Entire books and reports have been written about the ways companies scour the globe for economic development subsidies. But the lack of universal reporting standards, language barriers, and complicated governmental and tax structures make it difficult to examine just how much individual corporations benefit from government assistance across the world. A new Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rule, Topic 832, offers a tiny window to this global practice.

FASB is an independent, private organization that creates rules on how companies should account for and report their finances (it’s the public sector equivalent to the Governmental Standards Accounting Board, or GASB). As we discussed in previous blogs, the new FASB standard requires publicly traded companies to disclose in their financial statements information about some subsidies, such as grants, granted by governments, including foreign ones (though some of the biggest taxpayer benefits companies receive, like property tax breaks, were omitted from the rule).

I looked at the new reporting by several global companies and here is what I have learned about corporate use of subsidies internationally.

Because the rule has limited reporting requirements, company subsidy disclosure can be incomplete, inconsistent, and is often missing. For example, we know Amazon has received subsidies globally, including for its second headquarters in Virginia. Yet, its financial statement is missing the reporting (the company reports, under a separate note on income tax, how much tax credits reduced its income tax liability, but that does not reflect public support through grants or rebates for example).

Some companies that report international subsidies omit the actual amounts or obscure the data by lumping all subsidies from multiple countries into a single paragraph with no breakdown by country. Take Micron Technology, which in its most recent 10-K reported this: “We receive incentives from governmental entities primarily in India, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States principally in the form of cash grants and tax credits.”

But, in some cases, we can see some specifics.

As in the U.S., companies benefit from various subsidies offered by national and local governments. Companies get tax credits and refunds, cash grants, free or discounted land, facility build-outs and improvements. Some subsidies come with investment and job creation requirements and clawback provisions.

Global companies have received massive public support from developed countries. For example, in 2022 and 2023, Ireland, a historical tax haven, provided Intel with $1 billion in grants and refundable tax credits for a manufacturing facility. And Ford is set to get $434 million* (C$590 million) by 2033 for its EV manufacturing facility in Ontario, Canada.

Companies also get subsidies from developing countries, promising leaders of the world’s poorer economics development and a bigger tax base — only a full accounting of that assistance can let residents know if their promises materialize. Tesla received $76 million in grants for its Gigafactory in Shanghai. Ford has benefited from undisclosed subsidies provided by the Brazilian government, and in its financial documents admits that its operations have benefited to a “substantial extent” from those perks.

It is interesting to see that a few countries, contrary to the U.S., allow their regions to challenge other region’s subsidies. Ford has caused a conflict between two local governments in Brazil, where the State of São Paulo challenged tax breaks granted to the company by the State of Bahia.

It’s important now more than ever to increase the global transparency around corporate subsidies – and the U.S. is in a prime position to take the lead. For one, many of the companies are U.S.-based and learned subsidy extraction at home.  Secondly, the implementation of federal policies such as the CHIPS and Science Act and Inflation Reduction Act sent a global shockwave across the world in the realm of subsidies. The European Union is known for restricting subsidy use, for example, but it loosened its subsidy regiments in response to U.S federal subsidies.

The FASB disclosure could be much stronger, requiring companies to provide a full accounting and disclosure of domestic and foreign subsidies, broken by county, province, and amounts. But if companies take the requirement seriously and disclose the required information in a comprehensive and accessible way, the public (and company investors) can better understand the costs of projects here and abroad – and hold companies accountable for the money they take.

*Converted by GJF as of April 8, 2024

As we noted last week, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has made an important contribution to the cause of corporate transparency and accountability with its new Accounting Standards Update No. 2021-10 (Topic 832). The update now requires publicly traded companies to report when they receive government assistance and how that assistance is reflected in their annual financial statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

While FASB stresses the update’s relevance to investors and market analysts, the general public has a clear interest in this information as well. “Government assistance” means our tax dollars, after all.

Unfortunately, reporting so far has been highly inconsistent.

Our preliminary survey looked at the annual SEC filings of 28 large companies across seven different industry sectors. Of those, 12 contained some form of disclosure sufficient to comply with the new rule’s minimum requirements. Another four disclosed government assistance but failed to provide specific amounts debited or credited against line items on their financial statements.

Topic 832 does call for companies to provide specific assistance amounts but does not require them to disaggregate those amounts by government entity or geography. As a result, these 16 companies provide widely varying levels of detail on the source of assistance and its intended use.

The remaining 12 companies did not disclose any government assistance in the last two years, including Alphabet (Google), Meta (Facebook), Microsoft, and Apple.

Intel, by contrast, boasted one of the most comprehensive notes we reviewed, distinguishing between capital- and operating-related assistance and disaggregating their $2.2 billion in recognized capital incentives by source.

Source: Intel Corporation, 2023 10-K Filing

Inconsistency in reporting, particularly across industries, may be in part a consequence of FASB’s decision to narrow Topic 832 to focus almost exclusively on cash grants, forgivable loans, and asset transfers.

The update does not cover non-discretionary subsidy programs made available to any company that meets predefined conditions, like a sales tax exemption on special equipment. Types of assistance that are not recognized directly in a company’s financial statements, a loan guarantee say, are likewise excluded on the grounds that estimating their value would be burdensome and impractical.

We know that for big tech companies, sales and property tax breaks on their massive and fast-proliferating data centers are some of the most lucrative subsidies these companies receive. Semiconductor manufacturers, meanwhile, are reaping tens of billions of dollars in grants and refundable investment tax credits through the federal CHIPS Act and related state programs.

FASB’s Topic 740 already covers income tax credits, though some surveyed companies, like Intel, have opted to treat refundable tax credits as government assistance.

Despite its shortcomings, Topic 832 is nevertheless a powerful peak under the hood of subsidized companies. Even given its narrow definition, we now know government assistance saved Intel $428 million on its operating costs last year, roughly a quarter of its $1.7 billion reported annual profit. This represented the second largest boost to a surveyed company’s bottom line after the Walt Disney Company, which recognized $800 million in amortized production tax credits in FY 2023.

Also notable is Intel’s inclusion of grants and refundable tax credits the company received for investments undertaken in Ireland. We’ll have more to say soon on Topic 832’s potential to broaden our perspective on corporate subsidies beyond the borders of the United States.

$1T logo
Source: Good Jobs First

Corporations in the United States have now paid more than $1 trillion since 2000 in regulatory fines, criminal penalties, and class-action settlements. This staggering total comes from a just-released report by Good Jobs First.

What stands out is the exponential growth of the fines, as detailed in Violation Tracker, a wide-ranging database containing information on more than 600,000 cases from 500 federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and prosecutors. In the early 2000s, total annual payouts for corporate misconduct were around $7 billion; in recent years, that’s grown to over $50 billion—a 300% increase in constant dollars.

Despite making up only 20% of the database’s penalty total – roughly $215 billion – the annual total of penalties levied by state and local agencies also exploded: from around $2.5 billion in the early 2000s to $8 billion last year.

States not only play a role in enforcing state-level regulations but are also responsible for the application of some federal laws, such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. Nearly two-thirds of the state totals came as the result of cases in which state attorneys general brought a group action, usually against a large company poorly operating across the country.

Financial and consumer protection offenses account for the largest portions of multi-state penalties. The largest such case to date was a 2008 settlement with the Swiss bank UBS, which agreed to pay $11 billion to resolve allegations that it misled investors in the marketing and sale of auction rate securities. That same year, Countrywide Home Loans paid nearly $9 billion to resolve allegations of predatory home mortgage practices.

Multi-state litigation is also common in enforcing healthcare violations. This played a particularly important role in exposing the actions of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors in exacerbating the opioid crisis.

Excluding multi-state cases, state regulation focused primarily on financial, consumer protection, and environmental offenses. Financial cases accounted for nearly $23 billion in penalties—soaring above every other category. Consumer protection and environmental violations follow at $15 billion and $13 billion, respectively.

Variations in state legislation, size, population, or funding can cause wide discrepancies in the penalty totals of the states. Those totals range from over $21 billion in California and New York, to less than $9 million in South Dakota.

Map of state penalties from $1 trillion report
Source: Good Jobs First’s Violation Tracker

California and New York together account for more than half of all state penalties apart from the multi-state cases. Sixteen other states have totals between $1 billion and $3.5 billion.

When state penalties are broken down into our nine offense groups, California and New York are at the top in every category except for healthcare-related offenses. The leader in that area is Florida, which has handed out nearly $2 billion in healthcare penalties since 2000, mostly related to nursing home violations involving resident health and safety. Washington State—renowned for its medical care—comes in second with more than $830 million in penalties.

Some of the disparities among state penalty totals is likely due to inadequate disclosure practices rather than an actual lack of enforcement. Numerous states need to improve agency transparency so that the public can see how much enforcement they are actually doing.

While state governments generally do a good job in targeting larger companies in their multi-state actions, some states have limited participation in these cases. More vigorous enforcement is needed at the local level in most states to duplicate the achievements of county and city agencies in California and New York. Taking what appears to be a half-hearted approach to enforcement deprives residents of the protections contained both in state regulations and in the federal laws the states help to enforce.

That companies have paid $1 trillion in fines, fees, and penalties for their actions is bad enough. But the totals would be much higher – for federal, state, and local agencies – if so many of these corporate leaders weren’t simply given a slap on the wrist when caught engaging in harmful or deceitful practices.

An actual crime wave

Contact:
Phil Mattera [email protected]

Siobhan Standaert [email protected] 

Logos of Enron, BP, Bank of America, Purdue, Wells Fargo and Volkswagen

Washington, DC — Regulatory fines, criminal penalties, and class-action settlements paid by corporations in the United States since 2000 have now surpassed $1 trillion. Total payouts for corporate misconduct grew from around $7 billion per year in the early 2000s to more than $50 billion annually in recent years, according to a new report by Good Jobs First.

This amounts to a seven-fold increase in current dollars — a 300% increase in constant dollars.

These figures are derived from Violation Tracker, a wide-ranging database containing information on more than 600,000 cases from about 500 federal, state and local regulatory agencies and prosecutors as well as court data on major private lawsuits.

The database shows that 127 large parent companies have each paid more than $1 billion in fines and settlements over the past quarter-century. The most penalized industries are financial services and pharmaceuticals, followed by oil and gas, motor vehicles, and utilities.

“The fact that penalties have reached the 10-figure level suggests that we have been living through a continuous corporate crime wave,” said Philip Mattera, Good Jobs First research director and lead author of the report. “Every year, companies pay out billions of dollars for a wide range of offenses. Many large corporations are fined or enter into settlements over and over again, often for the same or similar misconduct.”

Among the findings:

  • Bank of America has by far the largest penalty total at $87 billion. It and other banks, both domestic and foreign, account for six of the 10 most penalized parent companies.
  • Other bad actors include BP (mainly because of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill), Volkswagen (because of its emissions software cheating scandal), Johnson & Johnson (largely because of big settlements in cases alleging its talcum powder causes cancer), and PG&E (due to cases accusing it of causing or contributing to wildfires in the West).
  • Recidivism is a major issue. Half a dozen parent companies—all banks—have each paid $1 million or more in over 100 different cases, led by Bank of America with 225. Two dozen parents have at least 50 of these cases on their record.
  • All of the top 10 and 95 of the 100 most penalized parent companies are publicly traded. The most penalized privately held company is Purdue Pharma, which is going out of business for its role in causing the opioid crisis.
  • In more than 500 of the cases involving criminal charges, the U.S. Justice Department offered the defendant a deferred prosecution or non-prosecution agreement, thus allowing it to avoid entering a plea. Numerous companies have gotten more than one of these leniency agreements.
  • Cases brought by state and local government prosecutors and regulators account for $215 billion of the trillion-dollar total. Nearly two-thirds of that amount came from actions brought by groups of state attorneys general or financial regulators acting in concert. California and New York far surpass the rest of the states in the penalties achieved through single-state actions.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration accounts for more than one-third of the 600,000 cases in Violation Tracker, which includes only fines of $5,000 or more. But because OSHA’s fines have been kept artificially low and are often below that threshold, the agency accounts for only $3 billion of the $1 trillion total (for example, a company today pays a maximum fine of just over $16,000 when an employee is killed on the job).

The study calls on prosecutors and regulators to supplement monetary penalties with other kinds of remedies, such as forcing companies to divest from lines of business in which they were engaged in serious misconduct. The Justice Department also needs to be more aggressive in bringing criminal charges against individual corporate executives in the most serious cases.

It also calls for greater consistency among states in their commitment to enforcement. Apparently half-hearted approaches to enforcement in states such as South Dakota and Utah deprive residents of the protections contained both in state regulations and in the federal laws the states help to enforce.

“Numerous states also need to improve their disclosure practices, so that the public can see how much enforcement they are actually doing,” said Good Jobs First research analyst Siobhan Standaert, co-author of the report.

Read the full report online or get it in a PDF.

Penalty Totals for Cases Linked to 10 Mega-Scandals

Table 1. Penalty Totals for Cases Linked to 10 Mega-Scandals

Parent Companies with the Largest Penalty Totals

Table 3. Parent Companies with the Largest Penalty Totals

The Repeat Offenders: Parent Companies with the Most Cases Involving Penalties of $1 Million or More

Parent Companies with the Most Cases Involving Penalties of $1 Million or More

Parent Industries with the Largest Penalty Totals

Table 5. Parent Industries with the Largest Penalty Totals

Executive Summary

Regulatory fines, criminal penalties, and class-action settlements paid by corporations in the United States since 2000 have now surpassed $1 trillion. Over that period of time, total annual payouts for corporate misconduct grew from around $7 billion per year in the early 2000s to more than $50 billion in recent years. This amounts to a seven-fold increase in current dollars or a 300% increase in constant dollars.

These figures are derived from Violation Tracker, a wide-ranging database containing information on more than 600,000 cases from about 500 federal, state and local regulatory agencies and prosecutors as well as court data on major private lawsuits.

The database shows that 127 large parent companies have each paid more than $1 billion in fines and settlements over the past quarter-century. The most penalized industries are financial services and pharmaceuticals, followed by oil and gas, motor vehicles, and utilities.

Bank of America has by far the largest penalty total at $87 billion. It and other banks, both domestic and foreign, account for six of the 10 most penalized parent companies. The others are BP (mainly because of Deepwater Horizon disaster), Volkswagen (because of its emissions cheating scandal), Johnson & Johnson (largely because of big settlements in cases alleging its talcum powder causes cancer), and PG&E (due to cases accusing it of causing or contributing to wildfires in the West).

Recidivism is a major issue. Half a dozen parent companies—all banks—have each paid $1 million or more in over 100 different cases, led by Bank of America with 225. Two dozen parents have at least 50 of these cases on their record.

All of the top 10 and 95 of the 100 most penalized parent companies are publicly traded. The most penalized privately held company is Purdue Pharma, which is going out of business for its role in causing the opioid crisis.

Four of the 10 most penalized parents—BP, UBS, Volkswagen, and Deutsche Bank—are headquartered outside the United States. Of the 100 most penalized parents, 37 are based in 14 foreign countries, with the biggest penalty totals imposed upon parents based in the United Kingdom and Germany.

Actions relating to the financial crisis of the late 2000s—including both the toxic securities whose collapse precipitated the crisis and the shoddy mortgage-origination practices which made those securities toxic—account for the largest portion of the penalties, nearly one-quarter of the total.

Other mega-scandals responsible for big shares of the penalties include: the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the marketing of prescription drugs for unapproved purposes, pricing abuses by pharmaceutical companies, the opioid crisis, emissions cheating by Volkswagen, and utility liability for wildfires.

In more than 500 of the cases involving criminal charges, the U.S. Justice Department offered the defendant a deferred prosecution or non-prosecution agreement, thus allowing it to avoid entering a plea. Numerous companies have gotten more than one of these leniency agreements.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration accounts for more than one-third of the 600,000 cases in Violation Tracker, which includes only fines of $5,000 or more. Because OSHA’s fines have been kept artificially low and are often below that threshold, the agency accounts for only $3 billion of the $1 trillion total.

Cases brought by state and local government prosecutors and regulators account for $215 billion of the trillion-dollar total. Nearly two-thirds of that amount came from actions brought by groups of state attorneys general or financial regulators acting in concert. California and New York far surpass the rest of the states in the penalties achieved through single-state actions.

We call on prosecutors and regulators to supplement monetary penalties with other kinds of remedies, such as forcing companies to divest from lines of businesses in which they were engaged in serious misconduct. The Justice Department also needs to be more aggressive in bringing criminal charges against individual corporate executives in the most serious cases. Finally, we call for greater consistency among states in their commitment to enforcement.

Introduction: The Road to $1 Trillion

There are many days when the business news reads like a crime blotter. Large corporations are repeatedly being accused of offenses such as accounting fraud, market manipulation, foreign bribery, invasion of privacy, improper marketing of dangerous drugs, wage theft, and predatory lending. Regulatory violations involving issues such as pollution, workplace hazards, and faulty products are so common that they draw little attention except in the most egregious cases.

The road to $1 trillion can be traced back to 2001, when a high-flying energy trading company called Enron fell back to earth. Business journalists, Wall Street analysts and others who had been taken in by the company’s hype started to raise questions as they cast a more critical eye toward the company’s unorthodox accounting practices. It soon came to light that Enron had been engaged in a massive accounting fraud. The company and its auditor, Arthur Andersen, both went out of business.

Enron was just one of a series of accounting and corruption scandals that erupted in the early 2000s. Others involved companies such as WorldCom, a telecommunications company found to have inflated its assets by billions of dollars; Tyco International, a security systems company whose CEO was convicted of misusing corporate funds to support a lavish personal lifestyle; and Adelphia Communications, whose principals were found guilty of looting the firm.

Many of the prosecutions which emerged from these scandals targeted individual corporate executives, such as Kenneth Lay of Enron, Bernard Ebbers of WorldCom, and Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco International. Yet there were also cases brought against the companies themselves and against banks and auditors accused of enabling the misconduct. There are more than two dozen entries in Violation Tracker linked to these scandals, with total penalties exceeding $6 billion.

Mega-Scandals

The accounting and corruption cases of the early 2000s constitute one of what we are labeling Mega-Scandals. These are cases involving more serious wrongdoing, often affecting large numbers of consumers, workers, or community residents. Fines and settlements in these matters run well into the millions of dollars—and sometimes billions. The offenses are frequently committed by multiple companies. In fact, they may be pervasive in an industry.

Table 1 shows the 10 largest mega-scandals whose penalties account for the largest portions of our trillion-dollar total. Lists of the individual cases linked to the mega-scandals have been added to the Summaries page of the Violation Tracker website. Here we provide snapshots of some of the largest mega-scandals.

Table 1. Penalty Totals for Cases Linked to 10 Mega-Scandals

Mega-Scandal Penalty Total
Toxic Securities $148,424,000,000
Mortgage Abuses $84,104,995,766
Opioid Crisis $70,852,909,664
Price Fixing $43,560,101,570
Deepwater Horizon $35,854,750,000
Emissions Cheating $32,409,305,116
Sanctions Violations $25,622,319,767
Pharmaceutical Hazards $23,392,652,203
Improper Drug Marketing $20,653,020,587
Foreign Bribery $19,467,027,661

Toxic Securities. The magnitude of the Enron era cases would be dwarfed by another mega-scandal which erupted later in the 2000s. It was the outgrowth of a period of financial deregulation that allowed Wall Street to create a slew of complex investment products backed by shaky home mortgages. When the housing market softened and many of those mortgages became delinquent, the value of residential mortgage-backed securities plunged. They came to be known as toxic securities.

By 2008 some of the biggest players on Wall Street were teetering. Lehman Brothers went under. Bear Stearns had to be rescued and taken over by JPMorgan Chase, which was also pressured to take over the failing Washington Mutual, an aggressive subprime lender. Merrill Lynch avoided bankruptcy only by agreeing to be acquired by Bank of America, which also took over Countrywide Financial, another major player in the subprime market. Many other banks were propped up by hundreds of billions of dollars from the federal government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Wall Street and the country avoided a total financial collapse, but there were significant legal and monetary consequences for the financial institutions held responsible for devising and marketing the risky securities. They found themselves the target of major lawsuits brought by the federal government, state government, institutional investors, and others.

Banks ended up paying more than $148 billion in fines and settlements. The biggest hit was taken by Bank of America, which shelled out $24 billion, much of it from lawsuits brought against Merrill Lynch and Countrywide. The total for JPMorgan Chase was $18 billion, and for Citigroup it was $16 billion. The following foreign banks, which were active in marketing what turned out to be toxic securities, each paid more than $10 billion: Deutsche Bank, NatWest, and UBS (whose total includes cases brought against Credit Suisse, which it would later acquire). 

Mortgage Abuses. The legal fallout from the financial crisis was also felt by the financial institutions that originated those shaky home mortgage loans behind the toxic securities. In some cases, they were part of the same banks that marketed the securities. Banks were sued both for luring low-income consumers into unsustainable mortgages and for misleading investors about those practices.

Far and away, the biggest payout in this category came from Bank of America, whose $53 billion total resulted from giant settlements with the U.S. Justice Department, state attorneys general, the loan guarantee agency Fannie Mae, and others. JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo each racked up close to $9 billion in payouts. Overall, the mortgage abuse cases resulted in fines and settlements of more than $80 billion.

