Feral Jundi

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Legal News: Former Attorney General John Ashcroft To Become Independent Director Of Xe Services

This is a very interesting move, and bravo to the investors and to Xe for bringing on this heavy weight. John Ashcroft is definitely taking on a risky move as well, and I salute his courage for jumping on board.

So what does this mean in terms of the future of Xe? There are three things that come to mind.  The first is the ongoing litigation that Xe has been up against, both by lawsuits and with the stuff going on between the US Gov and the company over various incidents. The second is the legally complex and highly dangerous missions that Xe is a part of, and especially as the DoS builds and expands their army of private security contractors. Third is how to structure the companies policies to best fit in with the new codes of conduct and licenses that companies will have to abide by as budgets are approved and laws are implemented.

Probably the one thing that keeps coming to my mind about this industry is that companies will continue to risk a lot, and in order to protect themselves legally, they have to have an army of lawfare warriors. That whole saying of ‘send guns, money, and lawyers’ is absolutely true, and the companies that want to survive and continue to provide their services, need really kick ass legal firms or legal eagles to protect them.

It will be a complex legal environment as we press forward in this war, and as we involve industry in the counter-piracy or counter-transnational criminal organizations game, and picking a former Attorney General of the United States (with all of his connections and influence) is a good move to help navigate that.

What is also interesting about this move, is that having him on board might help to attract a CEO and/or management team of a higher caliber.  It will add ‘value’ to the company, because they have added a significant player to the team.  These things matter at the upper level, and the investors are doing all they can to not only maintain the company’s current value, but to increase it and grow.  And if the customer (meaning the US government) knows that the company has a high level legal heavy weight and a strong lawfare army, then that gives them and the tax paying public a little bit more of a warm and fuzzy about the intent of the company. The narrative says that ‘the company wants to do good, and provide an excellent service for it’s clients’. –Matt

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft to Become Independent Director of Xe Services
Past Department of Justice Head to Chair Governance Subcommittee
May 04, 2011
USTC Holdings, LLC, the investor consortium that acquired Xe Services, LLC, including its main holding U.S. Training Center, Inc. (“USTC”) in December 2010, today announced that former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft will serve as an Independent Director of the company. USTC is a leading provider of training and security services focused on worldwide operations in support of the United States Government and other customers.
“Attorney General Ashcroft’s accomplished career will certainly provide a strong reference for the Company as we continue to strengthen its governance and accountability.” (more…)

Friday, February 4, 2011

Legal News: Contractor That Worked In Iraq Cannot Exclude Compensation Under § 112

     Ok gang, this is important and please feel free to pass this around.  This contractor lost in this case and the one thing that saved his bacon was this little memo that came from an IRS Acting Deputy Director in 2004.  If you filed your taxes with the impression that you fell under the same ‘combat zone compensation’ that the members of the Armed Forces received back then, then this memo could be your life saver. If anyone has a copy of this thing, I will make an edit and add it to this post so everyone knows where to find it. Robert L. Hunt was the IRS Acting Deputy Director at the time.

     The other point I wanted to bring up here is this. The powers that be are certainly trying all they can to put us under military/government control or under UCMJ, but god forbid if contractors actually enjoyed the same tax benefits as the Armed Services in combat zones? –Matt

Edit: 02/06/2011 – Thanks to Chris for sending me a copy of this memo.  I put it up in my Scribd account here if you want to check it out.

Court: Blackwater Contractor in Iraq Cannot Exclude Compensation Under § 112

By The Tax Prof

February 1, 2011

The Tax Court yesterday held that a Florida man who earned $98,400 in 2005 working for Blackwater (since renamed Xe) providing security services to the U.S. Army in Iraq could not exclude the compensation from income under § 112 as “combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces.” Holmes v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2011-26 (Jan. 31, 2011). The Tax Court concluded that the taxpayer did not serve in the Armed Forces of the United States but instead was a private citizen hired by and paid by a private company (Blackwater). The Tax Court refused to impose a penalty because the taxpayer relied on an IRS memorandum wrongly stating that civilian personnel in direct support of combat zone military operations qualified for the § 112 exclusion.

