wegelin s1 indictment

8/2/2019 Wegelin S1 Indictment

1/59

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,-v . -

WEGELIN & co . IMICHAEL BERLINKA,URS FREI, andROGER KELLER,

Defendant s .

-X

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

COUNT ONE(Conspiracy)The Grand Ju ry charges :

INDICTMENT

S1 12 Cr. 02 (JSR)

The Defendants and Co-Conspirators1 . At all t imes r e levan t to t h i s Ind ic tment , WEGELIN &

CO. ("WEGELIN"), th e defendan t , founded in 1741, wasSwi tze r l and ' s o ld es t bank. WEGELIN prov ided p r i v a t e banking,a s se t management, and o th e r se rv ice s to ind iv idua l s and en t i t i e saround the world, i nc lud ing U.S. t axpayers l i v ing in theSouthern D i s t r i c t o f New York. WEGELIN prov ided these se rvicesp r i n c i p a l l y through " c l i e n t adv isors" based in its var iousbranches in Swi tzer land ("Cl ien t Advisors") . WEGELIN wasp r i n c i p a l l y owned by e ig h t managing par tner s ( the "ManagingPar tners") and was governed by an execu t ive committee t h a tincluded th e Managing Par tne rs (the "Execut ive C,::ommittee").

1.--"A TRUE COPY '"

>....- 'UNIT(D STATES MAGIStRATE:FOR TH E SOUTH J.STR1CT OF N, 'f,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P t P U T Y CLERK

1:12-cr-00002-JSR-4


2/59

WEGELIN had no branches outs ide Swi tzer land , but it d i rec t l yaccessed the U.S. banking system through a cor respondent accountt ha t it held a t UBS AG ("UBS") in Stamford, Connect icut ( the"Stamford Correspondent Account") . As o f in o r about December2010, WEGELIN had 12 branches in Swi tzer land and approximate ly$25 b i l l i on in a s s e t s undermanagement .

2. From a t l ea s t i n o r about 2008 up through andinc luding in o r about 2010, MICHAEL BERLINKA, th e defendant , wasa Cl ien t Advisor a t the Zurich branch of WEGELIN, th e defendant( the "Zur ich Branch") .

3. From a t l e a s t in o r about 2006 up through andinc luding i n o r about 2010, URS FREI, the defendant , was aCl ien t Advisor a t th e Zurich Branch o f WEGELIN, th e defendant .

4. From a t l e a s t i n o r about 2007 up through andinc luding i n o r about 2010, ROGER KELLER, th e defendant , was aCl ien t Advisor a t th e Zurich Branch o f WEGELIN, th e defendant .

5. From in o r about 2005 up through and inc luding in o rabout 2010, Cl ien t Advisor A, a co-consp i ra to r not named as adefendant here in , was a Cl ien t Advisor a t th e Zurich Branch. Atvar ious t imes , Cl ien t Advisor A a l so served as the "team leader"of MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, th e defendants ,and ce r ta in o ther Cl ien t Advisors of the Zurich Branch. As a

2


3/59

team l eader , C l ien t Advisor A coordinated ce r t a i n a c t i v i t i e s o f ,but d id not supervise , these and o ther Cl ien t Advisors .

6. From in o r about 2007 up through and inc luding in o rabout 2012, Managing Par tner A, a co-consp i ra to r not named as adefendant here in , was one of the Managing Par tner s of WEGELIN,the defendant . From in o r about 2005 up through and inc ludingin o r about 2011, Managing Par tner A was the head o f WEGELIN'SZurich Branch. During t ha t per iod , Managing Par tner Asupervised MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, thedefendants , C l i en t Advisor A, and o ther C l ien t Advisors in theZurich Branch with r e s p ec t to , among o ther th ings , th e openingand se rv ic ing o f "undeclared accounts" fo r U.S. t axpayers ."Undeclared accounts" a re bank and secu r i t i e s accounts owned byU.S. taxpayers whose a s s e t s , and the income genera ted by th easse t s , were not repor ted by th e U.S. t axpayers to th e t axa t ionau thor i ty of th e United Sta tes , the In t e rn a l Revenue Serv ice("IRS") .

7. From in o r abou t 2008 up through and inc luding in o rabout 2011, Executive A, a co-consp i ra to r no t named as adefendant here in , was a member of the Executive Committee ofWEGELIN, the defendant , and worked pr imar i ly a t the ZurichBranch.

3


4/59

8. At a l l t imes r e levan t to th i s Indictment / BedaSingenberger ( "Singenberger//) 1 a co-conspira tor no t named as adefendant here in / was an independent a s se t manager fo r var iousU.S. t axpayers who held undeclared accounts a t WEGELIN 1 thedefendant 1 UBS 1 Swiss Bank A 1 and o th e r Swiss banks.Singenberger he lped h is U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s 1 WEGELIN 1 UBS 1Swiss Bank A and o th e r Swiss banks hide such accounts/ and theincome genera ted the re in / by/ among o ther t h ings 1 se l l i ng shamcorpora t ions and foundat ions to U.S. t axpayers as veh ic lesthrough which. the U.S. t axpayers could hold t h e i r undec la redaccounts / and by managing the a s se t s held in such account s .From a t l e a s t in o r about 2002 to in o r about 2006 1 Singenbergerregu la r ly t rave led to the Southern D i s t r i c t of New York ando ther p laces in th e United Sta tes to meet with h is U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s with undeclared accounts a t WEGELIN 1 UBS 1 ando ther Swiss banks.

9. From in o r about the mid-1990s up through andinc luding in o r about l a t e 2008 1 Gian G is l e r ("Gis le r 11 ) 1 a coconsp i ra to r not named as a defendan t here in / was a c l i e n tadvisor a t UBS in Swi tzer land . From i n o r about ea r ly 2009 upthrough and inc luding in o r about mid to l a te 2009 1 Gis le r wasan independent a s s e t manager fo r U.S. t axpayers hold ing

4


5/59

undeclared accounts a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , UBS, and o therSwiss banks .

Obligations of United States TaxpayersWith Respect to Foreign Financial Accounts

10. At a l l t imes r e levan t to t h i s Indic tment , c i t i z e ns andr es iden t s of the United Sta tes who had income in any oneca lendar year in excess of a threshold amount ("U.S. taxpayers")were requi red to f i l e a U.S. Individua l Income Tax Return ("Form1040") , fo r t h a t ca lendar year with th e IRS. On Form 1040, U.S.taxpayers were ob l iga ted to r epor t t h e i r worldwide income,inc luding income earned in fore ign bank accoun ts . In add i t ion ,when a U.S. t axpayer completed Schedule B o f Form 1040, he o rshe was required t o ind ica te whether, a t any t ime during ther e levan t year , the f i l e r had "an i n t e re s t i n o r a s ignature o ro th e r au thor i ty over a f inanc ia l account in a fo re ign country ,such as a bank account , s e c ur i t i e s account , o r o th e r f i n a n c i ~ l account ." I f so , th e U.S. taxpayer was r equ i red to name thecountry .

11. In add i t ion , U.S. taxpayers who had a f inanc ia li n t e r e s t in , o r s igna tu re o r o ther au thor i ty over , a fore ignbank account with an aggrega te value of more than $10,000 a t anyt ime during a given ca lendar year were r equ i red to f i l e with theIRS a Report o f Foreign Bank and Financ ia l Accounts , Form TD F

5


6/59

90-22.1 ("FBAR") on o r before June 30 of the fol lowing year . Ingenera l , the FBAR requi red t ha t the u.s. t axpayer i de n t i f y thef inanc ia l i n s t i t u t i o n where the account was held , the type ofaccount , the account number, and the maximum value o f theaccount dur ing the r e levan t ca lendar year .

Overview of the Conspiracy12. From a t l e a s t in o r about 2002 up through and

inc luding in o r about 2011, more than 100 U.S. t axpayersconspi red with, a t var ious t imes, WEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URSFREI, and ROGER KELLER, the defendants , Managing P ar tn e r A,Cl ien t Advisor A, o ther Cl ien t Advisors a t WEGELIN, BedaSingenberger , Gian Gis le r , and o ther s known and unknown, todef raud the United Sta tes by conceal ing from the IRS undeclaredaccounts owned by U.S. taxpayers a t WEGELIN. As o f in o r about2010, the t o t a l value o f undeclared accounts held by U.S.taxpayers a t WEGELIN was a t l e a s t $1.2 b i l l i o n .

13. Among o ther t h ings , WEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URSFREI, and ROGER KELLER, the defendant s , and o ther C l ien tAdvisors opened dozens of new undeclared accounts fo r U.S.taxpayers in o r about 2008 and 2009 a f t e r UBS and another la rgei n t e rn a t i o n a l bank based in Switzer land ("Swiss Bank B") closedt h e i r respect ive bus inesses se rv ic ing undeclared accounts fo rU.S. taxpayers ( the "U.S. cross-border banking businesses") in

6


7/59

the wake of widespread news r epor t s in Swi tzer land and th eUnited Sta tes t h a t the IRS was i nves t iga t ing UBS fo r helpingU.S. t axpayers evade taxes and hide asse t s in Swiss bankaccounts . WEGELIN, BERLINKA, FREI, KELLER, Cl ien t Advisor A ando ther C l i en t Advisors d id so a f t e r WEGELIN's Execut ive Committeeaf f i rmat ive ly dec ided to capture fo r WEGELIN the i l l e g a l U.S.c ross -borde r banking business l o s t by UBS and d e l i b e ra t e l y s e tout to open new undec la red accounts fo r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t sl eav ing UBS. At o r about the t ime t h i s po l icy dec is ion wasannounced to team l eader s within WEGELIN, Execut ive A to ld theteam l eader s t h a t WEGELIN was not exposed to th e r i sk ofprosecut ion t h a t UBS faced in the United St a t e s because WEGELINwas smal le r than UBS, and t ha t WEGELIN could charge high fees toi t s new U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s because the c l i e n t s were a f ra id ofcr imina l prosecut ion in the United Sta tes . As a r e s u l t of th i sin f lux o f former UBS U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s in to WEGELIN,WEGELIN's undec lared U.S. t axpayer a s se t s under management, andthe fees earned by m a n a g i n ~ those a s se t s , inc reaseds ubs t a n t i a l l y .

14. As p a r t of t h e i r sa les p i t c h to U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t swho were f l ee ing UBS, a t var ious t imes , BERLINKA, FREI, KELLER,and o ther Cl ien t Advisors to ld U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s , insubstance, t h a t t h e i r undec la red accounts a t WEGELIN would not

7


8/59

be disc losed to th e United Sta tes a u thor i t i e s because WEGELINhad a long t r ad i t i on of bank secrecy and, unl ike UBS, d id nothave of f ices outs ide Switze r land , thereby making WEGELIN l e s svulnerable to United Sta tes law enforcement pres su re . ManagingPar tne r A and Execut ive A p a r t i ~ i p a t e d in some of th e meetings where such sta tements were made to U.S. t axpayers .

