Replies to post #196672 on KAT Exploration Inc (KATX)

[skyhawk66]

Thanks Shorton, Nothing like posting the Honest Truth!

[Kadin]

ShortonCash...If a corporation does business in the US, or has a bank account here, it is regulated under US Laws. Kat Gold Holdings Corp business is registered in Nevada. However, a company does not even need to be based in the US, if it does substantial business or banking here to be held accountable under a 1977 US law known as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

The type of scenario(s) you are suggesting are complex and hardly a starting point considering this isn't even on the table.

If you're shooting arrows hoping one hits via your links then credibility is in question as to how these companies operate and are held accountable.

Since you have provided "Pricewaterhouse"...

The Canadian arm of PwC has been named in seven separate lawsuits claiming as much as $2bn in damages for investors who lost almost everything in the largest fraud in history. PwC Canada was auditor to Fairfield Sentry, the feeder fund that placed $7.2bn of investors' money with Madoff, and which became the biggest single casualty.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/6074118/Madoff-victims-to-sue-accountants-PwC-over-feeder-fund-audits.html


Tyco settlement

In July 2007, PwC agreed to pay US$229 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by shareholders of Tyco International Ltd. over a multibillion-dollar accounting fraud. The chief executive and chief financial officer of Tyco were found guilty of looting $600 million from the company

Satyam case

In January 2009 PwC was criticised, along with the promoters of Satyam, an Indian IT firm listed on the NASDAQ, in a $1.5 billion fraud. PwC has written a letter to the board of directors of Satyam that its audit may be rendered "inaccurate and unreliable" due to the disclosures made by Satyam's (ex) Chairman. PwC's US arm "was the reviewer for the U.S. filings for Satyam." Consequently, lawsuits have been filed in the US with PwC as a defendant. Two partners of PricewaterhouseCoopers, Srinivas Talluri and Subramani Gopalakrishnan, have been charged by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation in connection with the Satyam scandal. Since the scandal broke out, Subramani Gopalakrishnan retired from the firm after reaching mandatory retirement age; while Talluri remains on suspension from the firm

Global Trust Bank Ltd and DSQ Software

India's accounting standards agency ICAI is investigating partners of PwC for professional negligence in the now-defunct Global Trust Bank Ltd. case of 2007. Like Satyam, Global Trust Bank was also based in Hyderabad. This led to Reserve Bank of India banning PwC from auditing any financial company for over a year. PwC was also associated with the accounting scandal at DSQ Software in India. Following the Satyam scandal, the Mumbai-based Small Investor Grievances Association (SIGA) has requested the Indian stock market regulator SEBI to ban PwC permanently and seize its assets in India alleging few more scandals like "Ketan Parekh stock manipulations."


House of Lords inquiry in the UK

In 2011, a House of Lords inquiry specifically criticized PwC for not drawing attention to the risks in the business model followed by Northern Rock, a client of the firm, which was rescued by the UK government during the financial crisis


In April 2011...
PricewaterhouseCoopers has been fined $7.5 million (£4.6 million) over the fraud at Indian outsourcer Satyam.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PricewaterhouseCoopers

http://www.forbes.com/sites/francinemckenna/2010/12/30/no-bark-no-bite-pricewaterhousecoopers-rolls-over-to-beat-fraud-cases/

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/outsourcing/3272871/pwc-fined-46m-over-satyam-fraud/


Regardless of the type of Tax Shelter, there's a concerted effort Globally to regulate since Madoff, AIG, Lehmen, UBS, and et al...
New Tax Laws pending and Global Alliances are targeting Corporations due to Trillions of dollars lost and Investor scams in the Market that are funneled through them.

Having said that...

The Company's disclosure regarding 'Fraud or Faulty' decision-making! Priceless!

http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=52019236
pg. 38

The Company’s management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, does not expect that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and its internal control processes will prevent all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of error or fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that the breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and may not be detected. However, these inherent limitations are known features of the financial reporting process. Therefore, it is possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though not eliminate, this risk.

Changes in Internal Control

There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) that occurred during our fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.


Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm

This annual report does not include an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Our management’s report was not subject to attestation by our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to rules of the SEC that permit us to provide only management’s report in this annual report.



They don't even guarantee their own information. These loopholes are throughout their filings.
Thankfully Global efforts are closing in on loopholes which enable investor scams and corporations who circumvent paying taxes regardless of the type of shelter/structure you suggest.

A discering investor would question the practices of this company's history...
But if investors aren't savvy enough to raise the question of why Ken sold assets from their own parent company, i.e., switch assets from one failed business to another, splitting them into a development stage company and an exploration company, then it doesn't matter what the answer is. They've undermined their own credibility.


At least when you purchase a product there's usually a warranty!

[alansnowcross2]

Excellent Shorton looks like icing on the Cake for a potential buyer, so much value for the buyer.

The DD brought the board well worth reading!

[B402]

Hey Shorto..you posted the KPMG Link..The Crooks.

This link
http://www.kpmg.com/CN/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/tax_loss_relief_0710.pdf

I noted they were crooks
Like Jacobson and Stan the man (associations of Katx)

Carry Backs in the US are 2yrs
In Canada its 3yrs per your own link

The KPMG tax shelter fraud scandal involves allegedly illegal U.S. tax shelters by KPMG that were exposed beginning in 2003. In early 2005, the United States member firm of KPMG International, KPMG LLP, was accused by the United States Department of Justice of fraud in marketing abusive tax shelters.

Under a deferred prosecution agreement, KPMG LLP admitted criminal wrongdoing in creating fraudulent tax shelters to help wealthy clients dodge $2.5 billion in taxes and agreed to pay $456 million in penalties. KPMG LLP will not face criminal prosecution as long as it complies with the terms of its agreement with the government. On January 3, 2007, the criminal conspiracy charges against KPMG were dropped.[1] However, Federal Attorney Michael J. Garcia stated that the charges could be reinstated if KPMG does not continue to submit to continued monitorship through September 2008.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KPMG_tax_shelter_fraud