71–80 of 151 posts
This sentence could replace all the ethics training in the case majority of corporations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a good summary of the stock option backdating scandal. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/options-b... It was because the paperwork for the option grants were being written at the end of the month with a date based on the lowest price during the preceding month, a common practice at the time, but one that misrepresented when the options were actually granted, thereby enriching grantees at the e…
So lying about the date, and not reporting properly was the problem not the price in and of itself. That makes much more sense.
This is roughly theft from the other stockholders.
If curious, past threads: Why I Did Not Go to Jail (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18026790 - Sept 2018 (152 comments) Why I Did Not Go to Jail (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11240717 - March 2016 (13 comments) Why I Did Not Go To Jail - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7191642 - Feb 2014 (182 comments)
ya, curious why this has to be submitted over and over
This is one of the more important bits to be periodically reposted on HN. Compliance with the law is not 'optional', and if you cross that line there is a fair chance that it will come back to bite you. Regulated industries, stock transactions (and options, as in this bit of startup history) all have their peculiarities and you need to realize that not all of these end up with the proverbial slap on the wrist if you…
My first thought was that "the system" is broken. It's too big and complicated. It's inhumane. And it's not just corporate tax law. Health care is a dumpster fire. Lots of overly complicated modern bureaucracies. We're not as smart as we think we are.
We are, that's the problem. We find loopholes, we find edge cases, we bend rules to our benefit. Thus the bureaucracy must become ever more complicated to deal with our cleverness.
This is one of the more important bits to be periodically reposted on HN. Compliance with the law is not 'optional', and if you cross that line there is a fair chance that it will come back to bite you. Regulated industries, stock transactions (and options, as in this bit of startup history) all have their peculiarities and you need to realize that not all of these end up with the proverbial slap on the wrist if you…
So I'd add a little more to your advice to resign if asked to do something illegal. If your company, or industry, seems to be the new whipping post for some Federal agency, consider a new place. Assuming you're in a spot that could be a scapegoat.
This is one of the more important bits to be periodically reposted on HN. Compliance with the law is not 'optional', and if you cross that line there is a fair chance that it will come back to bite you. Regulated industries, stock transactions (and options, as in this bit of startup history) all have their peculiarities and you need to realize that not all of these end up with the proverbial slap on the wrist if you…
I agree with all of that, but there's also the idea that once the government decides you're guilty, they will find something. There's so many laws, and they are so complex, that's it's not hard for them to do so. So I'd add a little more to your advice to resign if asked to do something illegal. If your company, or industry, seems to be the new whipping post for some Federal agency, consider a new place. Assuming you…
I don't think the government had any vendetta against this particular person. (ie: Martin Skherli) However, she was probably investigated for money matters (ie: her tax reports) as she probably was shadier than Ben would like to admit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems terrible for everyone. Poor people get stuck with false accusations by the police, no bail, and public defenders who are either incompetent or overworked. Rich people (or middle class founders who dream of getting rich) get to deal with incomprehensible tax and accounting laws where no one can ever really be sure that they're compliant. Ben Horowitz had the luck to receive good legal advice and the wisdom to…
A good start would be to write the law in a way an average Joe could understand it. I can already hear the legal sector screaming ' it's impossible!!'. A good example is the 'plain English' requirement for some documents issued by the financial institutions to retail customers in the UK. I saw first hand what that means when we did projects for banks: bank's analyst sends a report to a professional investor- the text…
This was before the ruckus Ben mentions.
Worked out well financially for the beneficiary, but would be very wrong these days. May have been wrong then.
This is one of the more important bits to be periodically reposted on HN. Compliance with the law is not 'optional', and if you cross that line there is a fair chance that it will come back to bite you. Regulated industries, stock transactions (and options, as in this bit of startup history) all have their peculiarities and you need to realize that not all of these end up with the proverbial slap on the wrist if you…
I agree with all of that, but there's also the idea that once the government decides you're guilty, they will find something. There's so many laws, and they are so complex, that's it's not hard for them to do so. So I'd add a little more to your advice to resign if asked to do something illegal. If your company, or industry, seems to be the new whipping post for some Federal agency, consider a new place. Assuming you…
> Michelle (note: her name has been changed) I do wonder what is the point of that. It takes 2 minutes of searching to find it out.
99.99%+ of people are not willing to take that 2 minutes though