15. In fur therance of the consp i racy to defraud theUnited St a t e s , WEGELIN, the defendant , he lped c e r t a in U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s r epa t r i a t e undec la red funds to the UnitedSta tes by i s su ing checks drawn on, and execu t ing wire t r ans fe r sthrough, WEGELIN'S Stamford Correspondent Account fo r th ebenef i t of the U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s . In add i t ion , WEGELINhelped a t l e a s t two o ther Swiss banks r epa t r i a t e undeclaredfunds to t h e i r own U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s by i s su ing checks drawnon WEGELIN's Stamford Correspondent Account fo r th e b e n e f i t ofthe c l i en t s of th e two othe.r Swiss banks.

Means and Methods of the Conspiracy16. Among the means and methods by which WEGELIN, MICHAEL

BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, th e defendan t s , and t h e i rco-consp i ra to r s ca r r ied out th e consp i racy were th e fol lowing:

a . WEGELIN, BERLINKA, FREI, and KELLER opened andse rviced undeclared accounts fo r U.S. taxpayers - - sometimes inthe name of sham corpora t ions and foundat ions es tab l i shed under

8


9/59

th e laws of Panama, Hong Kong, and Liechtens te in - - fo r thepurpose of helping the U.S. taxpayers hide asse t s and incomefrom the IRS.

b. WEGELIN and FREI knowingly accep ted bankdocuments f a l s e ly dec la r ing t ha t such sham e n t i t i e s b e n e f i c i a l l yowned c e r t a in accounts , when WEGELIN and FREI knew t h a t U.S.t axpayers be ne f i c i a l l y owned such accounts .

c . WEGELIN, BERLINKA, and FREI opened undec la redaccounts fo r U.S. taxpayers using code names and numbers (soca l l ed "numbered accounts") so t h a t th e U.S. t axpaye rs ' nameswould appear on as few documents as poss ib le in th e event t ha tthe documents f e l l i n to the hands o f t h i rd p a r t i e s .

d. WEGELIN, BERLINKA, FREI, and KELLER ensured t ha taccount sta tements and re la ted documents were not mailed tot h e i r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s in the United St a t e s .

e . WEGELIN, BERLINKA, and KELLER se n t e-mai l s andFedera l Express packages t o p o t e n t i a l U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s inth e United Sta tes to s o l i c i t new pr iva te banking and a s s e tmanagement bus iness .

f . At var ious t imes from i n o r about 2005 up throughand inc luding i n o r about 2007, WEGELIN, BERLINKA, FREI, andKELLER communicated by e-mai l and /or te lephone with U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s who had undeclared accounts a t WEGELIN. Cl ien t

9


10/59

Advisors sometimes used t h e i r persona l e-mai l accounts tocommunicate with U.S. taxpayers to reduce the r i sk of de tec t ionby United St a t e s law enforcement a u thor i t i e s .

g. Beginning in o r about l a t e 2008 or ea r ly 2009,and a f t e r WEGELIN began to -open new undeclared accounts fo r U.S.taxpayers f l ee ing UBS, Managing Par tne r A i n s t ruc ted BERLINKA,FREI, KELLER and o th e r Cl ien t Advisors of the Zurich Branch notto communicate with t h e i r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s by te lephone o re-mai l , but r a t h e r to cause t h e i r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s tot r a ve l from the United Sta tes to Switzer land to conduct businessr e l a t i ng to t h e i r undeclared accounts .

h. Various U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s of WEGELIN,BERLINKA, FREI, and KELLER f i l ed Forms 1040 tha t f a l se ly andf raudulent ly f a i l ed to r epor t th e exis tence o f, and the incomegenera ted from, t h e i r undeclared WEGELIN accounts ; evadedsubs tan t i a l income taxes due and owing to th e IRS; and fa i led tof i l e t imely FBARs i den t i fy ing t h e i r undeclared accounts .

i . Upon reques t , WEGELIN i s sued checks drawn on, andexecuted wire t r a ns f e r s through, th e Stamford CorrespondentAccount for the b e n e f i t of U.S. taxpayers wi th undeclaredaccounts a t WEGELIN and a t l ea s t tw o o ther Swiss banks. Whendoing so, WEGELIN sometimes separa ted_ the t r ansac t ions in tobatches of checks o r mult ip le wire t r ans fe r s of $10,000 o r l e ss

10


11/59


12/59

income o r asse t s i s no t considered a crime under Swissbanking law. As such, ne i t he r th e Swiss government,nor any o ther government, can ob ta in in fo rmat ion aboutyour bank account . They must f i r s t convince a Swissjudge t h a t you have committed a se r ious crimepunishable by the Swiss Penal Code.

The webs i te i nv i t ed user s to " [ r ]eques t a Swiss bankingconsu l ta t ion today" by c l ick ing a l ink to a "Consu l ta t ionReguest" form t h a t asked fo r informat ion about a use r ' s count ryof res idence , t e l ephone number, and e-mai l . addres s . The WebsiteOpera to r provided t h i s informat ion to WEGELIN Cl ien t Advisors ,who then sen t e-mai l s to the United S t a ~ e s promot ing WEGELIN'Sp r i va t e banking and a s se t management se rv ices . In some cases ,Cl ien t Advisors sen t WEGELIN's promotional mate r i a l s to U.S.t axpayers in th e Uni ted Sta tes by Federa l Express . Through th i swebsi te , over t ime, WEGELIN obta ined new undeclared accountsholding mil l ions of do l l a r s in t o t a l for U.S. t axpayers .Managing Par tner A and o ther managing par tne rs of WEGELINreceived quar t e r ly upda tes on th e progress o f t h i s adver t i s ingprogram. Managing Par tner A approved payments to the WebsiteOpera to r .

WEGELIN Opens New Undeclared AccountsFor u.s. Taxpayers Fleeing UBS

18. In o r about May and June 2008, the IRS ' s cr imina li nves t iga t ion o f UBS's U.S. c ross -borde r banking businessrece ived widespread media coverage in Swi tzer land and the United

12


13/59

St a t e s . At o r about t h a t t ime, many U.S. taxpayers wi thundeclared accounts a t UBS unders tood t h a t the i nves t iga t ionmight r e su l t in th e d isc losure of t he i r i den t i t i e s and UBSaccount informat ion to the IRS.

19. On o r about Ju ly 17, 2008, UBS announced t h a t it wasclos ing i t s U.S. c ross -borde r banking bus iness . Thereaf ter , UBSc l i e n t advisors began to no t i fy t h e i r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s t ha tUBS was clos ing t h e i r undeclared accounts . Some UBS c l i e n tadvisors t o ld such c l i en t s t ha t they could cont inue to mainta inundeclared accounts a t WEGELIN, the defendant , and c e r t a in o therSwiss pr iva te banks. At o r about t ha t t ime, it became widelyknown in Swiss pr iva te banking c i rc l e s t ha t WEGELIN was openingnew undeclared accounts fo r U.S. t axpayers .

20. In o r about 2008, the Execut ive Committee o f WEGELIN,the defendant , inc luding i t s Managing Par tners , af f i rmat ive lydecided to capture the i l l e g a l U.S. c ross -borde r bankingbusiness l o s t by UBS by opening new undeclared accounts fo r U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s f l ee ing UBS. In o r about 2008, M a n a g ~ n g Par tne r A announced t h i s decis ion to Cl ien t Advisor A and othe rteam l e ade rs o f the Zurich Branch. At o r about the t ime of th i sannouncement, Execut ive A to ld the team l eader s t ha t WEGELIN wasnot exposed to th e r i sk of prosecut ion t ha t UBS faced becauseWEGELIN was sma l l e r than UBS, and t ha t WEGELIN could charge high

13


14/59

fees to i t s new U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s because the c l i en t s werea f ra id of cr imina l prosecut ion in th e United St a t e s .

21. At o r about t ha t t ime, Managing Par tne r A superv i sedthe crea t ion of a list of C l i en t Advisors a t the Zurich Branchwho were ava i l ab le to meet with po te n t i a l U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s ,many of whom walked i n to the Zurich Branch o f WEGELIN, thedefendant , seeking to open new undec la red account s . Thereaf te r ,in o r about 2008 and 2009, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGERKELLER, the defendan t s , and o ther C l ien t Advisors met with a tl e a s t 70 such po te n t i a l c l i en t s . In these meetings , BERLINKA,FREI, KELLER and o ther Cl ien t Advisors in terviewed th e po te n t i a lU.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s about t h e i r backgrounds, the sources oft h e i r funds, and th e amount of money they wished t o t r a ns f e rfrom UBS to WEGELIN, among o ther th ings . During these meet ings,the U.S. t axpayers typ ica l ly showed t h e i r U.S. passpor t s ,advised t ha t they we.re U.S. c i t i z e ns o r l e g a l permanentr e s i d ~ n t s , conf i rmed t h a t UBS was c los ing t h e i r account s , andcompleted c e r t a ~ n account opening documents. These documentstyp ica l ly included a s tandard Swiss banking form ca l l ed "FormA," which c l e a r ly i de n t i f i e d th e U.S. t axpayers as thebenef i c i a l owners of the accounts . In some cases , as descr ibedin more d e t a i l below, the Cl ien t Advisors sought to reassuret h e i r new U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s t h a t WEGELIN would no t d isc lose

14


15/59

t he i r i d e n t i t i e s o r account in format ion to th e IRS. In manycases , Managing Par tner A o r Executive A jo ined these meetings.

22. In p repara t ion fo r these meet ings , Managing Par tner Aand Executive A superv i sed videotaped t r a in ing sess ions withCl ien t Advisors of the Zurich Branch to i n s t ruc t them on t h e i rdel ivery of c e r t a in se l l i ng po in t s to be made to U.S. t axpayersf lee ing UBS. These se l l i ng po in t s included th e f a c t t ha tWEGELIN, the defendant , had no branches outs ide Swi tzer land andwas small , d i s c r e e t , and, unl ike UBS, not in th e media.

23. In t h i s manner, WEGELIN, the defendant , opened newundeclared accounts fo r a t l e a s t 70 U.S. taxpayers who had f l edUBS in o r about 2008 and 2009. Most were opened a t WEGELIN'SZurich Branch. When these new undeclared accounts were openeda t the Zurich Branch, they were des igna ted with a spec ia l code -- "BNQ" - - i nd ica t ing i n t e rna l ly within WEGELIN, among o therth ings , t h a t the accounts were undeclared. At some po in t in o rabout 2008 o r 2009, th e Zurich Branch requ i red t h a t the. openingof a l l new U.S. taxpayer accounts be approved by ManagingPar tner A o r Executive A.

