Office of Government Ethics

Report on Improvements to the Financial

Disclosure Process for Presidential Nominees

to the 

Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate 

and the Committee on Government Reform of the

House of Representatives

April 2001
1

Table of Contents

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Introduction ..................................................................4

Part I. Executive Branch Public Financial Disclosure Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

A. Non-legislative Improvements to the Public Reporting System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

B. Recommended Changes to the Ethics in Government Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1. Reduce the number of valuation categories throughout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2. Shorten certain reporting time-periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3. Limit the scope of reporting by raising certain dollar-thresholds . . . . . . . . . . 12

4. Reduce descriptive details that are unnecessary for conflicts analysis . . . . . . 14

5. Eliminate redundant reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Part II. Eliminating the Duplication of Required Financial Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Part III. Other Statutory Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

A. Expansion of Certificates of Divestiture Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

B. Revision of the Criminal Conflict of Interest Statutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

 Outreach

Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

 Non-Governmental organizations studies reviewed

Appendix C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

 Current SF 278 and “revised model”

Appendix D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

 Comparison charts
2

Executive Summary

The nomination and confirmation process has grown increasingly complex over the years so

that today it is viewed by many as being unnecessarily complicated and unduly burdensome for

persons being considered for Presidential appointments. Various commissions and studies in the

past have made recommendations for simplifying and rationalizing this process. In 2000, with the

approach of another Presidential transition, attention was once again turned to this process. Under

the Presidential Transition Act of 2000, Congress directed the Office of Government Ethics (OGE)

to study the process and propose ways to: (1) streamline, standardize, and coordinate the financial

disclosure process for Presidential nominees under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978; (2) avoid

duplication of effort and reduce the burden of financial disclosure filings; and (3) address other

matters OGE deemed appropriate, without making any proposal that would have the effect of

lessening substantive compliance with any conflict of interest requirement.

OGE obtained the opinions of interested parties first by reviewing their studies of the process.

We also reviewed the questionnaires used by confirming committees of the 106th Congress and the

White House, as well as the forms and instructions used by all three branches for public financial

disclosure required by the Ethics in Government Act. We sought and obtained comments about the

process through a notice in the Federal Register. Finally, we discussed possible proposals with

executive branch ethics officials, and spoke with individuals who have been or are currently involved

in the process.

Public financial disclosure by high-level Government employees was introduced into law to

provide a tool for identifying and resolving potential conflicts of interest and to increase public

confidence in the Government. It is fundamental to the executive branch ethics program. The

current public financial disclosure system, however, requires reporting more information than is

useful or necessary to achieve its fundamental goals. Some of the detail regarding assets,

transactions and other reportable items is more intrusive and burdensome than it need be. Such

unnecessary detail could be eliminated without “lessening substantive compliance with any conflict

of interest requirement.” Eliminating such nonessential detail would benefit both Presidential

nominees and the approximately 20,000 Government employees who are subject to public reporting.

To simplify financial disclosure and mitigate the burden, OGE is recommending changes to

the Ethics in Government Act for the executive branch to: (1) reduce the number of valuation

categories; (2) shorten certain reporting time-periods; (3) limit the scope of reporting by raising

certain dollar-thresholds; (4) reduce details that are unnecessary for conflicts analysis; and

(5) eliminate redundant reporting. 

In addition to the form used for public financial disclosure in the executive branch (the

SF 278), there are several other forms requiring financial and other information that must be filed

by potential nominees. These include the White House Personal Data Statement, the Questionnaire

for National Security Positions (SF 86), and Senate confirming committee questionnaires. Our

comparison of the SF 278, SF 86, and committee forms identified overlap and inconsistency. We
3

developed charts from which the parties responsible for these forms can note the overlap and can

then balance the burdens that the questions on these forms create against the needs to obtain the

information they seek. 