Link to TaxProf blog post here.

——————————————————————

From the Tax Court memo Holmes v. Commissioner, Page 9

     Petitioner admitted on brief that he did not file a return for calender year 2005.  Petitioner’s only explanation for failing to file is that in 2005 while in Iraq, he was given a memorandum that caused him to believe that the income he was receiving from Blackwater was not taxable.  This memorandum was an internal memorandum written to give the Commissioner’s employees field guidance for examination and collection activity involving taxpayers in Iraq.  The memorandum, titled “Memorandum for Acting Deputy Director, Compliance Field Operations”, was issued by the Internal Revenue Service Small Business/Self-Employment Division on June 28, 2004.  The memorandum states that civilian or military personnel who are in direct support of a combat zone military initiative and physically located in the combat area are entitled to the exclusion.  It also states that time spent in a combat zone by an individual serving in support of the Armed Forces will be disregarded with respect to “certain acts required under the Internal Revenue Code.”  It goes on to state that “This change in procedure will be reflected in the next revision of the IRM, which is in the process of being written.”

     Petitioner satisfies all the criteria found in the memorandum.  He was serving in Iraq alongside the military, provided security to Government officials, and aided in giving air support, medical aid, and emergency response assistance. Petitioner had no background in tax law and was given this memorandum written by an IRS employee while serving in Iraq.  We believe that receiving this memorandum while serving in Iraq could give someone reasonable cause to believe that his payments from Blackwater were excluded from gross income.  Therefore, petitioner is not liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1).

——————————————————————

From the Judicial Review

     While in Iraq, petitioner was given a memorandum issued by Robert L. Hunt, the Acting Deputy Director, Compliance Field Operations, Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This memorandum discussed the appropriate steps for civilian personnel to take when engaged in an IRS examination and collection activity involving a taxpayer deployed to a Qualified Combat Zone. Petitioner did not remember who gave the memorandum to him.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Industry Talk: Somalia TFG Cancels Contract With Saracen International

     Yarow said his government, which controls only part of Mogadishu in a country that has seen mostly anarchy for two decades, wanted assistance, but only from companies with distinguished records.

     “The Cabinet has today overwhelmingly voted against Saracen International,” Yarrow said. 

     Yes, but the Puntland contract is still in place. But as far as this contract, who knows who they will choose to replace Saracen? Whomever the donor country is, they are they ones forking over the money and will find a company the TFG can deal with.

    As for dropping Saracen purely because of Erik Prince’s supposed involvement, is pretty stupid if you ask me.  More than likely he was just advising the main planners.  I am sure his connections were useful as well.  But really, you use guys like this because they can see the whole picture and have experience with really dangerous projects.  And because someone else was paying for his services, why would the TFG care? Hell, that government needs all the help they can get, and here they are ditching a security training contract.

    Of course the media loved fueling whatever negativity they could.  Blackwater does not exist anymore, Xe has nothing to do with Saracen, and Erik Prince is doing his own thing in another country.  And yet as soon as Prince was mentioned in some report (that I have yet to see), all of a sudden Saracen International becomes the new Blackwater. Pffft. Meanwhile, islamists and pirates win another one. –Matt

Edit: 01/28/2011 – Check out the story I posted in the comments.  The reporters at the Associated Press are really going off on this deal. All I can say is bravo to the Puntland government for not being influenced by a biased media.

Somalia cancels military training project linked to Blackwater founder

By Mohamed Sheikh Nor

January 27, 2011

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Somalia’s government decided on Thursday to cancel an agreement with a private security company linked to the founder of Blackwater Worldwide to train Somali forces to go after pirates and insurgents, a senior official said.

Deputy Security Minister Ibrahim Mohamed Yarow told The Associated Press that the Cabinet, meeting behind closed doors, ended the agreement with Saracen International in a decision he said is “irrevocable.”

The AP reported last week that Erik Prince, whose former company Blackwater Worldwide became synonymous with the use of private U.S. security forces running amok in Iraq and Afghanistan, had quietly taken on a new role in the project to train troops in lawless Somalia. Blackwater guards were charged with killing 14 civilians in 2007 in the Iraqi capital.

