investigating fraud. CFEs have the ability to: * Identify and reduce opportunities for fraud * Implement effective anti-fraud controls * Continuously improve anti-fraud measures based on new risks and technologies * Educate employees to deter fraud and report wrongdoing * Resolve allegations

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter beforestate houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to the GOP prim

In today's economic climate, who will help you protect your company and your clients from the devastating impact of fraud? Fraud can creep into your business in a number of ways. You may find you need an objective expert to deter potential problems, investigate allegations or provide resolution. A Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) offers anti-fraud knowledge and skills you need to: * Investigate allegations against one of your employees * Recommend strong anti-fraud internal controls * Conduct interviews related to sensitive issues * Provide assistance with financial dispute resolution * Resolve irregularities discovered during your company's audit * Provide expert testimony on financial and investigative matters A Unique Set of Skills Fraud Examiners have a unique set of skills that are not found in any other discipline; they combine knowledge of complex financial transactions with an understanding of law, criminology, investigation and how to resolve allegations of fraud. CFEs work in a variety of disciplines including accounting, auditing, fraudinvestigation and security, as well as in different industry segments including government, healthcare, financial services, manufacturing and retail distribution. CFEs are knowledgeable in four areas critical to the fight against fraud: * Fraudulent Financial Transactions * Criminology & Ethics * Legal Elements of Fraud * Fraud Investigation Reduce Fraud Risks and Costs Heightened fraud awareness, combined with new laws and regulations, has increased the already growing demand in the workforce for professionals who are highly skilled at deterring, detecting and investigating fraud. CFEs have the ability to: * Identify and reduce opportunities for fraud * Implement effective anti-fraud controls * Continuously improve anti-fraud measures based on new risks and technologies * Educate employees to deter fraud and report wrongdoing * Resolve allegations o

In today's economic climate, who will help you protect your company and your clients from the devastating impact of fraud? Fraud can creep into your business in a number of ways. You may find you need an objective expert to deter potential problems, investigate allegations or provide resolution. A Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) offers anti-fraud knowledge and skills you need to: * Investigate allegations against one of your employees * Recommend strong anti-fraud internal controls * Conduct interviews related to sensitive issues * Provide assistance with financial dispute resolution * Resolve irregularities discovered during your company's audit * Provide expert testimony on financial and investigative matters A Unique Set of Skills Fraud Examiners have a unique set of skills that are not found in any other discipline; they combine knowledge of complex financial transactions with an understanding of law, criminology, investigation and how to resolve allegations of fraud. CFEs work in a variety of disciplines including accounting, auditing, fraudinvestigation and security, as well as in different industry segments including government, healthcare, financial services, manufacturing and retail distribution. CFEs are knowledgeable in four areas critical to the fight against fraud: * Fraudulent Financial Transactions * Criminology & Ethics * Legal Elements of Fraud * Fraud Investigation Reduce Fraud Risks and Costs Heightened fraud awareness, combined with new laws and regulations, has increased the already growing demand in the workforce for professionals who are highly skilled at deterring, detecting and investigating fraud. CFEs have the ability to: * Identify and reduce opportunities for fraud * Implement effective anti-fraud controls * Continuously improve anti-fraud measures based on new risks and technologies * Educate employees to deter fraud and report wrongdoing * Resolve allegations or suspicions of fraud * Assist in the rec

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter before state houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill group Medicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill group Medicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist t

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

By Juan Cole, TomDispatch This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and

Springhill Group dedicated to the top standards of ethics and integrity. Springhill Group is developed to offer assistance to all employees ongoing dedication to perform its important affairs in accordance with applicable laws, standards, and sound ethical business practices. Related Links: More information about the U.S. Department of Commerce Safe Harbor Program can be found at http://www.export.gov/safeharbor/ . MGMA is the premier membership association for professional administrators and leaders of medical group practices. http://www.mgma.com/ The American Medical Group Association (AMGA) represents medical groups and organized systems of care, including some of the nation's largest, most prestigious integrated healthcare delivery systems. http://www.amga.org