OGE also has addressed the suggestion that other ethics program related statutes be revised,

including criminal conflict of interest statutes. For example, OGE is exploring an expansion of the

existing tax code provision that deals with taxes resulting from the divestiture of an asset for conflict

of interest purposes. This would involve an amendment to the tax code to allow for a Certificate of

Divestiture program for the sale of many stock options. Current law only applies when a sale results

in capital gains. With regard to the criminal conflict of interest statutes, we have already been in

contact with the Department of Justice to begin exploring the revision of the conflict laws.

OGE is ready to work with both the executive and legislative branches to make the

appointment process smoother and less burdensome for all parties.
1

Paul C. Light and Virginia L. Thomas, The Merit and Reputation of an Administration:

Presidential Appointees on the Appointments Process, The Presidential Appointee Initiative,

Washington, DC: April 28, 2000, page 3.

4

Introduction.

Just over ten years ago, the nomination and confirmation process generated such concern that

former President Bush established the President’s Commission on the Federal Appointment Process.

The Commission was established under the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 and Executive Order 12719

to study ways to simplify the Presidential appointment process by reducing the number and

complexity of forms to be completed by potential appointees.

That effort resulted in some improvements. Today, however, the nomination and

confirmation process is viewed by some as even more protracted, complicated, and burdensome than

it was ten years ago. In 2000, with an upcoming Presidential transition, attention once again turned

to this process. As one group looking at the appointment process found:

Those who survive the appointments process often enter office frustrated and

fatigued, in part because they get little or no help, and in part because the process has

increasingly become a source of confusion and embarrassment.1

The Presidential Transition Act of 2000 (Transition Act), Public Law 106-293, included a

provision directing the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to study the financial disclosure process

for Presidential nominees required to file reports under section 101(b) of the Ethics in Government

Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App. § 101(b)). It also directed OGE to submit by mid-April 2001, a report

to the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Government Reform

of the House of Representatives making recommendations on improvements to this process.

Section 3(b)(1) of the Transition Act states that the report is to include recommendations and

legislative proposals on --

(A) streamlining, standardizing, and coordinating the financial disclosure

process and the requirements of financial disclosure reports under the Ethics in

Government Act of 1978 ( 5 U.S.C. App.) for Presidential nominees;

(B) avoiding duplication of effort and reducing the burden of filing with

respect to financial disclosure of information to the White House Office, the Office

of Government Ethics, and the Senate; and

(C) any other relevant matter the Office of Government Ethics determines

appropriate.
5

The Transition Act placed one limitation on the recommendations to be submitted. Any

recommendations made in the report “shall not (if implemented) have the effect of lessening

substantive compliance with any conflict of interest requirement.” This report is in response to the

directive of the Transition Act.

The nomination and confirmation process referenced in the Presidential Transition Act

encompasses the activities of many executive branch agencies, including OGE. In general, the first

Government contact for an individual who may be considered for nomination will be the White

House. The White House provides potential nominees with the forms to complete, including the

Public Financial Disclosure Form (Standard Form 278), and the Questionnaire for National Security

Positions (SF 86), that furnishes information for the background investigation. The White House

then requests the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (or State Department or Defense Department)

to perform a background investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to perform a “tax check,”

and OGE, in conjunction with the employing agency, to perform a conflicts of interest analysis,

based upon a review and analysis of the SF 278. Using this information, a final determination on

a nomination is made. Once a nominee’s name is formally sent to the Senate, the committee or

committees that will hold confirmation hearings communicate directly with the nominee about the

information that the committee requires.

In this report, OGE occasionally refers to procedures or systems that are not within the

jurisdiction of OGE but are administered by another part of the Government. We have discussed this

study with each of those other entities, and recommend that these discussions continue. But, we

wish to emphasize that any significant improvements to the nomination and confirmation process

will require actions by OGE as well as by others.

Because of the many Government entities involved in the nomination and confirmation

process, OGE made an extensive effort to obtain the views of the many effected entities. In

developing this report, OGE obtained written input and met with many of the executive branch ethics

officials who also work with the financial disclosure system on a day to day basis. OGE also: 

--obtained the views of those non-Governmental organizations (NGOs) we knew to

be interested in transition and presidential appointment issues; 

--obtained and reviewed the questionnaires from each confirming committee and

from the White House;

--obtained and reviewed the forms and instructions of the House, Senate, and judicial

branch public financial disclosure systems based upon the Ethics in Government Act;
6

--placed a notice in the Federal Register seeking comment from agencies and the

public; and 

--spoke with a number of individuals who have been or currently are involved in the

clearance process for Presidential appointments. 