Yarow said his government, which controls only part of Mogadishu in a country that has seen mostly anarchy for two decades, wanted assistance, but only from companies with distinguished records.

“The Cabinet has today overwhelmingly voted against Saracen International,” Yarrow said.

(more…)

Saturday, December 18, 2010

Industry Talk: USTC Holdings Buys Xe Services For Estimated $200 Million

     This post by AM Law Daily had everything that I thought was pertinent to the story.  So Xe has finally been sold, and for an estimated 200 million dollars.

     I think what is really interesting with this acquisition is all the national security related stuff that goes along with buying a company like this.  When you buy Xe, you are buying all the really complex and sensitive government contracts they are involved with.  And like the article below pointed out, Michael Chertoff’s company (former Homeland Security Secretary) was heavily involved in making sure this was done correctly.

     So what will USTC Holdings do with Xe, now that they bought it?  Good question, but I am sure you won’t see a lot of change right off the get go. Matter of fact, you probably won’t see anything new with the company, other than it just having new owners. –Matt

Bingham, Mayer Brown Advising on Sale of Blackwater/Xe Services to Private Equity Group

December 17, 2010

By Brian Baxter

Xe Services, the private military contractor formerly known as Blackwater Worldwide, announced on Friday that it had been sold to a group of private equity investors with ties to company founder Erik Prince.

Terms of the transaction were not disclosed, but The New York Times puts the value of the deal at around $200 million. USTC Holdings, the investment group taking control of Xe, said in a statement that the deal includes all Xe companies that provide domestic and international security services, including the target’s training facility in Moyock, N.C.

Bloomberg reports that USTC is comprised of private equity firms Manhattan Partners and Forté Capital Advisors, whose managing partner, Jason DeYonker, has close ties to the Prince family. (Aaron Kanter serves as Forté’s chief compliance officer and in-house counsel.)

(more…)

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Industry Talk: Security Firms’ Future Looks Bright

     While it may seem strange for powerful countries to hand over to the private sector their monopoly on legitimate violence, Chaliand says it should be seen as a private-public partnership.

     Good little article here, and it helped to bring into perspective what this code means and what it could lead too. The only thing I would disagree with here is the cost of contractors versus military. No one ever mentions the whole pension thing or lifetime medical benefits that the military retiree receives, and contractors will not(unless a company provides that).  Nor is the cost of maintaining a large standing army during times of peace ever mentioned as being politically impossible, thus making the idea of an ‘instant support force’ of contractors during times of war a good idea. Or politicians can raise an army through the means of a draft and see how that works……Or not.

     Which takes us back to this code and the possible benefits of such a thing.  Militaries and countries around the world could really stand to benefit from an industry that is well regulated and ready to go.  Most importantly, an industry/temporary work force that is willing and able to serve in a war for that country. Hmmmm–‘willing’ versus ‘forced’, ‘temporary’ versus ‘long term’. –Matt

Security firms’ future looks bright

Nov 22, 2010

by Frédéric Burnand

Private security contractors, 60 of whom recently signed an international code of conduct in Geneva, could see their growth legitimised by this document.

But specialists are warning that without a planned control mechanism the code, which pledges respect of human rights and humanitarian law, could be nothing but an empty shell.

Private security firms have been very active in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years. Before that it was Africa. But everywhere they operate, these companies have a reputation for carrying out uncontrolled mercenary activities.Today, they want to clean up their image through regulation, according to Alexandre Vautravers, head of international relations at Geneva’s Webster University.“Since the beginning of the decade, the Washington-based International Stability Operation Association has been working on the code of conduct,” he said.

Blackwater a signatory

The document signed in Geneva under the auspices of the Swiss authorities is therefore a response to demands from within the industry. Even Blackwater, best known for its activities in Iraq and since rebranded Xe Services, is one of the signatories.For French author Gérard Chaliand, who has written extensively about the mercenary business, companies like Blackwater have always found ways of surviving and expanding despite the criticism they face.“Regulating this industry seems indispensable to me with extended activities requiring new rules,” he told swissinfo.ch. “But it shouldn’t just be declarations of intention: there should also be sanctions.” (more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress