yes, i contacted her a couple months ago with my contact info...then again a few weeks ago to ask for an update. No reply.
got some more contact names from the bottom of the SEC's press release on the AgFeed settlement (...in which they stated, "The $18 million to be paid by AgFeed to settle the SEC’s case WILL BE DISTRIBUTED to victims of the company’s fraud."...caps mine)
"The SEC’s investigation has been conducted by Michael Cates, Donna Walker, and Ian Karpel of the Denver Regional Office. The court litigation is being led by Gregory Kasper and Nancy Ferguson while the bankruptcy aspects of the case are being handled by Alistaire Bambach, Patricia Schrage, and Neal Jacobson of the New York Regional Office."
this woman was also quoted in an article:
Julie K. Lutz, Associate Regional Director
SEC Denver Regional Office
“This settlement holds AgFeed accountable for its accounting fraud and deprives the company of ill-gotten gains,” Julie Lutz, director of the SEC’s Denver regional office, said in a statement today.
Going to hold off harassing the above for a couple months...maybe they trying squeeze some blood outta Goth-tard, etc. I have never gone thru this before, so have no idea. Glad to do some work if pointed in the right direction.
Class Fund got $7M total, and distributed $4.8M
SEC has $5.5M leftover after "contributing" $12.M to the shareholders that held til the end (the Shareholder Fund...see below).
SEC still pursing cases against four Chinese company executives as well as our noble former US execs, Gothner and Pazdro.
What a unique experience to be involved in a case so egregious that the judge decided to pierce the 'corporate veil'.
Have no idea what the SEC will remove from or add to the $4.8M. Thought they were already compensated by our tax dollars.
Also hoping they don't reinvent the wheel in gathering data and distributing funds. Unclear why they would not just use the info gathered by Epiq Systems...for a price, of course, but hopefully discounted given not much extra work would be required by Epiq.
This would, of course, assume the SEC was trying to do things as efficiently as possible and that there was no fav gov't contractor in line to waste more of our money.
AgFeed Strikes SEC Deal, Gets Nod For Disclosure Statement
By Jamie Santo
September 15, 2014
...Under the settlement, the SEC will receive an allowed $18 million claim, paid in cash out sale proceeds. The agency will contribute $12.5 million to the liquidating trust solely for all holders of equity interests, and distribute the remaining $5.5 million at its discretion, Brady said.
AgFeed's Chapter 11 plan also includes an earlier $7 million deal to settle a shareholder class action, to be paid by the debtor and its insurers, Brady said.
just got an email confirming the amount from the Class Fund - pretty much exactly per the calcs posted on the board previously
now...can we focus on the last of the 3 funds?
anyone have any ideas how to get the SEC to not reinvent the wheel in calculating how disperse OUR funds...thus saving us several hundred thousand dollars and months of time?
don't be shy; important initiatives have started on a msg bd ;)
Sentiment: Strong Buy
i heard from someone associated with the Equity/share holder fund (don't want to name names; this is all conjecture on a msg bd anyway;) that the SEC fund was also going to use date ranges.
Seems like they would used the same date ranges set up by the Class Fund....and why not use the same data that the Class Fund administrators have collected and verified . The administrators did a couple hundred thousand dollars of work to compile this info; it took months; the judged approved the selected date range and amounts.
Or, the SEC could start the process all over...
You wrote, "the SEC settlement fund is a combination of the $5.5M from the $8M SEC settlement payment and a mostly equal amount from the class defendants (aka AgFeed)"
sounds like you are estimating the SEC fund to have 2x what the Class Fund. If the SEC sets up similar parameters to the Class Fund, would a rough guestimate be 2x the payout per share...again, just trying to ballpark this last payment
no, the Total Recognized Loss figure comes from the link JoeThomas posted below; here it is again:
Unfortunately, as i understand it, multiply 39% x your "Recognized," not Actual loss.
So...onto the SEC Fund.
Looks like the SEC is taking their time...as well as our money. (Keeping $12.5M and distributing $5.5M? yikes!)
If $5.5M is what the SEC settles on, seems like we can expect a payout per qualifying shareholder similar to what we will be receiving from the Class Fund.
If i did the calcs right, each person gets back 39% of their recognized loss. Looks like some others have done the same computation. Just took the amt to be distributed divided by the total recognized loss ($4,792K/$12,202K = .39). Check to be mailed at end of August to the address you listed on your claim.
re: "....it very well could be taxable."
Depends on how the final judgement reads - what are the damages for?
Hopefully, return of capital.
Allocation of Damage Awards
The tax treatment of damages received from securities investment disputes is fairly clear if the taxpayer can identify the nature of the damages being received (e.g., lost income, return of capital, capital gain or punitive). However, it is not always apparent the types of damages being paid in these disputes, leaving the recipient in the uncertain position of allocating the award between taxable and nontaxable sources. A prime example is damages paid in disputes between investors and their stockbroker or brokerage company. These disputes are typically handled through binding arbitration; defendants in these cases frequently pay damages without admitting wrongdoing. (17) As a result, the recipients are often left without any documentation as to the nature of the damages and may not be able to substantiate their subsequent tax treatment if challenged by the IRS.
The best-case scenario for substantiating the recipient's tax treatment (allocation) of damages is when there exists a final judgment (by a court or arbitration panel) or settlement agreement that clearly indicates what the damages are for. As a general rule, courts hold that the allocations contained in a settlement agreement are binding for tax purposes. (18) Thus, plaintiffs may have an incentive to settle investment-related disputes in an attempt to dictate the damage award's tax treatment. For example, clearly it is in the taxpayer's best interest to indicate that damage payments are a nontaxable return of capital or for appreciation of the investment (taxed as a capital gain), as as opposed to lost income or punitive damages (taxed as ordinary income).