the banking industry and the first one was filing exam or presenting exempt of you force number one there were a number first of all we have the disparate treatment argument as the record shows after i finish the hearing i just governed from the discovery that was given to me lately it's very late that there were at least twelve employees in addition to my clients who are not have an income taxes you ducted and yet my clients door in particular on september twenty nine thousand nine hundred ninety nine we're going to stand by these clients i mean excuse me we're going to stand by the petitioners unless and until we hear from i r s i arrests never got into the gain they give them to their employers most of your force are kept on hand by the employers so the employer knows what he or she has to d docked in terms of income tax in particular cases like if there's a huge number of got them but we did not support them because it's not our practice gentlemen we advised the employer to do so but we don't have a record that we told it can be to do so and yet the commission still wants to hold my clients responsible  position by saying this is the substandard loan which lowers the rating in the report of the f and b therefore going to the issue that maybe it created it was not it affected the soundness of the bank well that's sort everything under control and we've approved all this nandi direction he later turncoats but without any substantial evidence to back up his turn coating testimony ok so the indemnification letter was just something that she thought she could do there being part from working in the banks was that these documents that they mail to i arrests now the government could not the f b i see would not have these documents these were documents strictly dealing with the confidential relationship between i arrested my client that's all they were if i arrest said hey you know you're full of hot water weren't you guys we know all about you we've got a special category for for their shares you want to see that they're that they're liquid you want to see that they're not just growing the thinking you know the typical financial thing but pointed to people's personnel files to grab their tax returns the other thing something had to be done about this that that's the problem with the use of these documents is that had my clients not been honest and straightforward but true there are you going to personnel files without a legitimate reason this is not an just completely not justified or that they just drain the bank of all their assets that wasn't happening in this case nobody is saying not even the f b i c e o saying that my clients were playing games with the income they are and what they earned w s every year for those two years that this went on i also want to say that there was no benefit rived by my clients except for well i don't know if that was even a benefit because they were having their old age necessarily you know having the political philosophy that my clients have but so it was hard to talk about whether they were mad because my clients were open about their position although there was covert and on the other they were too open about their position and in fact in the march ninety eight minutes which i have that my the see i think it's i don't know i'm sorry i don't have the paraphrasing and then he says we expect it's our recommendation that the individual employees minimize their visibility in the community with regard to this particular issue now if they want to go up on that issue we could have addressed that because then we could have shown that the minute also about the board of directors responsibility this is a no brainer i mean i don't know if the forthcoming judges if you ever had a private law practice but iraq has an eight hundred number that you can call in as if you small business owner they have three seminars it's a no brainer why they had to hire a three hundred dollars an hour attorney to find out that employer employee relationship you can never not you know if you're legit meaning it wasn't saying that he agreed with the exempt of the force but he knew they had a right to test whether or not they were exams he was just concerned about them flowing around with the declaration under penalty of perjury he just wanted him to he just had them order and we would submit that that water is warranted there there is beyond question because all of the elements of the eighty elements of the statute misconduct harm to the institution and s this was an issue of bank management these people were the bank they were bank management you think the bank acting on behalf of the bank and causing the bank to the bank to engage in illegal activities simple call to the i r s were told banks management that they could not stop withholding fica that was required all of these actions began in one nine hundred ninety seven they didn't come czerny was relying on representations made by a bank's management that the proper forms had been sent to the i r s proper proper exam forms he says he's not a tax lawyer he never maybe he should have looked behind what exactly the forms that were needed were he didn't but he was relying on bank management that represented to him that all of the proper steps have been taken to protect the bank and in fact they hadn't and the auditors discovered that in one nine hundred ninety eight and informed thence management that they were breaking the law there via using the bank in that manner they were causing the bank to break the law that's the issue the harm to the bank is also beyond question not only did the bank make the payments most of the back taxes which was never repaid even though the bank may demand  they the actions of the respondents were bank managers exposed instead of protecting the bank that makes owes the bank to numerous potential liabilities both civil and criminal i believe  hundred number they could've at easily discovered that their their plan for the first to cease withholding on fica was illegal they should have done that in their role as bank managers assuring the bank at the boards that they had indeed filed a proper is valid example an altered example w for is when they actually had not and didn't even check on the situation for and they presented they again even in response to my argument haven't shown how the bank was harmed in any way they didn't get any penalties there there was no nothing no action taken by they they talked about mr jenner talk about misleading the bank and she talked about the on altered exam to be a force now there was general language as far as my clients were concerned they had submitted the valid documents that were necessary to not have to pay their income taxes now the with respect to the eight hundred number or taking the free seminars on how to do taxation it's a two way street here the board was very a criminal action if you have zero let me just say this on the auditors they approved the one thousand nine hundred seven they weren't worried about the nonexempt they had a bunch of of people not paying taxes they were worried