|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Settlement regarding the US cross-border case |
As announced on 18 February 2009, UBS settled the US cross-border case with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) by entering into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ and a Consent Order with the SEC. As part of these settlement agreements: - UBS will pay a total of USD 780 million (CHF 917 million) to the United States, USD 380 million representing disgorgement of profits from maintaining the US cross-border business and USD 400 million representing US federal backup withholding tax required to be withheld by UBS, together with interest and penalties, and restitution for unpaid taxes associated with certain account relationships involving fraudulent sham and nominee offshore structures and otherwise as covered by the DPA. - UBS will complete the exit of the US cross-border business out of non-SEC registered entities, as announced in July 2008, which these settlements now allow UBS to do in a lawful, orderly and expeditious manner. - UBS will implement and maintain an effective program of internal controls with respect to compliance with its obligations under its Qualified Intermediary Agreement (QIA) with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as well as a revised legal and compliance governance structure in order to strengthen independent legal and compliance controls. - Pursuant to an order issued by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA), information has been transferred to the DOJ regarding accounts of certain US clients as set forth in the DPA, who, based on evidence available to UBS, appear to have committed tax fraud or the like within the meaning of the Swiss-US Double Taxation Treaty. Under the DPA, the DOJ has agreed that any prosecution of UBS be deferred for a period of at least 18 months, which is subject to extension under certain circumstances, such as UBS needing more time to complete the implementation of the exit of its US cross-border business. If UBS satisfies all of its obligations under the DPA, the DOJ will refrain from pursuing charges against UBS relating to the investigation of its US crossborder business. Additionally, as published by FINMA on 18 February 2009, FINMA has concluded that UBS violated the requirements for proper business conduct, and it barred UBS from providing services to US resident private clients out of non-SEC registered entities. Further, FINMA ordered UBS to enhance its control framework around its cross-border businesses and announced that the effectiveness of such a framework will be audited. The order by FINMA in support of the resolution achieved with the DOJ was instrumental in averting the imminent risk of further negative implications and uncertainties for the bank. The cost for the settlement has been fully charged to the year 2008, as reflected in this report. The settlement agreements do not resolve issues concerning the pending John Doe summons which the IRS served on UBS in July 2008. The summons seeks information regarding a substantial number of undisclosed accounts maintained by US persons at UBS in Switzerland, whose information is protected from disclosure by Swiss financial privacy laws. As announced on 19 February 2009, the IRS has commenced a civil action, seeking enforcement of the summons, which UBS intends to challenge. UBS believes it has substantial defenses to the enforcement of the summons and intends to vigorously contest its enforcement in the civil proceeding, as is permitted under the terms of the DPA. Objections to the enforcement of the summons are based upon US law, the terms of UBSs QIA with the IRS, Swiss financial privacy and other laws, and the principles of international comity that require US courts to take into account foreign laws. |
Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
Products and services in these webpages may not be available for residents of certain nations. Please consult the sales restrictions relating to the service in question for further information.
© UBS 1998-2009. All rights reserved.
UBS has restated its annual report for 2008 on May 20, 2009, including the financial statements and other information. | ||||||