Deepwater Horizon. It was not long after the financial crisis that the next corporate mega-scandal burst onto the scene. It began on April 20, 2010 when an explosion occurred at the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig operated by BP in the Gulf of Mexico. The accident killed 11 crew members and released a vast amount of oil into the gulf. It turned out to be the largest oil spill in history.

BP—along with the owner of the rig, Transocean, and Halliburton, which helped construct it—faced a wave of litigation alleging deficiencies in their actions before, during, and after the accident. They ended up paying about $36 billion in settlements, with most of that coming from BP.

Improper Drug Marketing. Apart from financial services, pharmaceuticals account for the largest portion of the penalties documented in Violation Tracker. Drugmakers have been responsible for a variety of mega-scandals. Among them is the practice of marketing products for uses not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

There are times when doctors may need to prescribe medications for off-label uses, but the drug companies have been accused of promoting products to users who may be harmed by the unapproved use. Violation Tracker documents more than 60 major cases of this sort, accounting for around $20 billion of fines and settlements.

Many of these cases were resolved in the early 2000s, For example, in 2004, Warner-Lambert, now part of Pfizer, agreed to plead guilty and pay more than $430 million to resolve criminal charges and civil liabilities in connection with what was alleged to be illegal and fraudulent promotion of unapproved uses of its Neurontin anti-seizure drug.

Drug Pricing Abuses. Another pharmaceutical mega-scandal involves manipulation of the wholesale price levels companies are required to report to state Medicaid agencies and which are used in determining how much they receive for their products. This reporting is supposed to ensure that the prices being paid by Medicaid are not out of line with those charged to other parties. Drugmakers have repeatedly been accused of reporting inflated prices to Medicaid, and have paid out large amounts in settlements. For instance, in 2016 Pfizer and its subsidiary Wyeth paid $784 million to resolve allegations that Wyeth knowingly reported to the government false and fraudulent prices on two of its proton pump inhibitor drugs.

Then there is the issue of rebates. Pharmaceutical companies often offer them to private-sector customers to promote their products, but they frequently fail to provide the same benefit to government health programs. Violation Tracker contains numerous cases in which drugmakers were accused of shortchanging government agencies on rebates. In 2021, Bristol-Myers Squibb paid $75 million to settle one such case.

Generic Pay for Delay. Generic producers are supposed to help reduce drug prices, but they often do the opposite. Along with price-fixing, they often engage in schemes called pay for delay. These are deals in which they receive payments from producers of brand-name drugs whose patent protection is ending to look the other way as those producers use tricks to extend their exclusivity. Pay for delay arrangements are frequently challenged via class action lawsuits, and both brand-name and generic drugmakers have paid billions in settlements.

Earlier this year, for instance, Gilead Sciences agreed to pay over $246 million to settle litigation alleging it entered into an improper deal to delay the introduction of a generic version of its HIV medications. Pay for delay is apparently so profitable that nine-figure settlements have not put a dent in it.

Opioid Crisis. Yet another pharmaceutical mega-scandal comes out of the reckless promotion of dangerously addictive painkillers such as oxycodone. The biggest culprit, of course, was Perdue Pharma, which in 2020 agreed to pay $8 billion to resolve criminal and civil charges. The settlement required the company to plead guilty to fraud and other felonies. While in bankruptcy, the company agreed to leave the pharmaceutical business and use its resources to fund opioid addiction treatment, but the settlement was challenged because of a provision shielding the Sackler family, which controlled the company, from liability. The dispute went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard the case in December 2023 but has not yet ruled on the matter.

While the fate of the Sacklers remains uncertain, many other companies have faced legal consequences for their role in the opioid crisis. Along with other drugmakers, these include wholesalers and pharmacy chains accused of ignoring the extraordinary volume of prescriptions coming from dubious sources such as shady pain clinics known as pill mills.

Among the big wholesalers, AmeriSource Bergen and Cardinal Health have each paid over $6 billion in opioid-related settlements, while McKesson has paid over $8 billion. Pharmacy giants CVS and Walgreens have each paid over $5 billion. More cases are pending.

Overall, Violation Tracker documents more than 80 major opioid-related cases with total penalties of about $70 billion, making it the biggest mega-scandal after toxic securities and mortgage abuses.

Emissions Cheating. Automakers have long grumbled about fuel efficiency standards and rules governing tailpipe emissions. In 2015, it came to light that Volkswagen was circumventing these restrictions by programming the engines in its diesel vehicles to give readings during emissions testing that were far different from the amount of pollution the cars were actually spewing into the air during normal driving.

What came to be called Dieselgate would seriously taint VW’s reputation and bring about a wave of enforcement actions and lawsuits against the company. In multiple cases brought by the Justice Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys general, and others, VW ended up paying more than $25 billion in fines and settlements.

VW was not the only automaker with an emissions cheating scandal. Mercedes-Benz paid about $2 billion to settle similar allegations; Fiat Chrysler, now part of Stellantis, paid over $1 billion.

Bogus Bank Accounts. In the early 2010s, managers at Wells Fargo began putting enormous pressure on bank employees to generate more revenue by persuading existing customers to open additional accounts of various kinds. Faced with impossible demands, many of these low-level bankers found that the only way to meet their quotas was to create the accounts themselves, without notifying the customer. In many cases, this fraudulent activity was apparently sanctioned by supervisors.

The scam came to light in 2016, when the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced a $100 million fine against the bank, which also agreed to pay $35 million to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and $50 million to the City and County of Los Angeles. These cases were just the first in a series of cases that would ultimately cost Wells Fargo more than $8 billion.

Wildfire Liability. The devastating wildfires that have swept through parts of the western U.S. in recent years have brought about a new kind of mega-scandal: accusations that major utility companies caused or contributed to those disasters by failing to properly maintain the areas around their power lines.

The primary target of these allegations has been PG&E Corporation, whose operations span northern and central California. Over the past five years, PG&E has paid out over $16 billion in fines and settlements in case brought by state regulators, the state attorney general’s office and other parties.

Edison International, whose subsidiary Southern California Edison is the primary electric utility in southern California, has paid out over $1 billion in wildfire cases.

Findings

Over the course of the past quarter-century, the annual total of fines and settlements paid by corporations grew from around $7 billion per year in the early 2000s to more than $50 billion in recent years (see Table 2). This amounts to a seven-fold increase in current dollars or a 300% increase in constant dollars.

As the table shows, there have been some years in which the total has spiked, only to fall back the following year. That is a reflection of an unusual cluster of cases, especially class action lawsuits. For example, 2008 saw a sharp rise due to a slew of cases in which Wall Street banks were accused of misleading customers into investing in volatile auction rate securities.

Table 2. Annual Totals of Corporate Fines and Settlements documented in Violation Tracker

Year Penalty Total
2000 $7,529,107,408
2001 $7,396,596,552
2002 $11,462,249,016
2003 $14,841,257,009
2004 $15,897,434,371
2005 $19,935,111,915
2006 $20,019,502,443
2007 $22,965,708,659
2008 $65,736,192,185
2009 $19,399,409,048
2010 $24,017,664,734
2011 $21,186,614,396
2012 $67,945,706,476
2013 $74,445,638,229
2014 $74,331,104,344
2015 $80,610,161,543
2016 $52,951,689,646
2017 $59,034,967,859
2018 $43,713,582,073
2019 $42,667,788,516
2020 $69,613,806,023
2021 $53,446,420,906
2022 $71,194,610,927
2023 $52,546,365,431
2024 $9,891,677,229

*2024 figure is through early March 

Most Penalized Companies

Given its involvement in many giant toxic securities and mortgage abuse settlements, Bank of America has accumulated by far the largest penalty total of any parent company. The list of the most penalized parents in Table 3 shows that it and other banks, both domestic and foreign, dominate the top tier.

Non-bank parents in the top ten include BP (due to Deepwater Horizon), Volkswagen (due to its emissions cheating) and PG&E (due to its wildfire liabilities). One parent in that group not yet discussed is Johnson & Johnson. The company ended up there largely because of the growing costs of litigation alleging that its talc-based baby powder causes ovarian cancer. In 2023, J&J agreed to provide up to $9 billion over 25 years to resolve current and future talc claims.

Table 3. Parent Companies with the Largest Penalty Totals

Rank Current Parent Name Total Penalties Cases
1 Bank of America $87,286,650,890 328
2 JPMorgan Chase $39,340,688,209 275
3 BP $36,486,562,463 409
4 UBS $31,069,299,125 179
5 Wells Fargo $27,616,269,231 266
6 Citigroup $26,945,611,792 181
7 Volkswagen $26,154,445,505 111
8 Johnson & Johnson $24,497,162,770 88
9 Deutsche Bank $20,011,467,563 99
10 PG&E Corp. $19,952,607,075 134

Looking beyond the top 10, there are 127 parent companies with penalty totals of $1 billion or more.

Ownership Status. The 10 companies with the largest cumulative penalties are all publicly traded; the same is true for 95 of the top 100. Cases linked to public parents make up about 83%  of the $1 trillion total in Violation Tracker. The most penalized privately held parents are Purdue Pharma (which is going out of business), Binance Holdings (a cryptocurrency company which was fined over $4 billion last year for anti-money-laundering deficiencies), JUUL Labs (which has faced allegations of marketing vaping products to minors), Knauf (a German building materials company which paid a $1 billion settlement related to defective drywall), and Koch Industries (the industrial conglomerate whose founders are known for being staunch opponents of regulation).

Violation Tracker also collects data on penalties paid by large non-profit entities, especially health systems. The most penalized non-profit is California-based Sutter Health.

Headquarters Location. Four of the 10 most penalized parents—BP, UBS, Volkswagen, and Deutsche Bank—are headquartered outside the United States. Of the 100 most penalized parents, 37 are based in 14 foreign countries. Of those, the nation that accounts for the largest penalty total is the United Kingdom, mainly due to BP, banks such as NatWest and Barclays, and pharmaceuticals companies such as GlaxoSmithKline.  Germany, home to Volkswagen and Deutsche Bank, is second, followed by Switzerland and France.

Repeat Offenders

Some companies appear in Violation Tracker only once; others show up over and over again. Among the latter, there is great variation in caseloads depending in part on which regulatory agencies the company deals with. For example, the big railroads each have more than 1,000 entries because the Federal Railroad Administration regulates safety by imposing large numbers of relatively small penalties.

To determine which companies have the worst records when it comes to more serious cases, we calculated the number of penalties of $1 million or more linked to each parent. As shown in Table 4, the “winners” of this competition turn out to be the big banks. Six of them have been at the losing end of more than 100 such cases. At the top is Bank of America, with a remarkable total of 225 such cases.

Apart from the banks, the parents with the most major penalty cases are CVS Health, AT&T, Walmart, and Teva Pharmaceuticals. Two dozen parents have 50 or more.

Table 4. Parent Companies with the Most Cases Involving Penalties of $1 Million or More

Rank Parent Cases
1 Bank of America 225
2 Wells Fargo 169
3 JPMorgan Chase 167
4 Citigroup 125
5 UBS 122
6 Morgan Stanley 102
7 CVS Health 88
8 AT&T 86
9 Deutsche Bank 82
10 Walmart 67

Most Penalized Industries

We have already noted that financial services and pharmaceuticals account for the largest shares of total penalties. Table 5 shows how the other industries rank. Oil and gas is in third place largely because of BP’s fines and settlements related to the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Motor vehicles is fourth primarily because of Volkswagen’s penalties stemming from the emissions cheating scandals, but there have also been large payouts by Toyota in connection with allegations that its vehicles were prone to sudden, unintended acceleration.

Table 5. Parent Industries with the Largest Penalty Totals

Rank Parent Industry Penalty Total Cases
1 Financial Services $387,559,149,282 7,719
2 Pharmaceuticals $116,245,163,450 1,270
3 Oil and Gas $55,565,445,820 6,561
4 Motor Vehicles $46,950,728,206 1,100
5 Utilities and Power Generation $46,373,492,557 3,085
6 Retailing $28,334,341,503 6,328
7 Chemicals $28,035,317,907 5,505
8 Wholesalers $25,293,969,880 1,086
9 Healthcare Services $23,311,696,485 13,343
10 Information Technology $16,433,932,542 435

Utilities are in fifth place because of the wildfire liabilities of PG&E as well as major environmental settlements signed by companies such as American Electric Power and Duke Energy. Retailing ranks sixth because of the giant opioid payouts by pharmacy chains Walgreens and CVS Health. Chemicals are seventh mainly because of liabilities incurred by the German company Bayer after it acquired Monsanto, whose Roundup allegedly caused cancer.

Wholesalers are in eighth place because of the large opioid payouts by the major drug distributors. Healthcare services comes in at ninth due to numerous False Claims Act charges brought against for-profit hospital chains such as Tenet and HCA for unlawful billing of Medicare and Medicaid. The information technology industry rounds out the list in 10th place as a result of big privacy and antitrust cases involving companies such as Meta Platforms, Alphabet Inc., and Microsoft.

In Violation Tracker, private equity is treated as an industry in which majority-owned portfolio companies are regarded as subsidiaries. We collect data on penalties linked to the holdings of more than 40 of the largest private equity companies. Their combined total is about $4 billion, making private equity the 20th most penalized industry. The private equity company with the largest penalty total is Apollo Global Management, at $1.2 billion.

Offense Groups

Each entry in Violation Tracker is tagged with one of nine broad offense groups. As shown in Table 6, financial offenses—which include categories such as toxic securities, mortgage abuses, and accounting fraud—account for the largest portion of the penalty dollars, by far. Competition-related offenses, which include price-fixing cases, market manipulation and bribery, rank second.

Yet when it comes to the number of cases, the top group is safety-related offenses. That is largely because of the enormous caseload of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is responsible for more than one-third of all the entries in Violation Tracker. Since its fine structure has been kept artificially low, OSHA’s penalty total (applying our threshold of $5,000) is only $3.3 billion—far below that of other regulators such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Table 6. Offense Group Totals

Rank Offense Group Total Penalties Cases
1 Financial Offenses $286,391,284,995 10,968
2 Competition-related Offenses $151,879,762,284 4,566
3 Consumer-protection-related Offenses $147,306,892,156 25,126
4 Environment-related Offenses $127,586,364,325 85,227
5 Safety-related Offenses $108,562,339,261 313,921
6 Healthcare-Related Offenses $82,244,259,391 41,076
7 Government-contracting-related Offenses $56,610,292,888 3,865
8 Employment-related Offenses $36,221,987,043 141,883
9 Miscellaneous Offenses $5,977,184,595 1,510

Civil vs. Criminal

The vast majority of the 600,000-plus cases in Violation Tracker are designated as civil actions. Only about 2,000, or .32%, are criminal matters. Yet they account for more than 13% of penalty dollars. These involve a variety of offenses, such as fraud, violation of economic sanctions, foreign bribery, anti-money laundering deficiencies, marketing of drugs for unapproved purposes, and more egregious environmental violations.