24. From in o r about March 2009 up through and inc ludingin o r about October 2009, pursuan t to a spec ia l IRS program fo rU.S. taxpayers with undec la red accounts ( the "Offshore VoluntaryDisclosure Program"), approximately 14,000 U.S. t axpayers

15


16/59

vo lun ta r i ly d isc losed to the IRS undeclared accounts held a tbanks around th e world , including WEGELIN, the defendant . Aspa r t of t h i s process , dozens of U.S. taxpayers obta ined copiesof t h e i r WEGELIN bank records . Some of these records includedthe names of MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, thedefendants , and o ther Cl ien t Advisors . In response to theexpected d isc losure of C l i en t Advisors ' names to th e IRS throughthe volunta ry d isc losure program, in o r about 2009, ManagingPar tne r A announced to team l eaders of the Zurich Branch t ha tCl ien t Advisors ' names would no longer appear on c e r t a in WEGELINrecords . From a t l e a s t in o r about l a t e 2009 up through andinc luding in o r about ear ly 2010, Cl ien t Advisors ' names wererep laced by "Team In te rna t iona l , " o r a s imi la r des igna t ion , once r ta in WEGELIN records , so as to reduce the r i sk t h a t Cl ien tAdvisors ' names would become known to the IRS.

25. In o r about mid-2009, the Execut ive Committee ofWEGELIN, the defendant , decided t ha t the bank would stop openingnew undeclared accounts fo r U.S. t axpayers , but t h a t WEGELINwould continue to se rv ice i t s ex i s t ing undeclared U.S. taxpayeraccounts . Never the less , in o r about l a t e 2009 o r e a r l y 2010,WEGELIN and MICHAEL BERLINKA, the defendant , and Execut ive Aopened a t l e a s t three new undeclared accounts fo r U.S. taxpayerswho had f l ed from Swiss Bank A when it, l ike UBS and Swiss Bank

16


17/59

B, c losed i t s U.S. cross-border banking business fo r both newand ex i s t ing U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s . Each of the th ree new U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s had a t l e a s t two passpor t s : one from the UnitedSta tes and one from a second country . In each case , WEGELIN,BERLINKA and Execut ive A opened the new undeclared account underthe passpor t of the second country; even though WEGELIN,BERLINKA and Execut ive A wel l knew t h a t the U.S. t axpayer had aU.S. passpor t .

26. A f te r the Managing Par tners of WEGELlN, th e defendant ,dec ided to capture UBS's i l l e g a l business fo r themselves , thet o t a l value of undeclared accounts held by U.S. t axpayers a tWEGELIN, the defendant , inc reased subs tan t ia l ly over t ime. Asof in o r about 2005, WEGELIN, the defendant , h id a t l e a s t $240mil l ion in undeclared U.S. t axpayer a s se t s from th e IRS. By ino r about 2010, t h i s amount had r i sen to a t l e a s t $1.2 b i l l i on .New Undeclared Accounts Opened by WEGELIN and MICHAEL BERLINKA

27. In o r about 2008 and 2009, WEGELIN and MICHAELBERLINKA, th e defendant s , opened new undeclared accounts fo rnumerous U.S. t axpayers f l ee ing UBS, inc luding the fol lowing:

Client A

28. At a l l t imes r e levan t to t h i s Indic tment , Cl ien t A, aco-consp i ra to r no t named as a defendant here in , l i ved with herhusband in Boca Raton, Flor ida . She became a U.S. c i t i zen in

17


18/59

2003. In o r about 1987, Cl ien t A became the b e n e f i c i a l owner ofan undeclared account a t UBS and i t s predecessor bank. In o rabout July 2008, Cl ien t A 's UBS c l i e n t advisor , Gian Gis ler ,advised Cl ien t A and h er husband t h a t she must c lose her UBSaccount because she was American. At o r about t h a t t ime, Gis le ri n s t ruc ted Cl ien t A and her husband no t to c a l l UBS from theUnited St a t e s , and t o ld them t ha t he was l eaving UBS. Gis le rinv i ted Cl ien t A to move h er account with Gis le r to anotherbank, but she dec l ined . Gis le r then recommended WEGELIN, thedefendant , and noted t ha t it was a r e l i ab l e bank t h a t had noo f f i c e s in th e United St a t e s .

29. In o r about September 2008, Cl ien t A and h er husbandt r ave led to Zur ich to c lose her UBS account . By t h a t t ime,Gis le r had l e f t UBS, and Cl ien t A had a new UBS c l i e n t adv i sor .The new UBS c l i e n t adv i so r i n s t ruc ted them not to c a l l from theUnited St a t e s , promised t ha t UBS would not give t h e i rinformat ion to the IRS, and recommended WEGELIN, th e defendant ,as a bank a t which to hold Cl ien t A 's account .

30. Also dur ing t h i s t r i p , Cl ien t A and h er husband walkedto WEGELIN, th e defendant , and met with MICHAEL BERLINKA, thedefendant . BERLINKA in terviewed Cl ien t A and h er husband aboutt h e i r persona l background and the source o f t h e i r funds, amongo ther th ings . Cl ien t A and h e r husband t o ld BERLINKA t h a t they

18


19/59

were U.S. c i t i z e ns , showed t h e i r U.S. passpor ts , and sa id t ha tthey wanted to t r a ns f e r funds from UBS. BERLINKA opened a newaccount be ne f i c i a l l y owned by Cl ien t A us ing th e code name"N1641" on o r about September 19 1 2008. At o r about t h a t t ime,WEGELIN accep ted a Form A signed by Cl ien t A s t a t i ng t h a t Cl ien tA was th e b e n e f i c i a l owner of the account .

31. In connect ion with the opening of the account 1 MICHAELBERLINKA, the defendant 1 t o ld Cl ien t A and h er husband t h a t theywould be sa fe a t WEGELIN 1 th e defendant / and t h a t BERLINKA hadbeen ins t ruc ted not t o d i sc lose t h e i r account informat ion toUnited St a t e s a u thor i t i e s . In add i t ion , BERLINKA ins t ruc tedCl ien t A and h e r husband no t to c a l l o r send faxes to WEGELINfrom th e United Sta tes and explained t ha t WEGELIN would not sendmail to them in the United St a t e s .

32. On mult ip le occas ions in o r about 2008 and 2009,Cl ien t A o r her husband ca l led BERLINKA from th e United Sta testo no t i fy him t h a t they would be t rave l ing to Aruba. Once inAruba, C l i en t A o r her husband ca l l ed and/or faxed BERLINKA toreques t t ha t he send checks to them in the United Sta t e s . Inresponse , WEGELIN and BERLINKA sen t checks drawn on th e StamfordCorrespondent Account from Swi tzer land to Cl ien t A in BocaRaton, Flor ida by pr iva te l e t t e r c a r r i e r . WEGELIN i s sued thechecks in th e amount of $8,500 to help conceal the undeclared

19


20/59

account from the IRS. WEGELIN also wired funds fo r the benef i tof Cl ien t A through the Stamford Correspondent Account to theUnited Sta tes and Aruba. These checks and wire t r a ns f e r s a rese t fo r th in th e t ab le accompanying paragraph 137 o f t h i sIndictment .

33. In o r about September 2009, Cl ien t A and h er husbandlearned t ha t t h e i r names and UBS account informat ion might beprovided to th e IRS in connect ion with the August 2009 agreementbetween Swi tzer land and the United Sta tes to d i sc lose UBS bankrecords r e l a t i ng to approximate ly 4,450 U.S. t axpayers(here inaf te r , the "August 2009 Agreement") . Alarmed by t h i snews, Cl ien t A ' s husband ca l l ed BERLINKA from th e United Sta tes .During th i s c a l l , BERLINKA advised Cl ien t A 's husband not tomake a volunta ry d isc losure to the IRS and assured him t ha tt h e i r WEGELIN account informat ion would not be provided to theIRS.

34. As of on o r about October 8, 2008, C l i en t A 'sundeclared account a t WEGELIN, the defendant , held approximately$2,332,860.

Clients B and C

35. WEGELIN and MICHAEL BERLINKA, th e defendan t s , openedand managed an undeclared account fo r a marr ied couple , ClientsB and C, co-conspira tors not named as defendant s here in . At a l l

20


21/59

t imes r e levan t to t h i s Indic tment , Clients B and C were U.S.c i t i z e ns and re s iden t s of Flor ida .

36. In o r about 2008, UBS no t i f i e d Cl ien t s B and C t ha tthey must c lose t h e i r undeclared UBS account , which they hadmainta ined s ince i n o r about th e l a t e 1990s. Cl ien t B askedGis le r , h is former UBS c l i e n t adv i se r , i f he knew anyone a tWEGELIN, the defendant , who could help them. Gis le r recommendedMICHAEL BERLINKA, the defendant , and arranged fo r Cl ien t s B andC to meet BERLINKA a t the Zurich Branch in o r about October2008. At t ha t meet ing, Clients B and C shqwed BERLINKA t he i rU.S. passpor ts , provided t h e i r U.S. address , and sa id t ha t theywanted to t r ans fe r approximate ly $900,000 from UBS to WEGELIN.Managing Par tner A jo ined the meeting and fu r t h e r in terviewedCl ien t s B and C. Thereaf te r , Managing Par tner A approved theopening of a new undeclared account fo r C l ien t s B and C.

37. At o r about the t ime t h i s account was opened, WEGELIN,the defendant , accepted a Form A from Cl ien t s B and C s t a t i ngtha t they r es ided in Flor ida and benef ic ia l ly owned the account.MICHAEL BERLINKA, th e defendant , agreed on beha l f of WEGELINt ha t WEGELIN would not send mai l to Cl ien t s B and c in th eUnited Sta tes and t ha t Cl ien t s B and C could conduct businesswith WEGELIN us ing a code name, "N1677." Because Cl ien t B didnot want to use h is r e a l name when ca l l ing WEGELIN from the

21


22/59

United St a t e s , BERLINKA s e t up the account so t ha t Cl ien t Bcould use ano the r code name "Elvis" - - when he did so .Thereaf te r , on one o r tw o occas ions , Cl ien t B ca l l ed BERLINKAfrom the United States to check h is account balance , whichBERLINKA provided to Cl ien t B.

38. On o r about December 31, 2008, the undeclared accounta t WEGELIN, th e defendant , owned by Cl ien t s B and C heldapproximate ly $873,958.