A detailed listing of the outreach efforts that were made in preparing this report can be found in

Appendix A and the selected studies that we reviewed can be found at Appendix B.

Report Organization

This report is divided into three sections. Part I contains OGE’s recommendations to

streamline the requirements of the public financial disclosure system under Title I of the Ethics in

Government Act, which is reflected in the current SF 278.

Part II addresses the multiple financial information requests involved in the nomination and

confirmation process which may unduly complicate or delay the process or otherwise serve as

unnecessary impediments to service in a PAS position. Included is a discussion of the overlapping

questions found on the SF 278, the SF 86 (Questionnaire for National Security Positions) and its

supplemental questions, and each Senate confirming committee’s questionnaire. 

Part III of the report addresses related ethics program issues that can affect service in the

executive branch at all levels. This includes potential changes to the tax code for gain resulting from

the divestiture of an asset by an executive branch employee for conflict of interest purposes.

At the end of the report, there is a conclusion that summarizes the actions OGE will

undertake independently, as well as OGE’s commitments to work with other executive branch

agencies and the Senate, to bring about the improvements we are recommending.
2

Senate Report No. 95-170, at 21-22, reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4237-4238.

7

Part I. Executive Branch Public Financial Disclosure Requirements.

This part discusses proposed improvements to the public financial disclosure reporting

system. In preparing this report, we undertook a complete review of both the legal requirements of

the Ethics in Government Act and our own practices in administering the public reporting system.

We found that many elements are working well and are fulfilling the fundamental purposes of the

public reporting system. We have not discussed those elements of the system that we believe should

remain unchanged. Rather, our discussion focuses on those areas where we believe change is

appropriate.

We wish to note that our recommendations for changes to the Ethics in Government Act are

for the executive branch only. While executive branch employees are subject to substantial criminal

and civil conflict of interest statutes, officers and employees of other branches are not. Thus, we

take no position as to whether the changes we recommend would adequately meet the public policy

needs for public disclosure in the other two branches.

Public financial disclosure by certain high level political appointees, as well as certain senior

career employees of the executive branch, was first introduced as a statutory requirement in 1978

with the passage of the Ethics in Government Act, Public Law 95-521. At that time, public financial

disclosure was intended to --

--increase public confidence in Government;

--demonstrate the high level of integrity of the vast majority of Government officials;

--deter conflicts of interest from arising because official activities would be subject

to public scrutiny;

--deter persons whose personal finances would not bear up to public scrutiny from

entering public service; and

--better enable the public to judge the performance of public officials in light of the

official’s outside financial interests.2

OGE believes that all of these goals remain valid today. The public financial disclosure

system is a fundamental element of the executive branch ethics program. The information that it

requires regarding assets, income, compensation arrangements, outside positions, clients, and other

financial matters relates directly to conduct requirements and it is essential to maintaining the

integrity of Government operations and programs. Moreover, making this information publicly

available ensures outside scrutiny and contributes to public confidence in Government. 
3

The types of financial information requested -- assets, sources of income, liabilities,

positions held outside the Government, continuing arrangements with former employers or

agreements with future employers, gifts, transactions, and client information -- all have some useful

relationship to a current conflict of interest or ethics statute or a conduct regulation. Those statutes

can and do take into consideration the financial interests of spouses and children, so reporting

requirements extend to those interests as well. It is not the general subject of the information

requested, but rather the level of detail required about that subject, that is burdensome.

8

Based upon more than 20 years of experience administering this statutory system, however,

we believe that the current public financial disclosure system requires the reporting of more

information than is necessary or useful for the purposes of conflict of interest analysis or maintaining

public confidence in Government.3 Some of the specific detail regarding assets, transactions and

other reportable items is intrusive or burdensome to the filer and could be eliminated without

“lessening substantive compliance with any conflict of interest requirement.” Eliminating such

unnecessary detail would relieve the burden that falls not only on Presidential nominees but also on

approximately 20,000 executive branch employees who are subject to public reporting.

We also believe that a reporting system should be designed so that it is practical for the vast

majority of filers. For example, it is neither necessary nor desirable to require every filer to provide

details for every asset that is reported, whether or not that asset presents a potential conflict. Even

the existing reporting system does not require the reporting of so much detailed information that

ethics officials never need to obtain additional clarifying information. Ethics officials as well as

OGE currently request additional information from a filer that is relevant to the resolution of a

potential conflict, and it is the filer’s obligation to provide it.

Furthermore, the Government’s interest in public financial disclosure must always be

balanced against the privacy interest of filers. We need to take a careful look at the sometimes

competing interests that are at stake in an environment in which a financial disclosure report that has

been posted on the Internet is subject to global dissemination. The citizen’s interest in public access,

the filer’s interest in privacy, and the Government’s interest in being able to attract the most qualified

persons to enter Government service must all be carefully considered in light of the realities of the

information age. Eliminating unnecessary detail will lessen the intrusiveness of this system, while

providing ethics officials and the public with sufficient information to judge the actions of the

individual filer.

In this part of the report, we first discuss OGE’s own practices and interpretations that we

have reviewed and determined should be revised to lessen any unnecessary burdens on filers and

reviewers. These are changes that do not require any legislative action, but were prompted by the

review undertaken in preparing this report. 
4

Although generally the assets of other persons or estates do not have to be disclosed, in

certain cases an employee may have a financial interest in such assets. This might occur, for

example, when an executor’s fee is calculated as a percentage of the estate’s holdings. In such cases,

reporting of the assets will continue to be required.

9

A. Non-legislative Improvements to the Public Reporting System

As part of OGE’s review of Title I of the Ethics in Government Act, we considered whether

the burdens of public filing could be reduced merely by our making procedural or interpretative

changes to the public reporting system for nominees. We concluded at the outset that we could have

an immediate impact by consolidating the various levels of review of a nominee financial disclosure

report within OGE. This streamlining ensures that a nominee will not be unnecessarily contacted

several times for additional information by OGE. Consolidating requests for additional information

can aid in reducing the frustration level of a nominee who may view the reporting system as unduly

complicated. 

We also analyzed whether certain of our interpretations of the Ethics in Government Act

should be revisited. We looked particularly at cases where filers have been required to report the

holdings of: (1) investment partnerships where they serve as limited partner; (2) trusts where they

serve as trustee; (3) estates where they serve as executor; and (4) other persons for whom they have

a power of attorney. We determined that some flexibility was warranted where filers were unable,

without extraordinary effort, to ascertain the value and income of the subholdings of limited

partnerships (i.e. where one limited partnership invests in another limited partnership). Those values

are not necessary for conflicts of interest analysis and obtaining them can sometimes impose a heavy

burden on filers. In addition, upon reevaluation, we have decided that filers generally should not be

required to disclose the assets of a person for whom they have a power of attorney, nor the assets of

an estate for which the filer serves as an executor.4

We are in the process of consulting with the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of

Justice about the applicability of conflict of interests prohibitions to an employee serving as a trustee

for a non-family trust. The resolution of this issue will help determine whether any appropriate

changes can be made to the reporting requirements for holdings in trusts in such cases.

These changes reflect the recognition of OGE’s ongoing and continuous responsibility to

review its own systems and interpretations to ensure that our responsibilities are being performed

as efficiently and practically as possible. We are pleased that these changes, with the exception of

the trust question, have already been implemented.

In addition, there is another possible change that involves the procedures of confirming

committees. There are a number of boards, commissions, and committees whose members must be

appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If these individuals are not paid (or not

highly paid) or are not expected to serve more than 60 days, they are not required to file a SF 278.

However, a number of Senate committees ask them to complete a SF 278. OGE reviews this report
5

These recommendations encompass the entire system of new entrant, annual and termination

public financial disclosure filings for officers and employees throughout the executive branch, not

just nominees.

10

and provides its conflicts analysis to assist the committees, although we do not treat the form as

public.

A few Senate committees require the less complex OGE Form 450 Confidential Financial

Disclosure Report from individuals who will serve in part-time positions not otherwise covered by

public reporting requirements. This form provides enough information to make conflict

determinations for these nominees. We recommend that all the committees request only an OGE

Form 450 from individuals who are nominated to a part-time position on a board, commission, or

committee and who would not otherwise be required to file a public report. This action would

require no legislation to accomplish and would remove what has been identified by some groups as

a disincentive to service in these positions. We will be approaching each committee shortly with this

suggestion.

B. Recommended Changes to the Ethics in Government Act5

This section addresses improvements that would require legislative action to amend the

Ethics in Government Act. OGE determined that the public financial disclosure system could be

improved substantially by amending the law upon which it is based. Specifically, we propose that

the Ethics in Government Act be amended to: reduce the number of valuation categories throughout;

shorten certain reporting time-periods; limit the scope of reporting by raising certain dollarthresholds; reduce descriptive details that are unnecessary for conflicts analysis; and eliminate

redundant reporting. It is important to note that we believe these recommendations are consistent

with the mandate in the Transition Act not to lessen substantive compliance with any conflict of

interest requirement. For reference purposes we have attached as Appendix C a copy of the current

SF 278 as well as a “revised model” SF 278 that illustrates all the changes proposed in this report.

These recommendations are closely inter-related and inter-dependent and we present them

as a single, complete proposal. In other words, in the effort to reduce redundancy and excessive

reporting, we have ensured that all aspects of the proposed reporting requirements are coordinated.

Therefore, we must stress that if any portion of these recommended changes is not adopted, OGE

will need to review the whole proposal to ensure that information necessary for conflicts review and

ethics program compliance has not been inadvertently lost.

1. Reduce the number of valuation categories throughout.

a) Reduce the current eleven categories of asset value to three. 

For executive branch employees, a financial conflict exists if he or she (or other persons or

entities with whom they have a specified affiliation) has a financial interest in a matter in which they
6

See the proposed amendment to 5 C.F.R. § 2640.202(a)(2), at 65 Federal Register 53945

(September 6, 2000).

11

would participate as part of their job (18 U.S.C. § 208). The magnitude of the financial interest is

not relevant for conflicts determinations, unless a waiver of the conflict or an exemption from the

recusal requirement is being considered. To determine the application of this basic financial conflict

statute, an ethics official reviewing a financial disclosure report has little need to know the value of

an asset that creates a potential conflict for an employee. One could, therefore, make a legal

argument that the value of an asset offers little to a conflicts analysis. Nonetheless, given the

underlying justifications cited earlier for having a “public” financial disclosure form, we believe that

some general sense of the substantiality of an asset is useful. Rather than the current eleven

categories of value for asset disclosures, however, we propose three -- $1,001 - $15,000; $15,001-

$100,000; and over $100,000.

 The first category ( $1,001 - 15,000) encompasses the current proposed dollar threshold for

one of the regulatory exemptions issued by OGE under 18 U.S.C. § 208, concerning certain publicly

traded securities.6 Simply recognizing that an asset has a value below that amount will assist an

ethics official who reviews a financial disclosure report, and it should also reinforce the significance

of that amount for the filer when he or she examines personal assets in order to prepare a disclosure

report.

The uppermost category of asset value that we are proposing (over $100,000) represents what

we believe would be considered a significant asset by most filers and the public. We do not believe

that further detail above that amount is necessary, either for the public or for a conflict of interest

analysis. If members of the public are informed that a filer holds an asset which they consider

substantial (over $100,000), it is not necessary, we believe, for them also to know the extent to which

that asset’s value exceeds $100,000. Further, from the perspective of the nominee, significant

personal privacy will be restored if the requirement to disclose these details of one’s wealth (or lack

thereof) is eliminated. 

b) Reduce the current eleven categories of income amount to three. 

Information indicating the amount of income from investments is normally of limited use in

conflicts analysis. Certainly the degree of detail required by the current statute, with its eleven

categories, is not needed. Likewise, for earned income, over-specificity regarding the amount (which

must currently be disclosed as an exact figure) is unnecessary. In order to preserve some general

public information about both investment and earned income, however, while also protecting the

nominee’s privacy, we propose three categories of income -- $501-$20,000; $20,001-$100,000; and

over $100,000. (See our separate recommendation, discussed below, for eliminating the requirement

to report exact amount of income earned.)
7

For ease of reporting, we recommend that a single threshold be applied to both the filer and

spouse (at the amount proposed herein).

12

c) Reduce the current eleven categories of value for liabilities to three.

We believe that three categories ($20,001-$100,000; $100,001-$1,000,000; and over

$1,000,000) provide sufficient information about liabilities for all purposes of public financial

disclosure. The current eleven are overly detailed for purposes of conflicts analysis, in our view.

2. Shorten certain reporting time-periods.

a) Reduce the covered reporting period for disclosing outside positions held.

At present, the financial disclosure statute requires that positions held outside the U.S.

Government be reported if held during the current year or the preceding two calendar years. We

propose reducing that coverage period to the current year or the preceding one calendar year. First,

this will bring uniformity and significantly reduce confusion for filers, reviewers, and the public, as

virtually all other required financial disclosure data concern the current year and the preceding one

calendar year. Second, the standards of ethical conduct for executive branch employees focus on

appearances of impartiality primarily during the one-year period after leaving an outside position

(5 C.F.R. § 2635.502). In the usual situation, there is no conflict of interest or suitability justification

requiring public disclosure of outside positions held prior to that time.

b) Reduce the covered reporting period for disclosing clients and other sources

of individual compensation involving personal services.

For reasons similar to those stated in the preceding paragraph, we believe that the reporting

period for disclosing certain clients and other sources of individual compensation involving personal

services should encompass only the current year and the preceding one calendar year, rather than the

presently required current and preceding two calendar years. 

3. Limit the scope of reporting by raising certain dollar-thresholds.

a) Do not require disclosure of any income amounts (whether earned or from

investments) at or below $500.

The current threshold for reporting earned and investment income was fixed at $200 in 1989

(except for a spouse’s earned income, where the threshold is $1000).7

 That is even lower than the

current threshold for gift disclosure. We recommend raising the threshold to $500. This change

should significantly reduce the burden on filers of examining their finances for small investment

earnings, small payments for services, and other relatively insignificant financial dealings.
13

b) Do not require disclosure of deposit accounts with a financial institution and

Government securities, when valued at or below $100,000. 

Deposit accounts in financial institutions that are valued at or below the FDIC-insured

$100,000 amount raise virtually no conflicts concerns for any employees. At this level, the purpose

of reporting deposit accounts is primarily to provide the public with a sense of the individual’s

financial situation and lack of conflicts, not because they present any conflicts issues.

Government securities create conflicts for only a few executive branch officials, who are

generally prohibited from holding them at all. Further, Government securities are designated as

“permitted properties” for reinvestment when employees avail themselves of the capital gains tax

deferral opportunity (by seeking a Certificate of Divestiture) in conjunction with the sale of assets

when required for conflicts purposes (5 C.F.R. § 2634.1001 et seq.). Accordingly, we recommend

that such investments be reported only if valued over $100,000, and even then, primarily to provide

the public with a sense of the individual’s financial situation and lack of conflicts, not because they

present any conflicts issues.

c) Do not require disclosure of liabilities valued at or below $20,000. 

Since 1978, a liability must be disclosed if its value exceeds $10,000, a figure established in

1978. In today’s dollars, that amount would be $27,436. We propose $20,000 as an adequate

threshold for conflicts analysis, which also will effectively eliminate the unnecessary reporting of

most consumer and credit card debt. As discussed earlier, liabilities would be reported in three

categories, with the uppermost being “over $1,000,000.”

d) Redefine reportable clients and other sources of individual compensation

involving personal services, by limiting to persons or entities for whom the filer

has provided services worth more than $25,000.