More than 500 parent companies have paid criminal penalties totaling about $135 billion. Twenty-six of those parents paid $1 billion or more. Table 7 shows the parents that have paid out the most. The French bank BNP Paribas is at the top because of a 2015 case in which it was ordered to forfeit nearly $9 billion and pay a $140 million fine for the illegal processing of billions of dollars of transactions through the U.S. financial system on behalf of Sudanese, Iranian, and Cuban entities subject to U.S. economic sanctions.

The other parent on the list not previously discussed is the German insurance company Allianz, which in 2022 agreed to plead guilty to securities fraud in connection with a scheme in which institutional investors, including public pension funds, were encouraged to invest in risky complex products, resulting in heavy losses. Allianz agreed to pay more than $3 billion in restitution to the innocent victims of this fraud, pay a criminal fine of approximately $2.3 billion, and forfeit approximately $463 million to the federal government.

Table 7. Parent Companies with the Highest Penalty Totals from Criminal Cases

Rank Parent Penalties in Criminal Cases
1 BNP Paribas $9,123,383,000
2 Purdue Pharma $8,944,000,000
3 Allianz $5,763,000,000
4 BP $4,345,500,000
5 Binance Holdings $4,316,126,163
6 Volkswagen $4,300,000,000
7 UBS $4,201,529,916
8 GlaxoSmithKline $3,750,000,000
9 Pfizer $3,270,600,000
10 Wells Fargo $3,198,000,000

Note: Includes penalties from cases with both criminal and civil components.

In many cases, companies are able to resolve criminal charges without a plea. That is because the Justice Department makes extensive use of arrangements known as deferred prosecution agreements and non-prosecution agreements. These are leniency deals by which companies pay substantial penalties but avoid a criminal conviction.

Violation Tracker documents more than 500 cases involving a DPA or an NPA with total penalties of more than $50 billion. Among the companies that have paid the most in these cases are Wells Fargo (bogus account creation), Goldman Sachs (foreign bribery), Boeing (737 Max safety scandal), and JPMorgan Chase (dealings with the scam artist Bernard Madoff).

The theory behind these leniency agreements is that companies will learn from their mistakes and clean up their conduct. Yet there have been numerous instances of companies that signed a DPA or NPA ending up embroiled in another scandal. Amazingly, some of these companies were offered another leniency agreement, thus making a mockery of the deterrence concept. Among the double-dippers are American International Group, Barclays, Boeing, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.

State Enforcement

In addition to their role in enforcing state-level regulations, state governments share responsibility for the application of some federal laws, such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.

Of the $215 billion in total state penalties documented in Violation Tracker, nearly two-thirds came as the result of cases in which state attorneys general brought a group action, usually against a large company operating across the country. State securities and insurance regulators often do the same thing.

Financial and consumer protection offenses account for the largest portions of multi-state penalties. The largest such case to date was a 2008 settlement with the Swiss bank UBS, which agreed to pay $11 billion to resolve allegations that it misled investors in the marketing and sale of auction rate securities. That same year, Countrywide Home Loans paid nearly $9 billion to resolve allegations of predatory home mortgage practices.

Multistate litigation is also common in enforcing healthcare violations, particularly the role of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors in the opioid crisis.

Excluding multi-state cases, state regulation focuses primarily on financial, consumer protection, and environmental offenses. Financial cases account for nearly $23 billion in penalties—soaring above every other category. Consumer protection and environmental violations follow at $15 billion and $13 billion, respectively.

The largest single-state case was a $2.2 billion penalty paid by BNP Paribas to the New York State Department of Financial Services in 2014. This was part of a larger case that also involved the federal government. In 2020, the California Public Utilities Commission imposed a $1.9 billion fine on PG&E for its role in the catastrophic 2017 and 2018 wildfires in Northern California.

Variations in state legislation, size, population, or funding can cause wide discrepancies in the penalty totals of the states. As shown in Table 8, those totals range from over $21 billion in California and New York, to less than $9 million in South Dakota.

California and New York together account for more than half of all state penalties apart from the multi-state cases. Sixteen other states have totals between $1 billion and $3.5 billion.

When state penalties are broken down into our nine offense groups, California and New York are at the top in every category except for healthcare-related offenses. The leader in that area is Florida, which has handed out nearly $2 billion in healthcare penalties since 2000, mostly related to nursing home violations involving resident health and safety. Washington State—renowned for its medical care—comes in second with more than $830 million in penalties.

Enforcement between states can be difficult to compare because of inconsistent approaches toward regulation. There are several factors that influence this: the regulatory legislation itself, enforcement capacity, and disclosure of information. Depending on the state’s political culture, there may be a gap at any of these stages.

Some of the disparities among state penalty totals is likely due to inadequate disclosure practices rather than an actual lack of enforcement. We collect all the enforcement data posted online and then file open records requests for the rest. Those requests are not always honored. Some states, such as Arkansas, deny requests from non-residents. Others take extended periods of time to fulfill requests. This may be due to underfunding or understaffing, or to a reluctance to release the kind of comprehensive data we request. One notable example of this is the New York Department of Labor, which has failed to disclose any enforcement data to us, despite several requests.

Table 8: State Penalty Totals

State Penalty Total
Multi-State Actions $133,984,652,349
California $21,373,319,716
New York $21,254,741,342
Texas $3,533,312,600
Massachusetts $3,015,438,519
New Jersey $2,880,816,922
Florida $2,482,309,692
Ohio $1,897,877,124
Washington $1,697,411,806
Arizona $1,686,036,138
Michigan $1,395,011,101
Illinois $1,297,321,221
Connecticut $1,284,936,355
Pennsylvania $1,250,805,393
Minnesota $1,212,532,773
North Carolina $1,179,843,799
West Virginia $1,177,206,084
New Mexico $1,143,400,009
Oregon $1,081,082,450
Alaska $967,296,828
Mississippi $871,613,040
Maryland $849,613,845
Colorado $763,233,434
Alabama $667,947,199
Kentucky $627,737,343
New Hampshire $533,512,475
Missouri $531,611,885
Nevada $502,415,228
Virginia $462,596,869
Oklahoma $440,243,127
District of Columbia $396,352,131
Louisiana $388,494,243
Hawaii $323,180,502
Indiana $261,294,469
Delaware $245,893,142
Wisconsin $238,427,446
Montana $221,506,666
Iowa $184,907,318
Tennessee $172,894,873
Georgia $163,868,705
Arkansas $141,270,583
Idaho $94,561,339
Rhode Island $93,939,610
South Carolina $92,022,994
Vermont $71,254,548
Kansas $55,366,641
North Dakota $50,229,848
Wyoming $44,157,772
Maine $40,618,147
Nebraska $39,945,213
Utah $29,000,701
South Dakota $8,755,288
Grand Total $215,403,818,845

Local Enforcement

Local governments generally bring enforcement actions against small businesses, and many of the penalties involved are below the $5,000 threshold used in Violation Tracker. Yet there are some notable exceptions.

These are seen mainly in California, where county district attorneys and city attorney offices in several municipalities often bring substantial cases against larger companies. They do so both individually and in multi-district joint actions. Regional air quality management districts in the state are also active in enforcement.

Violation Tracker contains more than 3,500 entries from local prosecutors and regulators in California, with total penalties of more than $3 billion. The largest case was a $1 billion settlement between 18 local public entities and PG&E concerning three major wildfires.

Another local prosecutor that has brought major cases is the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in New York. A majority of its most significant actions have targeted large foreign banks for violating economic sanctions. Other active local regulators include the New York City Commission on Human Rights, the Allegheny County Health Department in Pennsylvania (which enforces air pollution laws), and the regional clean air agencies in Washington State. Also worth mentioning are units being created in larger localities to combat wage theft.

Conclusion

The fact that penalties have reached the 10-figure level suggests that during the past quarter century we have been living through a continuous corporate crime wave. Every year, companies pay out billions of dollars for a wide range of offenses. Many large corporations are fined or enter into settlements over and over again, often for the same or similar misconduct.

Monetary penalties are meant in part to deter future transgressions, but there is no indication that is happening. Instead, the fines and settlements seem to be regarded as little more than a cost of doing business. Presumably, the profits from wrongdoing outweigh the penalties.

At one time, companies were more concerned about being labeled a rulebreaker or a lawbreaker. These days, there is so much misconduct that only the most egregious transgressions stand out. And even in those cases, companies can assume that their sins will be forgotten before too long. That seems to be what is happening with the likes of Volkswagen and Wells Fargo, which have spent heavily to repair their images after the emissions cheating and bogus bank account scandals.

It is odd that amid a move to return to tougher policies to combat street crime, there is not an analogous effort to crack down on corporate crime. Instead, the Justice Department continues to employ leniency agreements that have frequently been ineffective in getting rogue companies to change their ways. The DOJ also remains reluctant to bring criminal charges against corporate executives, except in the most flagrant circumstances.

In a few cases, DOJ has experimented with different approaches, including forcing companies to exit lines of business in which they behaved illegally. Last year, for example, Teva Pharmaceuticals and Glenmark Pharmaceuticals were not only fined for scheming to fix prices of several generic drugs—they had to divest their operations relating to one of the drugs. That kind of penalty should shake up companies more than fines alone and thus should be used more frequently. The DOJ also needs to be more aggressive in bringing criminal charges against individual corporate executives in the most serious cases.

Under the Biden Administration, many federal regulatory agencies have been pursuing their mission diligently, though they have to contend with understaffing and inadequate budgets.

Agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission also face corporate-instigated legal challenges to their power, while the Supreme Court may soon issue a ruling which would weaken all federal regulators.

State governments generally do a good job in in targeting larger companies in their multi-state actions, though some states participate in only a limited number of those cases. As for single-state enforcement, states such as South Dakota and Utah need to increase their activity. Taking what appears to be a half-hearted approach to enforcement deprives residents of the protections contained both in state regulations and in the federal laws the states help to enforce.

Numerous states also need to improve their disclosure practices, so that the public can see how much enforcement they are actually doing.

More vigorous enforcement is also needed at the local level in most states to duplicate the achievements of county and city agencies in California and New York.

Jacobin: The For-Profit Nursing Home Scam

From the article:

Image of a woman in blue scrubs holding the hand of someone else, in a caring way.
Source: Shutterstock

Private equity–owned nursing home facilities across the country are poaching government funds that should be used to increase staffing levels and pay workers more to line their owners’ pockets…

The nursing home industry has undergone a massive upheaval in recent years, one that began well before the COVID-19 pandemic led to the deaths of more than two hundred thousand residents and sixteen hundred staffers. Large, shareholder-owned chains like Kindred and HCR ManorCare left the field in 2017 and 2018, respectively. A few dozen midsize private equity firms headquartered far from Wall Street emerged to take their place.

This shake-up has exacted a huge toll on nursing home quality.

“These firms, such as Arcadia Care, Brius Health Care, Aperion Care, and Infinity Healthcare Management, perform poorly in the federal government’s nursing home rating system, averaging only 2 on a 1 to 5 scale,” according to a recent report by Good Jobs First, a watchdog group that tracks fines imposed by government agencies. “These bad actors — some of which have doubled or tripled in size in recent years by purchasing facilities sold off by more established operators — have been averaging over $100,000 in penalties per facility, nearly three times the national level.”

Read the full story at Jacobin.

 

As they issue their Forms 10-K for the year 2023, publicly traded companies are required to start disclosing some forms of government financial assistance on their balance sheets for the first time ever. This disclosure– which includes grants and tax credits given to companies in the name of economic development– comes thanks to a new accounting standard for the private sector that follows a disclosure requirement for governments that took effect seven years ago.

Combined, the two accounting reforms, together with Good Jobs First’s Subsidy Tracker and Tax Break Tracker databases, give us a more complete picture of what corporate subsidies cost and who ultimately benefits.

Illustration by Nya Anthony

The older rule, Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 77, requires most state and local governments to disclose revenues lost to economic development tax abatement programs in their audited annual financial reports. Though mostly reporting on foregone local property taxes, Statement 77 also captures some corporate income and sales tax breaks used to stimulate economic growth. While the rule doesn’t require any form of company-specific or deal-specific disclosure, knowing the aggregate cost of tax abatement programs has enabled a more robust debate about opportunity costs, especially when abatements undermine school funding.

Now comes GASB’s private-sector sister group, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB. In November 2021, as an amendment to its version of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2021-10 (Topic 832). It requires businesses to disclose annual transactions with governments, excluding contract work, in their mandatory filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. (These reports are searchable at the SEC’s EDGAR database.) FASB Standard No. 832-10 aims to give shareholders greater insight into the terms and benefits of such transactions on companies’ financial performance.

Transparent incentives are our bread and butter here at Good Jobs First. So, naturally, we see this FASB update as another positive stride– though by excluding property, sales, and other types of tax breaks it omitted some of the costliest benefits companies receive from the public. However, the effectiveness of both these rules hinges on enforcement and compliance, which can be a challenge.

We have been to this rodeo before. In the same way early government compliance with GASB Statement 77 was uneven, our preliminary scan of how companies are reporting under FASB Standard No. 832-10 indicates a lot of irregularity. Unlike GASB, FASB did not issue any kind of suggested template or format for Standard No. 832-10 reporting.

In the coming weeks, we will publish more blogs on what we are seeing in this very first wave of corporate subsidy disclosures by publicly traded firms.

And don’t forget: Good Jobs First has been publishing deal-specific, company-specific data on subsidy awards since 2010 at our Subsidy Tracker database. Used together, along with local-government disclosures in our Tax Break Tracker database, the new data will empower stakeholders by further illuminating the opaque realm of government incentives and assistance.