39. The fol lowing t ab le fu r the r desc r ibes Cl ien t s A, B,and C and o t h e r U.S. t axpayers whose Cl ien t Advisor was MICHAELBERLINKA, th e defendant . None of these U.S. t axpayers t imelyrepor ted t h e i r accounts a t WEGELIN, the defendant , o r the incomeearned t he re in , t o the IRS on Form 1040 o r th e FBAR where theywere requ i red to do so .

Code Name (s) or Approx. Date Approx. HighNominee Name(s) in Approx. WEGELIN Value o fBenef ic ia l which WEGELIN Dates o f UBS Account(s) WEGEL INOwner (s ) Account(s) Held Account(s) Opened Accounts

.Cl ien t A N1641 1987-2008 09/2008 $2,544,609Cl ien t s B & c N1677; El v i s 1998-2008 10/2008 $873,000 Cl ient D Limpopo Foundat ion 1970s-2008 12/2008 $30,895,000Cl ien t E Hackate Foundat ion 1999-2008 12/12/2008 $1,241,644'l'otal $35,554,253

New Undeclared Accounts Opened by WEGELIN and URS FREI40. From in o r about 2006 up through and inc luding a t

l ea s t irt o r about 2010, URS FREI, the defendant , opened and/orse rviced dozens o f undeclared accounts fo r U.S. t axpayers a t

22


23/59

WEGELIN 1 the defendant . As of in o r about 2006 1 FREI managedundeclared accounts fo r approximate ly 20 U.S. t axpayers holdingapproximate ly $4 0 mil l ion in a s se t s . Those f igures grews ubs t a n t i a l l y over the next four yea rs . By in o r about 2010 1FREI managed undeclared accounts fo r approximate ly 50 U.S.taxpayers holding approximate ly $260 mil l ion i n a s s e t s . WithinWEGELIN 1 S Zurich Branch/ o ther Cl ien t Advisors f requen t ly soughtFREI 1 s advice concerning t h e i r undeclared U.S. t axpayeraccounts / and some Cl ien t Advisors t r a n s fe r r e d such accounts tohim. In o r about 2006 and 2007 1 FREI t rave led severa l t imes tothe United Sta tes fo r U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t bus iness . Inpar t icu la r / in o r about August and September 2007 1 FREI t r ave ledto New York 1 New York/ and to San Diego/ San Franc i sco/ Marinadel Rey 1 and Santa Monica/ Cal i fo rn ia .

41. In o r about 2008 and 2009 1 WEGELIN and URS FREI 1 thedefendants / opened new undeclared accounts fo r U.S. taxpayerswho had f led UBS 1 inc luding the fol lowing:

Clients F and G42. URS FREI 1 the defendant 1 was the Cl ien t Advisor a t

WEGELIN 1 the defendant / fo r two undeclared accounts mainta inedby two bro ther s ("Cl ients F and G11 ) 1 co-conspira tors not namedas defendants herein 1 who were 1 a t a l l t imes r e levan t to th i sIndic tment 1 U.S. c i t i z e ns and res iden t s o f Bayside/ New York.

23


24/59

43. In o r about August 2008, Cl ien t s F and G t r ave led fromNew York to Zurich to meet with t h e i r c l i e n t adv iso r a t UBS,where they had owned separate undeclared accounts s ince in o rabout the 1960s. The UBS c l i e n t advisor informed Cl ien t s F andG t ha t they must close t h e i r UBS accounts , and t h a t o th e r U.S.t axpayers with undec lared accounts were t r a ns f e r r ing funds too the r Swiss banks, inc luding WEGELIN, the defendant .

44. Cl ien t s F and G then walked to th e Zurich Branch ofWEGELIN, the defendant , which was near UBS's Zurich of f ice , andasked to open a new account fo r each of them. There they metwith URS FREI, th e defendant . FREI in terviewed Cl ien t s F and Gand inspec ted t h e i r U.S. passpor ts . Cl ients F and G to ld FREIt h a t they wanted to t r a ns f e r asse t s from UBS to WEGELIN.

45. FREI opened separate undeclared accounts fo r Clients Fand G and a s s i s t e d with th e t r a ns f e r of t h e i r funds from UBS toWEGELIN, th e defendant : approximate ly $3.4 m i l l i on . fo r Cl ien t Fand $800,000 fo r C l i en t G. In add i t ion , FREI es tab l i shed theaccounts in code names ("Nl PULTUSK" and "Nl DREW,"respect ively) so t h a t t h e i r names would appear on a minimalnumber of records r e l a t i ng to t h e i r accounts .

46. Afte r opening t h e i r accounts , FREI gave h is businesscard to Cl ien t s F and G and t o ld them to c a l l him if they neededanything. Thereaf te r , on mult ip le occas ions in o r about 2008

24


25/59

and 2009, Cl ien t s F and/or G ca l l ed FREI from the United Sta tesand spoke to FREI o r one of h is ass i s t an t s about th e s ta tus andgrowth of t h e i r accounts a t WEGELIN, th e defendant .

47. In o r about October 2009, the undeclared accountsowned by C l i en t s F and G a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , he ldapproximately $3.4 mil l ion and $800,000 re spec t ive ly .

Clients H and I

48. URS FREI, the defendant , also served as the c l i e n tadvisor a t WEGELIN, the defendant , fo r an undeclared accountmainta ined j o in t ly by Cl ien t s H and I , co-conspira tors not namedas defendants here in . At a l l t imes r e levan t to t h i s Indic tment ,Clients H and I were U.S. c i t i z e ns and re s iden t s of New Je rsey .

49. In o r about November 2008, Cl ien t s H and I's UBSc l i en t adv i so r no t i f i ed them t ha t they must c lose t h e i rundeclared UBS account . Cl ien t H asked h is UBS c l i e n t advisorto r e f e r him to another Swiss bank so t h a t Cl ien t s H and I couldcont inue to main ta in an undeclared account . The UBS c l i en tadvisor recommended WEGELIN, the defendant , and two o th e r Swissbanks.

50. Cl ien t s H an d I walked to the Zurich Branch o fWEGELIN, the defendant , and met with URS FREI, th e defendant .FREI to ld Cl ien t s H and I t ha t he handled American accounts fo rWEGELIN. FREI in te rv iewed Cl ien t s H and I about t h e i r persona l

25


26/59

background and the amount they wished to depos i t . C l ien t s H andI showed t h e i r U.S. passpor t s to FREI and to ld him t ha t theywanted t.o t r ans fe r approximate ly $1 mil l ion from UBS to WEGELIN.

51. On o r about November 13, 2008, URS FREI, thedefendant , opened a new account for Cl ients H and I . At t ha tt ime, WEGELIN, the defendant , promised Cl ien t s H and I t ha t theycould conduct bus iness with th e bank using th e code name"N5771." WEGELIN a l so promised not to send mai l to Cl ien t s Hand I in the United St a t e s . In add i t ion , FREI i n s t ruc tedCl ien t s H and I not to c a l l him from th e United St a t e s . Later ,in o r about Ju ly 2009, FREI l i f t e d t h i s r e s t r i c t i o n a f t e rCl ien t s H and I informed him t ha t they had vo lun ta r i l y disc losedt h e i r WEGELIN account to the IRS.

52. On o r about Ju ly 14, 2009, th e undec lared accountowned by Cl ien t s H and I a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , heldapproximate ly $1,105,593.

Clients J and K

53. URS FREI, the defendant , also opened an undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , fo r C l ien t s J and K, amarr ied couple and co-conspira tors not named as defendantshe re in . At a l l t imes r e levan t to th i s Ind ic tment , Cl ien t s J andK were U.S. c i t i z e ns l i v ing in Los Angeles, Cal i fo rn ia .

26


27/59

54. In o r about 2008, Cl ien t s J and K, who had mainta inedan undeclared account a t UBS and one o f i t s predecessor bankss ince iri o r abou t t b , e , ~ 8 0 s , were advised by t h e i r UBS c l i e n tadv i se r t h a t they must c lose t h e i r undec la red UBS account .Clients J and K then spoke to an a t to rney in Los Angeles ( the"Los Angeles Attorney") , who advised them to c rea te an of f shoreen t i t y to hold th e account and who r e f e r r e d them to WEGELIN andURS FREI, th e defendants . Thereaf te r , in o r about November2008, a t th e Los Angeles At to rney ' s of f i c e , Cl ien t s J and Kcompleted account opening documents fo r a new account to be heldin the name of White Tower Holdings, LLC, a corpora t ion formedunder th e laws of Nevis. These documents inc luded: (1 ) a Form As t a t i n g t h a t Cl ien t s J and K benef ic ia l ly owned the White TowerHoldings account; (2) copies of the U.S. passpor t s o f Cl ien t s Jand K; (3 ) a separa te WEGELIN form in which Cl ien t s J and Kf a l s e ly s t a t e d t h a t White Tower Holdings was th e " b en e f i c i a lowner o f a l l income from US sources depos i ted in th e above-mentioned por t fo l i o ( s ) , in accordance with US tax l aw[]" ; and(4 ) even though the account was to be undeclared, Forms W-9 fo rCl ients J and K. A Form W-9 i s an IRS form through which U.S.taxpayers can ident i fy themselves as such to a bank, therebycausing the bank to r epor t the U.S. t axpayers ' account income to

27


28/59

the IRS each yea r on Form 1099. The Los Angeles Attorney thens en t the s igned documents from the United Sta tes to WEGELIN.

55. In o r about November 2008, Cl ien t s J and K t r ave led toZurich and Cl ien t K met with URS FREI, the defendant , a tWEGELIN, the defendant . FREI advised Cl ien t K t h a t mai l wouldnot be sen t to Cl ien t s J and K in the United St a t e s . FREI alsoadv i sed t ha t ROGER KELLER, the defendant , would be FREI'ssecondary con tac t a t the bank in the event t h a t FREI wasunava i lable . The nex t day, Clients J and K met with FREI againto discuss the wiring o f t h e i r funds from UBS to WEGELIN.

56. On o r about September 30, 2009, th e undec lared accountowned by Cl ien t s J and K a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , heldapproximate ly $614,408.

Clients L and M

57. URS FREI, th e defendant , was a l so the c l i e n t advisorfo r an undeclared account held a t WEGELIN, the defendant , byCl ien t s L and M, a married couple and co-consp i ra to r s not namedas defendants here in . At a l l t imes r e levan t to t h i s Indic tment ,Cl ien t s L and M were U.S. c i t i z e ns and res iden t s of Flor ida .

58. In o r about December 2008, the UBS c l i e n t advisor forCl ien t s L and M no t i f i e d them t ha t they must c lose t h e i rundeclared UBS account , which they had held in the name of anen t i t y ca l l ed th e Magabri Foundat ion, a sham en t i t y formed under

28


29/59

th e laws of Liech tens te in . The UBS c l i e n t adv i so r fu r the rinformed Cl ien t s L and M t ha t they could open a new account a t~ I N , th e defendant. Th e UBS c l i e n t adv i so r spoke to URSFREI, the defendant , on beha l f of Cl ien t s L and M and learnedt h a t WEGELIN and FREI were wil l ing to open a new account fo rthem in the name o f t h e i r sham e n t i t y , the Magabri Foundation.

59. The UBS c l i e n t advisor then arranged fo r , andaccompanied Cl ien t s L and M to , a meeting with URS FREI, thedefendant , a t the Zurich Branch o f WEGELIN, the defendant , in o rabout January 2009. At o r about t ha t t ime, FREI was informedt ha t Cl ien t s L and M were U.S. c i t i z e ns l iv ing in Flor ida andt ha t UBS was c los ing t h e i r account .

60. On o r about January 12, 2009, WEGELIN and URS FREI,the defendants , opened two new undeclared accounts fo r Cl ients Land M in th e name of the Magabri Foundation. At o r about t ha t t ime, WEGELIN, th e defendant , accepted a Form A declar ing t ha tCl ien t s L a n d M were the benef i c i a l owners of the accounts .Copies of t h e i r passpor t s were a t tached to th e Form A. Inadd i t ion , WEGELIN promised not to send mai l to Cl ien t s L and Min the United Sta t e s , and FREI i n s t ruc ted Cl ien t L not to c a l lhim from the United St a t e s . FREI l i f t ed the i n s t ruc t ion not toc a l l from the United Sta tes in o r about November 2009 a f t e r

29


30/59

Cl ien t L no t i f i ed FREI t h a t he had vo lun ta r i ly d isc losed theMagabri Foundat ion accounts to the IRS.

61. On o r about December 31, 2009, the undeclared accountsowned by Cl ien t s L and M a t WEGELIN, the defendant , heldapproximate ly $2,729,318.

62. Severa l of the undeclared U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s ofWEGELIN and URS FREI, the defendant s , are descr ibed in thefol lowing t a b l e . None of these U.S. taxpayers t imely repor tedt h e i r WEGELIN accounts , o r the income earned t he re in , t o the IRSon Form 1040 o r the FBAR where they were required to do so .

ApproximateCode Name (s) o r Date ApproximateNominee Name(s) in Approximate WEGELIN High Value

Benef ic ia l which WEGELJ:N Dates o f UBS Account(s) o f WEGELINOwner(s) Account(s) Held Account(s) Opened AccountsCl ien t F N1 PULTUSK 1960s - 2008 08/2008 $3,200,000Cl ien t G N1 DREW 1960s - 2008 08/2008 $800,000Cl ien t s H and I N5571 2006 - 2008 11/13/2008 $1,105,593Cl ien t s J and K White Tower Hold. 1980s - 2008 11/6/2008 $614,408Cl ien t s L and M Magabri Foundat ion 1997 - 2009 1/12/2009 $2,729,318Cl ien t s N and 0 Efraim Foundat ion 1973 - 2008 06/2008 $52,747,000Arthur Eisenberg N1126 1983 - 2008 12/10/2008 $2,234,608Tota l $60,980,927

New Undeclared Accounts Opened by WEGELIN and ROGER KELLER63. From in o r about 2007 up through and inc luding a t

l e a s t in o r about 2010, WEGELIN and ROGER KELLER, th edefendants , opened and se rviced undeclared accounts fo r dozenso f U.S. t axpayers . By in o r about th e end of 2008, KELLER

30


31/59

managed undeclared accounts fo r a t l ea s t 30 U.S. taxpayersholding approximate ly $120 mil l ion in t o t a l .

64. In o r about 2008 and 2009, WEGELIN and ROGER KELLER,the defendants , opened new undeclared accounts fo r U.S.taxpayers l eaving UBS, inc luding th e fol lowing:

Client P

65. ROGER KELLER, th e defendant , served as the c l i e n tadvisor fo r an undeclared account mainta ined by Cl ien t P, a co-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant herein , a t WEGELIN, th edefendant . At a l l t imes re levant to t h i s Indic tment , Cl ien t Pwas a U.S. c i t i zen and r es iden t of Maryland.

66. In o r about 2008, UBS advised C l i en t P t ha t he mustc lose h is undeclared UBS account , which he had mainta ined s incein o r about 1970. Because Cl ien t P ' s de t e r io r a t i ng hea l th d idno t permit him to ' t r ave l to Switzer land, C l i en t P 's son, a co-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant herein , t rave led to Zurichin o r about November 2008 to c lose Cl ien t P 's UBS account andi den t i fy ano ther Swiss pr iva te bank t ha t would open a newundeclared account fo r C l ien t P. The UBS c l i e n t advisorre fe r red Cl ien t P 's son to WEGELIN, the deferidant 1 and two o therSwiss banks .

67. On o r about November 3, 2008, Cl ien t P 's son walkedin to the Zurich Branch of WEGELIN, the defendant , without an

31


32/59

appointment and asked to open an account . ROGER KELLER, thedefendant , in te rv iewed Cl ien t P 's son. Cl ien t P 's son t o ldKELLER t ha t he and Cl ien t P were U.S. c i t i z e ns who l i ved in theUnited Sta tes and t ha t Cl ien t P had mainta ined an account fo rmany years a t UBS.

68. On o r about the fol lowing day, November 4, 2008, ROGERKELLER, the defendant , with the approval of Managing Par tne r A,opened a new undeclared account in the name of Cl ien t P 's son.At o r about t h a t t ime, WEGELIN, the defendant , accepted a Form Afa l se ly s t a t i ng t ha t Cl ien t P 's son, who l ived in Manhattan, wasthe sole b e n e f i c i a l owner of the account . WEGELIN promised notto send account s ta tements or o ther mail r e l a t i ng to the accountto the United St a t e s .

69. On o r about September 30, 2009, Cl ien t P 's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, the defendant , held approximate ly $732,938.

Client Q70. ROGER KELLER, the defendant , was also th e c l i e n t

advisor fo r an undeclared account owned by Cl ien t Q, a co-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant here in , a t WEGELIN, thedefendant . At a l l t imes re levant to t h i s Indic tment , Cl ien t Qwas a U.S. c i t i z e n and r es iden t of Cal i fo rn ia .

71. In o r about December 2008, Cl ien t Q 's UBS c l i e n tadvisor informed him t h a t he must c lose h is undec lared UBS

32


33/59

account / which he had owned s ince in o r about 1987. Thereaf te r /C l i en t Q1 S prev ious UBS c l i en t advisor to ld him t h a t WEGELIN 1th e defendant 1 was wi l l ing to open new undeclared accounts fo rU.S. t axpayers .

72. In o r about January 2009 1 because Cl ien t Q was unablefo r hea l th reasons to t r a ve l to Zurich to c lose h is UBS account 1Cl ien t Q1 S son, a co-conspira tor not named as a defendanthere in , t rave led i n h i s place . Cl ien t Q 's previous UBS c l i en tadvisor s e t up an appointment a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , andaccompanied Cl ien t Q 's son to meet with ROGER KELLER 1 thedefendant , and a Zurich Branch supe rv i so r on o r about January 5,2009. At t h i s i n i t i a l meet ing, KELLER and t he supe rv i so rinterviewed C l i en t Q 's son about h is persona l background, th esource of the funds , and the amount t ha t he wished to depos i t ,among o ther th ings . C l ien t Q 's son to ld KELLER and thesupervisor t h a t he was a U.S. c i t i zen and t ha t he wanted tot r a ns f e r approximate ly $7 mil l ion from UBS to WEGELIN.

73. La te r t h a t day, ROGER KELLER, th e defendant , advisedCl ien t Q 's son by te lephone t ha t WEGELIN, the defendant , wouldopen an account fo r him. Cl ien t Q 's son then re tu rned to thebank and completed va r ious paperwork. At o r about t ha t t ime,KELLER asked Cl ien t Q 's son whether he wanted to complete an IRSForm W-9, which, if completed, would cause WEGELIN to f i l e a

33


34/59

Form 1099 with the IRS to r epor t th e income in Cl ien t Q 'saccount in a given year . Cl ien t Q's son to ld KELLER t ha t he didnot wish to complete the Form W-9. In add i t ion , KELLER agreedt ha t WEGELIN would not send mail r e l a t i ng to the account to th eUnited Sta t e s . In the context of a conversa t ion about th edemise o f UBS's c ross -borde r banking bus iness , and KELLER t o ldCl ien t Q 's son t ha t WEGELIN was the o ldes t bank in Switzer land.KELLER did so to assure him t h a t WEGELIN would not d isc loseClient Q 's i den t i t y o r account informat ion to the IRS.

74. In o r about September 2009, Cl ien t Q and h is sont r ave led to Zurich and met with ROGER KELLER, the defendant , anda lawyer r ep resen t ing WEGELIN, th e defendant . In the con tex t ofa di scuss ion about the August 2009 Agreement t h a t would r e s u l tin the d isc losure of 4,450 UBS account f i l e s to th e IRS, KELLERand the WEGELIN lawyer assured Cl i en t Q and h i ~ ? son t h a t ClientQ 's account was safe and t h a t t h e i r names would n o t be re leasedto th e United Sta tes a u thor i t i e s .

75. On o r about March 31, 2010, Cl ien t Q 's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, the defendant , held approximate ly$7,173,679.

76. C l i en t P, Cl ien t Q, and o th e r undeclared U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s of WEGELIN and ROGER KELLER, the defendants ,are descr ibed in the fol lowing t ab le . None of . t he s e U.S.

34


35/59

t axpayers t imely repor t ed t h e i r WEGELIN accounts , o r th e incomeearned t h e r e in , to th e IRS on Form 1040 o r th e FBAR where theywere requi red to do so .

Code Name{s) o r Approx. Approx. Date ApproximateNominee Name{s) in Dates o f WEGELIN High ValueBenef ic ia l which WEGELIN UBS Account{s) of WEGELINOwner{s) Account(s) Held Account(s) Opened AccountsCl ien t P Cl ien t P 's Son 1970-2008 2008 $732,938Cl ien t Q Cl ien t Q 's Son 1987-2009 1/5/2009 $7,173,679Cl ien t s R & s Cl ien t R ' s Advisor 1970s 12/19/2008 $3,667,724Cl ien t s T & u TMT Family Foundat ion 1981-2008 11/2008 $1,247,649

. ,.-otal $12,821,990

New Undeclared Accounts Opened by C l i en t Advisor A77. From in o r about 2005 up th rough and inc lud ing in o r

about 2010, C l i en t Advisor A opened and se rv iced U.S. t axpayer-c l i e n t s with undeclared accounts a t WEGELIN, th e defendant ,inc lud ing the fo l lowing :

Cl ien t V

78. For example, Cl ien t Advisor A opened and mainta ined anundeclared account fo r Cl ien t V, a co-consp i ra to r no t named as adefendant h e re i n , a t WEGELIN, the defendan t . Cl ien t V was, a ta l l t imes r e l ev an t to t h i s Ind ic tment , a U.S. c i t i zen andr e s id en t of Flor ida .

79. Beginning in o r about 2005, Cl ien t V owned undec la redaccounts a t UBS and Swiss Bank B. In o r about 2008 and 2009,both UBS and Swiss Bank B requ i red C l i e n t V to c lose h isundeclared a c c o u n t s . . - - ~ " - -

35


36/59

80. On o r about Apr i l 14, 2009, Cl ien t V 's c l i e n t advisora t Swiss Bank B informed Cl ien t V t ha t WEGELIN, th e defendant ,was opening new undeclared accounts fo r U.S. t axpayers who weref l ee ing Swiss Bank B. Cl ien t V then walked to the Zurich Branchof WEGELIN, the defendant , without an appointment and asked toopen an account .

81. At o r about t h a t t ime, Cl ien t Advisor A in terviewedCl ien t V about h is persona l background and the source of h isfunds , among o ther th ings . C l ien t V t o ld Cl ien t Advisor A t ha tUBS and Swiss Bank B were clos ing h is accounts ; showed Cl ien tAdvisor A hi s .U .S . passpor t ; and to ld Cl ien t Advisor A t ha t hewished to depos i t approximate ly $5.7 mil l ion a t WEGELIN, thedefendant . Cl ien t Advisor A, with the express approva l ofManaging Par tner A, agreed to open the account through a" s t ruc tu re" - - t h a t i s , a sham of f shore en t i t y - - ra th e r than inCl ien t V 's own name.

82. To e s t a b l i s h th e " s t ru c t u re , " on o r about t h a t sameday, Apr i l 14, 2009, Cl ien t Advisor A i nv i t ed an employee of aSwiss company t h a t provides tax and l e g a l se rv ices ("Swiss Trus tAdvisor A") to meet with C l i en t V. At t h a t meet ing, Swiss Trus tAdvisor A sold to Cl ien t V an of f - the - s he l f sham en t i ty ca l ledthe Ni t ro Foundat ion. Cl ien t Advisor A, in tu rn , opened a newaccount a t WEGELIN, the defendant , fo r Cl ien t V in the name of

36


37/59

the Nit ro Foundat ion. In wr i t t en mate r ia l s t h a t Swiss Trus tAdvisor A provided to WEGELIN, Swiss Trust Advisor Aacknowledged t h a t Cl ien t V 's account would be undec lared . At o rabout t ha t t ime, WEGELIN accepted a Form A dec la r ing t ha t Cl ien tV, a U.S. c i t i zen and r es iden t of Flor ida , was th e b e n e f i c i a lowner o f the Ni t ro Foundation account . In add i t ion , WEGELINpromised t h a t it would n ot send mai l to Cl ien t V in th e UnitedSta tes . Thereaf ter , Cl ient V i n s t ruc ted UBS and th e Swiss BankB to t r a ns f e r h is funds to the Ni t ro Foundat ion account a tWEGELIN. Based on th e advice o f Cl ien t V 's c l i e n t advisors a tUBS and Swiss Bank B, the funds were t r ans fe r red in Swiss f rancsso t ha t the t ransac t ions would occur en t i r e l y i n Swi tzer l and,thereby reduc ing th e r i sk t ha t th e IRS would d e t e c t the account .

83. At o r about t h a t t ime, Cl ien t Advisor A i n s t ruc tedCl ien t V to use t e x t messages to communicate with him, r a t h e rthan te lephone c a l l s , because U.S. law enforcement a u thor i t i e sd id not y e t have th e a b i l i t y to t r ack th e huge volume of t e x tmessages t h a t were wri t t en around th e world. In add i t ion ,Client Advisor A assured Cl ient V t h a t h is account would remainsafe a t WEGELIN because th e bank was very o ld , had a r icht r a d i t i on , and d id not do business in th e Uni ted St a t e s .

84. In o r about June 2009, Cl ien t Advisor A met withClient V in Miami, Flor ida .

37


38/59

85. On o r about October 15, 2009, Cl ien t V's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , held approximate ly$4,175,000.

Client W

86. Cl ien t Advisor A also opened an undeclared account fo rCl ien t W, a co-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant herein .Cl ien t W was, a t a l l t imes r e levan t to th i s Indictment , a U.S.c i t i z e n who l ived in Cal i fo rn ia .

87. In o r about 2008, UBS advised Cl ien t W t h a t h isundeclared UBS account would be c losed . In o r about thefol lowing month, Cl ien t W asked Swiss Trust Advisor A how hecould cont inue to maintain an undeclared account in Switzer land.Swiss Trus t Advisor A re fe r red Cl ien t W to WEGELIN, th edefendant , and accompanied him to meet Cl ien t Advisor A a tWEGELIN'S Zurich Branch.

88. At t h i s meeting, Cl ien t Advisor A in te rv iewed Cl ien t Wabout h is persona l background, the source of h is funds , and theh i s to ry of h is UBS account , among o ther th ings . C l ien t W t o ldCl ien t Advisor A t h a t he was a U.S. c i t i z e n , showed h ispasspor t , and sa id t h a t UBS was clos ing h is account . Cl ien tAdvisor A t o ld Cl ien t W t ha t WEGELIN, th e defendant , would nothave UBS's problems with th e IRS because WEGELIN d id not havebranches in th e United St a t e s .

38


39/59

89. On o r about December 19, 2008, Cl ien t W re tu rned tothe Zurich of f i c e of WEGELIN, the defendant , met with Cl ien tAdvisor A, and opened an account in the name of Herzen ResourcesS.A. , a sham Panama corpora t ion t ha t Cl ien t W had bought fromSwiss Trus t Advisor A. At o r about t ha t t ime, WEGELIN accepteda Form A dec la r ing t h a t Cl ien t W benef i c i a l ly owned the HerzenResources account . In add i t ion , WEGELIN promised not to sendmail to Cl ien t W in th e United Sta tes .

90. In o r about th e summer of 2009, Cl ien t Advisor A t o ldCl ien t W t h a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , had s topped opening newaccounts fo r U.S. c l i e n t s , and t ha t Cl ien t W was lucky t ha t hehad been able to open th e Herzen Resources account .

91. On o r about September 30, 2009, Cl ien t W's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , held approximate ly$8,685,502.

Undeclared WEGELIN Accounts Managed byIndependent Asset Managers

92. Separa te and apar t from the undeclared accounts t ha tWEGELIN, the defendant , opened and managed d i rec t l y fo r U.S.taxpayers through i t s Cl ien t Advisors , WEGELIN also ac ted as acus todian with r espec t to undeclared accounts t h a t were managedby independent a s s e t managers, including th e fol lowing:

39


40/59

Kenneth Heller

93. At a l l t imes re levant to t h i s Indictment , KennethHel le r , a co-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant he re in , was aU.S. c i t i zen who l i ved and worked pr imar i ly in Manhattan. In o rabout December 2005 and January 2006, Hel le r opened anundeclared account a t UBS and funded it with approximate ly$26,420,822 wired from the United St a t e s .

94. On o r a b o ~ t June 6, 2008, Hel le r became concernedabout the IRS's i nves t iga t ion in to UBS's c ross -borde r bankingbus iness and faxed a news a r t i c l e about th e i nves t iga t ion to h isUBS c l i e n t adv i so r ("UBS Cl ien t Advisor A").

95. On o r about June 21, 2008, Hel le r re ta ined anindependent a s s e t manager based in L iech tens te in ("Liechtens te inAsset Manager A") to manage a new undeclared account t ha t Hel le ropened a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , a t o r about t h a t t ime. Overthe next s ev e r a l months, Hel le r funded t h i s account withapproximate ly $19 mil l ion wired from UBS. In orde r to p ro tec tHel le r , the account was opened in the name of NathelmCorpora t ion, according to a September 9, 2008 l e t t e r sent toH e l l e r ' s t ax p repare r by an a t to rney wo:r:king fo r He l le r ("Hel lerAttorney A"). This l e t t e r fu r the r s t a t ed :

A ll H el l e r money was t r a n s fe r r e d d i rec t l y from UBS toWegelin. . The problem i s the US Governmenti n t e r fe rence with Swiss Banks, in [an] a t t empt to

40


41/59

se ize income tax evaders.... The US Governmentg lad ly pressed its case wi th Swiss Govt fo r bankd i sc losu re of US c i t i z e ns , e t c . This i s why KH l e f tUBS [. ]

96. On o r about August 22, 2008, among o ther occas ions ,Liechtens te in Asset Manager A faxed to H e l l e r ' s o f f i c e inManhattan account s ta tements and o ther documents r e l a t i ng toHel le r ' s undec lared account a t WEGELIN, th e defendant .

97. On o r about October 2, 2008, H el l e r Attorney A faxedi n s t ruc t ions from H e l l e r ' s of f ice in Manhattan to WEGELIN, thedefendant , d i r e c t ing WEGELIN to wire approximate ly $50,000 to aU.S. bank account t h a t HELLER con t ro l led .

98. On va r ious occas ions in o r about 2008 and 2009, inresponse to t e l ephone and fax reques ts from Hel le r toLiechtens te in Asset Manager A, WEGELIN, th e defendant , i s suedmul t ip le checks drawn on th e Stamford Correspondent Account fo rth e b en e f i t of H el l e r . For example, as s e t for th in the t ab leaccompanying paragraph l37 , on o r about Ju ly 8, 2009, WEGELINi s sued approximate ly l2 checks fo r H e l l e r ' s be ne f i t , each in theamount of $2,500. Liech tens te in Asset Manager A sen t thesechecks to He l le r in the United St a t e s .

99. On o r about December 3 l , 2008, Hel l e r ' s undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, the defendant , held approx imate ly$l8 ,466,686.

4 l


42/59


43/59

defendant . On o r about December 31, 2003, the combined value ofthese undeclared accounts was approximate ly $6 ,133 ,000 .

Client Z

104. Singenberger a lso managed the as s e t s fo r an undeclaredaccount t ha t Cl ien t Z, a co-conspi ra tor no t named as a defendanthere in , he ld a t WEGELIN, the defendant . At a l l t imes r e levan tto th i s Indictment , Cl ien t Z was a U.S. c i t i z e n and re s iden t .

105. On o r about October 1, 2004, Singenberger opened anaccount fo r Cl ien t Z a t WEGELIN, the defendant , in the name ofEagle E l i t e Investments , Ltd . , a sham Hong Kong corpora t ion . Ato r about t ha t t ime, WEGELIN accepted a Form A s t a t ing tha tClien t Z bene f i c i a l l y owned the Eagle E l i t e Investments account.At o r about t h a t t ime, WEGELIN a lso accepted another bank formf a l s e ly dec la r ing t h a t Eagle E l i t e Investments bene f i c i a l l yowned the account .

106. In o r about 2009, Clien t Z held approximate ly$232,435 i n h i s undeclared account a t WEGELIN, th e defendant .

107. Severa l U.S. t axpayer-c l ients whose undeclaredaccounts a t WEGELIN, the defendant , were managed by independenta s s e t managers are descr ibed in the fol lowing t ab le . These U.S.taxpayers d id not t imely r epor t t h e i r accounts a t WEGELIN (orthe income earned there in) , to the IRS on Form 1040 o r the FBARwhere they were requi red to do so.

43


44/59

Code Name(s) o r Approx. Date Approx. HighNominee Name(s) in WEGELIN Val.ue o fBeneficial . which WEGELIN Account(s) WEGELINOwner {s ) Account(s) Held Opened Account{s)Kennet.h Hel le r Nathelm Corp. 12/2005 $18,466,686Berry T r us t , AssetC l i e n t s X & y Champion Ltd 4/10/2002 $6,133,000Eagle El i t eC l i e n t z Inves tment s Ltd . 10/1/2004 $232,435C l i e n t AA Levina Trust 4/10/2002 $776,090C l i e n t BB N 46 6 2005 $55, 496,..

~ - " ! ' r u s t ; Grand 2002;Dynamic Inves t . ; To p 6/23/2003;

.Cl i en t CC & DD Harbour Proper t i es 6/6/2005 $4,439,666Floranova Foundat ion; 9/11/2003;Michael Reiss Upside In te rna t iona l 11/2008 $2,588,470 ' l 'otal

The Repa t r i a t ion o f Undeclared FundsThrough th e Stamford Correspondent Account108. From a t l e a s t i n o r about 2005 up th rough and

inc lud ing in o r about 2011, WEGELIN, th e defendan t , used i t sStamford Correspondent Account not only to help its own U.S.t ax p ay e r - c l i en t s r e pa t r i a t e undeclared funds to th e UnitedSta tes without d e t ec t i o n by th e IRS b ut a l so to help U.S.t ax p ay e r - c l i en t s o f a t l e a s t two o th e r Swiss banks accompl ishth e same unlawful ends . For example:

Cl ien t EE109. At a l l t ~ m e s re l evan t to t h i s Ind ic tment , Cl ien t EE, a

co-consp i ra to r n o t named as a defendant he re in , was a r e s id en to f New Je r sey and a c i t i z e n Qf th e Uni ted St a t e s .

110. In o r about 2008, Cl ien t .EE opened an undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , and funded it through a

44


45/59

t r a n s fe r from Swiss Bank B, where he had held an undeclaredaccount s ince in o r about th e 1980s . C l i e n t EE's new undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN was managed by an independent a s s e t managerin Swi tzer land ("Independent Asset Manager A") .

lll. In o r about 2010, Cl ien t EE t r ave led to Afr ica fo r as a f a r i . To pay fo r th e s a f a r i , by arrangement with IndependentAsset Manager A, Cl ien t EE sen t a l e t t e r with no re tu rn addressfrom New Je r sey to Independent Asse t Manager A in Switzer land.The envelope con ta ined a s ing le piece o f p ap er on which Cl ien tEE had wri t t en only th e amount o f money Cl ien t EE needed to wireto th e s a f a r i company, namely, approximately $37,000. At o rabout t h a t t ime, Cl ien t EE sen t a second and separa te l e t t e r toIndependent A sse t Manager A con ta in ing only th e wire t r a n s fe rde ta i l s fo r th e s a f a r i company's bank account in Botswana.Thereaf te r , pursuan t to these i n s t ruc t ions , on o r about June 22,2010, WEGELIN wired approximate ly $37,000 th rough th e StamfordCorrespondent Account to th e s a f a r i company's bank account inBotswana.

112. In o r about December 2009, Cl ien t EE's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendan t , held approximate ly $847,844.

45


46/59

Client FF113. At a l l t imes re l evan t t o t h i s Ind ic tment , Cl ien t FF , a

co-consp i ra to r n ot named as a defendant he re in , was a r es iden tof Connec t icu t and a c i t i z e n of the United St a t e s .

114. In o r about 2006, Cl ien t FF i nher i t ed funds held in anundeclared account a t WEGELIN, th e defendan t .

115. On va r ious occas ions from in o r about 2007 up throug!land inc luding in o r about 2011, WEGELIN wired a t o t a l ofapproximate ly $324,955 in increments l e s s than $10,000 throughthe Stamford Correspondent Account to Cl ien t FF in th e Uni tedS ta t e s , as descr ibed in th e t ab le accompanying paragraph 137.

116. On o r about December 31, 2008, Cl ien t FF 's undeclaredaccount a t WEGELIN, th e defendant , held approximate ly $637,395.

Client GG

117. At a l l t imes re l evan t to t h i s Ind ic tment , Cl ien t GG, aco-consp i ra to r n o t named as a defendant he re in , was a r es iden to f Westches te r County, New York, and a c i t i zen o f th e Uni tedS ta t e s .

118. In o r around 2006, Cl ien t GG t r a n s fe r r e d undeclaredfunds t h a t he had held a t a Swiss bank s ince in o r about th eear ly 1990s to a new undeclared account a t WEGELIN, th edefendant . The new undeclared account was held in th e name ofBirkdale Universa l , S.A. , a sham en t i t y es t ab l i s h ed under the

46


47/59


48/59

Thereaf te r , a t FREI's reques t , Cl ien t GG withdrew approximate ly$ k ~ , o o o in u.s. cur rency from h is Westchester County account .On o r about August 21, 2007, Cl ien t GG ca r r ied t h i s $16,000 incash with him to a lunch meeting in Manhattan with FREI, againa t FREI's r eques t . At the lunch, Cl ien t GG handed FREI anunmarked envelope conta in ing th e $16,000. During the lunch, th ehead wai te r informed FREI t ha t someone e l s e a t the res t au ran twished to speak with him. FREI then excused himse l f from Cl ien tGG, walked to th e o the r s ide of the res t au ran t , and met withFREI's Other Cl i en t fo r approximate ly 10 minutes . At o r aboutt ha t t ime, FREI gave the Other Cl ien t th e cash - f i l l ed unmarkedenvelope t h a t Cl i en t GG had given to FREI moments ea r l i e r . FREIthen re turned to Cl i en t GG and noted t ha t it was becomingincreas ingly d i f f i c u l t to move funds out o f Swi tzer land , andtha t , to do so , he employed t h i s technique o f t r ans fe r r ing cashd i r ec t ly between h is c l i en t s . Thereaf ter , FREI cred i t edapproximate ly $16,000 to Cl ien t GG's undec lared account a tWEGELIN - - th e Birkda le Account .

121. In o r about 2010, Cl ien t GG's u n d e c l a r e d ~ a c c o u n t a tWEGELIN, the defendant , held approximate ly $898,652.

48


49/59

Client HH122. At a l l t imes r e levan t to th i s Indic tment , Cl ien t HH, a

co-conspira tor not named as a defendant here in , was a res iden tof Connect icut and a c i t i zen o f the United St a t e s .

123. Beginning in o r about the 1990s, Cl ien t HH mainta inedan undeclared account a t UBS. In o r about 2003, Cl ien t HH andher Swiss independent a s s e t manager ("Independent Asse t ManagerB") t rans fe r red h e r UBS funds to an undeclared account a tWEGELIN, the defendant .

124. On va r ious occas ions from in o r about 2003 up throughand inc luding in o r about 2009, Cl ien t HH t rave led toSwitzer land and withdrew funds from her undeclared account a tWEGELIN, the defendant , with the help of Independent Asse tManager B. Independent Asse t Manager B advised Cl ien t HH not tocar ry more than $10,000 i n to the United Sta tes a t any one t ime.

125. On va r ious occasions from in o r about 2003 up to andinc luding in o r about 2009, Independent Asset Manager B metCl ien t HH fo r dinner in Manhattan. When he d id soL he sometimesgave her U.S. currency withdrawn from her undeclared account a tWEGELIN, the defendant .

126. On var ious occas ions from in o r about 2005 up throughand inc luding in o r about 2009, WEGELIN, the defendant , i s suedchecks to Cl ien t HH drawn on the Stanford C o r r e s ~ o n d e n t Account.

49


50/59

As se t fo r th in the t ab le accompanying paragraph 137, WEGELINi ssued mul t ip l e checks in t h i s manner, each fo r l e s s than$10,000 to fu r t h e r conceal Cl ien t HH's undeclared account , fo r at o t a l of approx imate ly $79,500.

127. As o f December 2007, Cl ien t HH's undeclared account a tWEGELIN, the defendan t , he ld approximately $177,095.

Client I I

128. At all t imes re l evan t to t h i s Ind ic tment , Cl ien t I I , aco-consp i ra to r no t named as a defendant he re in , was a r es iden to f Arizona and a c i t i z e n of the Uni ted St a t e s .

129. Beginning in o r about 2010, Cl ien t I I mainta ined anundeclared account a t Swiss Bank c.

,c.,,.130. In o r about "2d1o, Cl ien t I I asked h is c l i e n t adv i sora t Swiss Bank c ("Swiss Bank c Client Advisor") to send himseve ra l batches of checks a t regu la r i n t e rv a l s , t h ree checks a ta t ime, each fo r l e s s than $5,000, payable to a company t h a tCl ien t I I co n t r o l l ed ( "Cl ien t II's Company"). Cl ien t I I f u r th e rreques ted t h a t th e checks "be drawn in th e U.S. d o l l a r s on yourcor responding US bank" and noted t h a t th e checks would be cashedover t ime.

131. Therea f t e r , from in o r about December 2010 up throughand inc lud ing in o r about March 2011, WEGELIN, th e defendant ,i ssued approx imate ly f ive checks drawn on th e Stamford

50


51/59

Correspondent Account payable to C l ien t II's Company andprovided them to th e Swiss Bank C Cl ien t Advisor , who, in turn ,s en t them to Cl ien t I I in Arizona. WEGELIN i s sued the checks ,which a re s e t fo r th in th e t ab le accompanying paragraph 137, inamounts l e s s than $5,000, fo r a t o t a l of $21,088.

132. As o f in o r about October 2010, Cl ien t II's undeclaredSwiss Bank C account held approximate ly $2,183,606.

Client JJ

133. At a l l t imes r e levan t to th i s Indictment , Cl ien t JJ , aco-consp i ra to r not named as a defendant here in , was a res iden tof Arizona and a c i t i zen of the United St a t e s .

134. Beginning in o r about th e 1990s, Cl ien t J J mainta inedan undec lared account a t Swiss Bank B. In o r about l a t e 2009,Swiss Bank B informed him t ha t he had to c lose h is account . Hethen t rave led to Swi tzer land and opened an undec lared account a tSwiss Bank C with the help of the Swiss Bank C Cl ien t Advisor .

135. Thereaf te r , from in o r about October 2009 up throughand inc luding in o r about March 2011, WEGELIN i s sued f ive checksdrawn on the Stamford Correspondent Account payable to Cl ien tJJ , each in the amount o f approximate ly $45,000, as s e t fo r th inthe t ab le accompanying paragraph 137.

136. As of Ju ly 2011, Cl ien t J J ' s undeclared Swiss Bank Caccount held approximate ly $6,700,000.

51


52/59

137. Cer ta in checks and wire t r ans f e r s t ha t WEGELIN, thedefendant , i ssued and executed through the StamfordCorrespondent Account on beha l f o f U.S. taxpayers wi thundeclared accounts a t WEGELIN, Swiss Bank C, and Swiss Bank D,fo r a t o t a l of approximate ly $1,417,626, a re l i s t e d in thefol lowing t ab l e . None of these U.S. taxpayers t imely repor tedsuch accounts , o r the income earned t he re in , to the IRS on Form1040 o r the FBAR where they were required to do so .Check # Swiss bank where(or Check/ Wire Undeclared u.s. t axpayer ' swire) da te Approx. amount u.s. t axpayer account was he ld2184 3/10/2005 $ 51621.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2217 4/20/2005 $ 5,000.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELIN;2252 6/23/2005 $ 9,367.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2331 10/11/2005 $ 7,863.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2399 1/9/2006 $ 32,250.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D

2423 2 /7 /2006 $ 26,675.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D244'S 3/15/2006 $ 7,570.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D..2490 5/16/2006 $ 8 ,250 .00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2547 7/26/2006 $ 2,900.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2591 9/7/2006 $ 8,000.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2634 11 /7 /2006 $ 9,827.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank D2635 11 /8 /2006 $ 5,000.00 Cl ien t HH WEGEL IN.2636 11/13/2006 $ 5,000.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELIN2726 2/8/2007 .$ 8,730.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank DWire 3/30/2007 $ 8,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN2791 4/25/2007 $ 8,200.00 Cl ien t KK Swiss Bank DWire 4/27/2007 $ 8 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 8/8/2007 $ 8 ,000 .00 Cl ien t GG WEGELINWire 8/9/2007 $ 8,000.00 Client GG WEGELIN3152 11/13/2007 $ 5,000.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELIN3253 3/13/2008 $ 5,000.00 Client KK Swiss Bank D-Wire 4/1/2008 $ 2 ,000 .00 Client FF WEGELINWire 4/15/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 5/1/2008 $ 2 ,ooo .oo Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 5/15/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 5/30/2008 $ 2 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3283 5/30/2008 $ 8 ,500 .00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 6/13/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 7/1/2008 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 7/15/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 8/1/2008 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN

52


53/59

Check # Swiss bank where(or Check/ Wire Undeclared u.s. t axpayer ' swire) da te Approx. amount u.s. t axpayer account wa s heldWire 8/15/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WRGELINWire 8/29 /2008 $ 2 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 9/15 /2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 10 /1 /2008 $ 2 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 10/31/2008 $ 2,000.00 Cl i en t FF WEGELINWire 11/14/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl i en t FF WEGELIN3416 11/25/2008 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3417 11/25/2008 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3418 11/25/2008 $ 8 ,500 .00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3421 11/28/2008 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 12 / l / 2008 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 12/15/2008 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 12/31/2008 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3468 1/5/2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3469 1/5/2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl i en t A WEGELIN3470 1/5/2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELINWire 1/6/2009 $ 11,000.00 Cl ien t A WEGELINWire 1 /15 /2009 $ 4 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3483 1 /26 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 1 /30 /2009 $ 2 ,000 .00 Cl i en t FF WEGELINWire 2 /13 /2009 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3510 2 /26 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3512 2 /26 /2009 $ 8 ,500 .00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3511 2/26/2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl i en t A WEGE:wH3509 2/26/2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 2/27/2009 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 3 /13 /2009 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3532 3 /25 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl i en t HH WEGELINWire 4/1/2009 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 4 /15 /2009 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 4 /21 /2009 $ 20,000.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3552 4 /21 /2009 $ 8 ,500 .00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3553 4 /21 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl i en t A WEGELIN3554 4 /21 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t A WEGELIN3556 4 /24 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 5 /1 /2009 $ 2,000.00 Cl i en t FF WEGELINWire 5 /15 /2009 $ 4 ,000 .00 Cl ien t FF WEGELINWire 5 /22 /2009 $ 4,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN3568 5 /25 /2009 $ 8,500.00 Cl ien t HH WEGELINWire 6 /1 /2009 $ 2,000.00 Cl ien t FF WEGELIN35"11 6 /8 /2009 $ 10,000.00 K. Hel l e r WEGELINWire 6/11/2009 $ 6,000.00 Cl i en t FF WEGELINWire 6/15/2009 $ 4,665.00 Cl i en t FF WEGELINWire 7 /1 /2009 $ 3 ,500 .00 Cl i en t FF WEGELIN3592 7 /8 /2009 $ 2,500.00 K. Hel le r WEGELIN3583 7 /8 /2009 $ 2,500.00 K. Hel le r WEGELIN3587 7/fS/2009 $ 2,500.00 K. Hel le r WEGELIN3586 7 /8 /2009 $ 2,500.00 K. Hel le r WEGELIN3589 7 /8 /2009 $ 2,500.00 K. Hel l e r . WEGELIN

53


54/59


55/59


56/59

offenses ag a in s t th e United Sta tes , to wit , v i o l a t i o n s of T i t l e26, United S ta t e s Code, Sect ions 7206(1) and 7201.

139. It was a p a r t and an objec t of th e consp i racy t ha tWEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, th edefendan ts , t oge the r with othe rs known and unknown, w i l l f u l l yand knowingly would and d id defraud th e United S ta t e s o f Americaand th e IRS fo r th e purpose o f impeding, impai r ing , obs t ruc t ing ,and de fea t ing the l awfu l governmental func t ions o f th e IRS inthe ascer ta inment , computa t ion , assessment , and c o l l e c t i o n o frevenue, to wit , f edera l income t axes .

140: It was fu r t h e r a p a r t and an ob jec t of the consp i racyt h a t var ious U.S. t axpayer -c l i en t s o f WEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA,URS FREI, and ROGER KELLER, the defendan ts , t o g e th e r with othe rsknown and unknown, w i l l f u l l y and knowingly would and d id make

and subscr ibe r e tu r n s , s ta tements , and o th e r documents, whichcontained and were ve r i f i e d by wri t t en d ec l a r a t i o n s t ha t theywere made under th e p e n a l t i e s of pe r ju ry , and which these U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t s , t oge the r with othe rs known and unknown, d idnot be l i eve to be t rue and co r r ec t as to every mate r i a l mat te r ,in v i o l a t i o n o f Ti t l e 26, United Sta tes Code, Sec t ion 7206(1) .

141. It was fu r t h e r a p a r t and an objec t of the consp i racyt h a t WEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI 1 and ROGER KELLER 1. thedefendan ts , t oge the r with othe rs known and unknown, w i l l fu l l y

56


57/59

and knowingly would and did a t tempt to evade and defea t asu b s t a n t i a l p a r t of th e income tax due and owing to th e UnitedSta tes by c e r t a in of WEGELIN'S U.S. t axpayer c l i e n t s , inv io l a t i on of Ti t l e 26, United Sta tes Code, Sec t ion 7201.

Overt Acts

142. In fur therance of the conspi racy and to e f f e c t i t si l l e g a l ob jec t s , WEGELIN, MICHAEL BERLINKA, URS FREI, ROGERKELLER, the defendan t s , and othe rs known and unknown, committedthe fol lowing over t a c t s , among o ther s , in the Southern D i s t r i c to f New York and elsewhere :

a . In o r about September 2008, WEGELIN and BERLINKAopened a new undec lared account in th e name of Cl ien t A.

b . On o r about November 25, 2008; January 5, 2009;February 26, 2009; Apr i l 21, 2009; and August 25, 2009, WEGELIN

and BERLINKA s en t mul t ip le checks drawn on the StamfordCorrespondent Account to Cl ien t A in the United St a t e s .

c . On va r ious occasions from in o r about 2003 up toand inc luding in o r about 2009, Independent Asse t Manager B metCl ien t HH fo r dinne r in Manhattan and gave h er U.S. currencywithdrawn from h e r undec lared WEGELIN account .

d. On o r about August 8 and August 9, 2007, WEGELINand FREI wired approximate ly $16,000 in tw o t r ansac t ions toC l i en t GG's U.S. bank account in Westchester County.

57


58/59

e. On o r about August 21, 2007, a t a res t au ran t inManhattan, Cl ien t GG provided approximate ly $16,000 in U.S.currency to FREI, who then provided it to FREI's Other Cl ien t .

f . On o r about November 4, 2008, WEGELIN and KELLERopened a new undec lared account in the name of Cl ien t P 's son, ares iden t of Manhattan, fo r the purpose of he lp ing Cl ien t P hideasse t s and income from th e IRS.

g. On o r about October 2, 2008, Kenneth Hel le r causedh is employee to send, by fax and U.S. mail , i n s t ru c t i o n s fromManhattan to WEGELIN d i r e c t i n g it to wire approximate ly $50,000to an account t h a t HELLER cont ro l led in the United St a t e s .

h. On var ious dates from in o r about 2006 up throughand inc luding in o r about 2009, WEGELIN, BERLINKA, FREI, andKELLER sen t Federa l Express packages r e l a t i ng to WEGELJN's U.S.t axpayer -c l i en t bus iness to addresses in the United Sta tes ,inc luding a Federa l Express package from WEGELIN to FREI a t ah o te l in Manhattan on o r about August 14, 2007.

(T i t l e 18, United Sta tes Code, Sect ion 371.)

E ~ ~ ' Z C L - -FOREPERSON PREET BHARARAUnited St a t e s Attorney

58


59/59

Form No. USA-33s-274 (Ed. 9-25-58)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-v -

WEGELIN & CO.,MICHAEL BERLINKA,URS FREI, and _ROGER KELLER,

Defendants.

18 U.S.C. 371

A TRUE BILL

INDICTMENTS1 12 Cr. 02 (JSR)

PREET BHARARAUnited States Attorney.

Foreperson.

wegelin s1 indictment

Documents