Stock fraud takes advantage of the trust a consumer places in a broker or brokerage firm. Stock fraud occurs when a broker manipulates customers into trading stocks without regard for the customer's interests. Stock fraud can be orchestrated at the company level, or can be committed by a single employee; stock fraud can also range in size financially from multi-million dollar deals to penny stocks, but stock fraud consistently involves intentional disregard for the financial situation of customers and obsession with personal gain. An attorney experienced in defending the rights of stock fraud victims and recovering funds stolen from them may be able to help guide you through your legal rights and advise you on the most appropriate course of legal action. The Following Activities are Considered Stock Fraud When Done Intentionally: Giving biased investment advice Giving unfounded advice Offering separate clients contradicting advice Advising clients to continue an imprudent risk Advising out of a conflict of interest Protecting Yourself Against Stock Investment Fraud There are many ways in which you can protect yourself from fraud before it occurs. One way is to make sure you are closely monitoring transactions and commissions in your account. Another way to help safeguard your account is to keep it from becoming too concentrated in any one stock position. As a general rule, no one stock position should represent more than 2% of your total portfolio. You don't want another Enron on your hands! Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (partial) Federal securities fraud under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is defined as "(1) material misstatements or omissions, (2) indicating an intent to deceive or defraud, (3) in connection with the purchase or sale of a security." Brown v. E.F. Hutton Group, Inc. , 991 F.2d 1020 (2nd Cir. 1993). An unsuitability claim is a subset of 10(b) securities fraud with the following elements to be proved: "(1) that the sec

GPS jamming signals coming from North Korea has forced South Korea to order its military and civilian air transports to switch on alternative navigational devices to avoid disruption. A statement from the ministry has confirmed that they were able to warn airlines and pilots of the 241 affected South Korean flights along with the 11 foreign airlines like Thai Airways, AirPhil, FedEx, Japan Airlines and Cathay Pacific Airways. But even as the GPS jamming signals continued, South Korea sees no serious threat to navigational safety. Korea Communications Commission confirmed that the GPS jamming signals have been coming from a city on North Korea side of the border. "We've traced the jamming signals to the direction of Kaesong," a commission deputy director told Springhill Group. According to the transport agency, planes that suffered from GPS signal jamming were instructed to use the alternative navigation systems and were not delayed in their schedules. The signal jamming appears to be focused on air traffic at Gimpo and Incheon airports, both of which are around 30 miles from the border. Despite the GPS disruption, Springhill Group reports that there was no serious threat to flight safety as airplanes are capable of using other navigation devices like inertial navigation system and very-high-frequency omni-directional range (VOR). Meanwhile, military communications and transportation were not greatly affected as they do not primarily depend on the GPS system. North Korea did not admit anything so the reason for the GPS jamming remains unclear as fears that another nuclear test might follow is escalating. Likewise, it is not known for just how long the jamming will continue as during last year's South Korea-US military drill, the radio signal jamming from Pyongyang has lasted for ten days. At any rate, South Korea is always on the lookout for any provocation from its neighbor, especially as a nuclear specialist has said that North Korea appears to

GPS jamming signals coming from North Korea has forced South Korea to order its military and civilian air transports to switch on alternative navigational devices to avoid disruption. A statement from the ministry has confirmed that they were able to warn airlines and pilots of the 241 affected South Korean flights along with the 11 foreign airlines like Thai Airways, AirPhil, FedEx, Japan Airlines and Cathay Pacific Airways. But even as the GPS jamming signals continued, South Korea sees no serious threat to navigational safety. Korea Communications Commission confirmed that the GPS jamming signals have been coming from a city on North Korea side of the border. "We've traced the jamming signals to the direction of Kaesong," a commission deputy director told Springhill Group. According to the transport agency, planes that suffered from GPS signal jamming were instructed to use the alternative navigation systems and were not delayed in their schedules. The signal jamming appears to be focused on air traffic at Gimpo and Incheon airports, both of which are around 30 miles from the border. Despite the GPS disruption, Springhill Group reports that there was no serious threat to flight safety as airplanes are capable of using other navigation devices like inertial navigation system and very-high-frequency omni-directional range (VOR). Meanwhile, military communications and transportation were not greatly affected as they do not primarily depend on the GPS system. North Korea did not admit anything so the reason for the GPS jamming remains unclear as fears that another nuclear test might follow is escalating. Likewise, it is not known for just how long the jamming will continue as during last year's South Korea-US military drill, the radio signal jamming from Pyongyang has lasted for ten days. At any rate, South Korea is always on the lookout for any provocation from its neighbor, especially as a nuclear specialist has said that North Korea appears to

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill groupMedicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it has a robust

To help protect yourself and Medicare from fraud and identity theft you should report it. Whenever you get a payment notice from Medicare review it for errors. The notice shows what Medicare was billed for, what Medicare paid, and what (if anything) you owe. Make sure Medicare was not billed for health care services, medical supplies, or equipment you did not get. Before you contact your health care provider, Medicare, or the Inspector General's hotline, carefully review the facts, and have the following ready: * The provider's name and any identifying number you may have. * The service or item information you are questioning. * The date the service or item was supposedly given or delivered. * The payment amount approved and paid by Medicare. * The date on your Medicare Summary Notice. * Your name and Medicare number (as listed on your Medicare card). * The reason you think Medicare should not have paid. * Any other information you have showing why Medicare should not have paid. http://springhillmedgroup.com/