Updated April 9th, 2024

Novara Media: US Health Companies Are Winning NHS Contracts Despite Dodgy Track Records

Front of a building that says "hospital" on it
Getty Images Signature

“Chronically ill patients and their carers at a London hospital are fighting back against the privatisation of their care, as new data reveals the dire state of NHS commissioning.

The Camberwell Satellite Dialysis Unit cares for dozens of kidney patients, many of whom will spend 12 hours a week getting dialysis. Despite sitting in a dated, metallic building hidden in a small industrial estate with a dodgy water supply, patients told Novara Media that the centre provides excellent care and that the staff are like family to them.

That could all be set to change, however, as the service is set to be outsourced to Diaverum – a global private healthcare giant with a questionable track record…

Diaverum runs a dialysis empire across Europe’s private healthcare systems. But privatisation also opens the NHS up to US health companies. Analysis by Violation Tracker US and reviewed by Novara Media shows that healthcare giants that have been paid out billions of dollars in cases related to corruption, fraud and offering negligent service that killed patients in the US are being paid hundreds of millions of pounds to run NHS kidney care.”

Read the full story at Novara Media.

 

Associated Press: Collapse of NBA, NHL arena deal prompts recriminations, allegations of impropriety in Virginia

An empty ice hockey rink full of people in the stands.
Source: Dmytro Aksonov/ Getty Images Signature

Supporters of a proposal to move the Washington Wizards and Capitals to Virginia began blaming everyone involved when the deal fell apart. Opponents had noted the deal would have cost over a billion dollars — money that could be put to greater community use — and generate few benefits.

Alexandria’s economic development director, Stephanie Landrum, told the Associated Press failing to bring in the teams would cause other businesses to reconsider coming to Virginia.

Greg LeRoy, executive director of incentives watchdog Good Jobs First, said it was “laughable to think that turning away a sports team seeking public financing will hurt the state’s business climate.”

“Other regions would kill for a business climate like northern Virginia’s,” said LeRoy, whose organization opposed the deal.

Read the full story.

24/7 Wall Street: 15 Massive Companies That Have Received Billions From The Government

24/7 Wall Street used Subsidy Tracker to show much public support companies have received from taxpayers in the name of economic development.

“There are few things that can unite the average American more than struggling to make ends meet while hearing that multi-billion-dollar corporations are receiving generous amounts of government handouts.

It is frustrating to hear about how much money the government gives out to massive companies while those same companies pay obscene executive salaries, make multiple stock buybacks every year, and fire thousands of employees, all while some pay little to no taxes on their resulting profits.

But what companies are the biggest offenders? Which of the biggest companies in America are suckling at the teat of government generosity and benefiting from the efforts of their well-paid lobbyists and corrupted elected officials? Here we will look into 15 of the biggest companies that have received at least three billion dollars from the United States government.”

Read the full story at 24/7 Wall Street.

While the federal government still regards marijuana as an illegal drug, medical use of cannabis has been legalized in 40 states; recreational use by adults has been approved in 24. With legalization has come a new system of regulation of producers and retailers. And where there are rules, there will be violations. We are now collecting data on those cases in Violation Tracker.

The latest update to the database contains 528 enforcement actions against cannabis cultivators and dispensaries totaling nearly $23 million since 2014. We collected this information from 14 states through publicly available online data or open records requests.

With the exception of a single case from the Los Angeles city attorney, all of the regulatory agencies are new to the database. Each of these regulators is specific to cannabis oversight.

While the growing process for medical and recreational marijuana is the same, there are key distinctions in how the product is dispensed. One requires a doctor’s note while the other requires simply being over the age of 21. Medical cannabis is under more stringent regulation to ensure the product is safe for use by patients that may have more sensitivities than the average adult user. Even still, the majority of Violation Tracker’s new cases are enforced against recreational facilities as they are not constrained by medical privacy laws.

Cannabis plant
Source: Roberto Valdivia on Unsplash

North Dakota and Delaware’s medical marijuana programs, for example, denied our open records requests citing that “compassion centers”, or medical marijuana vendors, are protected under confidentiality clauses similar to other medical providers.

We were able to collect medical marijuana enforcement actions from four states: Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Utah. Pennsylvania was the only state with substantial penalties–20 cases totaling over $1 million since its availability in 2018.

Recreational cannabis yielded better disclosure results with 10 states providing enforcement actions. There have been nearly 500 cases brought against adult-use cannabis businesses totaling almost $22 million in penalties since its initial legalization. Colorado–the pioneer of recreational weed–has unsurprisingly issued the highest number of enforcement actions (227) with penalties totaling $6.5 million. Not far behind, Nevada has penalized cannabis companies nearly $6.4 million despite legalizing marijuana five years later. Washington has overseen 121 cases with over $1.8 million in fines and settlements. The remaining states have brought fewer than a hundred cases each for noncompliance with cannabis regulations.

Cannabis cases cover numerous categories of violations. The major ones include dispensing medical cannabis to patients without an active medical marijuana identification card; inappropriately marketing products; failing to properly test for heavy metal contamination or pesticides; and allowing underage customers to purchase products.

At the moment, the cannabis industry is saturated with small growers or retailers, so none of the new companies are included in our parent universe. This may change over time as the industry continues to grow.

Two individual cases surpassed penalties of $1 million–in California and New Mexico–for violations related to licensing requirements, particularly failure to comply with inventory tracking, which monitors the movement of cannabis goods through the supply chain from seed to sale. Administrative procedures and ownership disclosures are especially important as many of the companies in this industry are independent LLCs with little to no transparency of financial interests.

State regulators, currently our only advocates for accountability, need to ensure enforcement closely follows the rise of the marijuana industry as more players vie for a spot.

KCUR: Kansas City Chiefs and Royals say stadium deals will help the community. Economists disagree

A baseball base on top of brown dirt.
Source: Getty Images Signature

The Kansas City Royals and Chiefs claimed they had created a “historic” community benefits agreement. The agreement was critiqued by several economists and other leaders, including Good Jobs First’s Executive Director Greg LeRoy. From the article:

LeRoy says the Chiefs’ and Royals’ deal is “laundry-listed with philanthropy,” which makes it look like a PR move instead of a positive return to the community.

LeRoy says the agreement doesn’t do much for the community and is an example of “what a fake CBA looks like.” But it does make the Royals more valuable.

“These long-term small payments, broadly defined, could be structured as charity,” LeRoy says. “The team is getting those massive tax breaks … which far, far exceed the cost of these donations. Will you get a winning team? Will you get a better neighborhood? Will you get a safer community? Those are all debatable, but it’s virtually a sure lock that you’re going to get a more valuable franchise.”

He says a key issue with the agreement is that it’s primarily between the county and the teams. A community benefits agreement, according to a manual Good Jobs First published two decades ago, is between a developer and private community groups, not primarily negotiated by a governmental entity…

Victor Matheson, a sports economist and professor at the College of the Holy Cross, says the biggest issue with the agreement is its “vague goals” for funding with the annual $3.5 million. Like LeRoy, Matheson’s biggest takeaway is that “this community benefits agreement is entirely PR.”

“They come off saying, ‘Hey, we’re a really good corporate citizen because we are going to give $3.5 million a year — that we are going to have a great deal of input about how that money gets spent.’ And in exchange for that, all we want you to do is give us $27 million a year.”

Read the full story at KCUR.