 

The current $5,000 threshold was set by statute in 1978. In today’s dollars that is $13,718.

We believe that amount is still somewhat low as a measure of identifying major clients that must

be publicly reported. Therefore, we propose a $25,000 threshold. We would make it clear that

public reporting of the name of a client where the client had a reasonable expectation of

confidentiality would not be required.

Disclosure of these major clients and sources of earned income for personal services provides

helpful information in applying executive branch ethics rules on impartiality, where official

participation in matters may be perceived as improper. Raising the threshold to $25,000 provides

a clearer focus on the most significant clients and sources.
14

4. Reduce descriptive details that are unnecessary for conflicts analysis. 

a) Eliminate the current requirement to identify income as “interest,”

“dividends,” “rents and royalties,” “capital gains” or “other,” and substitute

three basic types: “investment income,” “earned income” and “honoraria.” 

For an initial conflicts analysis, a reviewing ethics official only needs to know whether the

type of income is investment or earned. The more detailed characterization of income types serves

little purpose.

With regard to earned income, it is the income source that serves a vital conflicts purpose,

not the details as to specific type, such as salary, fees, commissions, or wages. The simple

characterization as “earned income” is sufficient for most conflicts review purposes. 

In contrast to earned income, the reporting of investment income has limited value, as it

rarely provides any insights regarding current conflicts that are not already apparent from other data

on the report. Nonetheless, we recommend retaining the basic reporting requirement for investment

income, because it can provide information about assets that were sold between reporting periods,

raise questions about unusual amounts of income generated from a particular asset, and give some

sense of the major sources of income for the reporting official. Characterization as “investment

income” is, however, a sufficient description of the income type.

b) Eliminate any requirement to report exact amounts of income, except for

honoraria.

With one exception, we perceive no compelling reason to require public reporting of exact

amounts for any income, particularly for nominees. The actual amount of income received from

either an investment or from employment is of limited utility in a conflicts analysis. This is

particularly so for investment income, as noted above.

For earned income, the one exception to eliminating disclosure of exact amounts is honoraria

received during Government service, because of the sensitive nature of those payments. While exact

amounts of honoraria are not necessary for conflicts purposes, we believe this to be an area where

the public interest is paramount. On its face, honoraria may suggest subjectively determined large

payments for brief appearances and speeches, sometimes involving unusual travel opportunities.

Given that appearance, requiring the exact amount of honoraria payments received during

Government service remains appropriate. We recommend, therefore, that all income except such

honoraria be reported by categories of amount, rather than exact amounts. (See our separate

recommendation, discussed above, for reducing the existing eleven categories of amount, which are

currently used for most reportable investment income, to four.)

The requirement to publicly disclose the exact amount of earned income is not necessary, and

eliminating it (except for certain honoraria) will ease the burden on a large percentage of the more
8

See 5 U.S.C. App. § 501(a). The triggering amount is currently $21,765, which changes

as the executive level pay scale is adjusted.

15

than 20,000 annual filers in the executive branch for whom no potential issues will arise concerning

earned income. Nonetheless, many non-career employees, for example, are restricted by statute8 and

executive order as to the amount of annual outside earned income they may receive during their

appointments. Additional information beyond categories of amount may be necessary in those

instances, so that ethics officials can identify potential income limitation problems and counsel the

employee, or highlight the issue for a nominee. The ethics official can, in those limited cases, ask

the filer for additional information. 

c) Eliminate reporting of dates and amounts for transactions involving the

purchase, sale or exchange of real property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures

or other securities.

In our outreach to ethics officials on this topic, almost all agreed that information regarding

the value of an asset transaction (purchase, sale or exchange) or the date on which it occurred is not

necessary for conflicts analysis and is rarely, if ever, used. Reporting the asset’s mere existence in

connection with a transaction during the reporting period provides sufficient information to conduct

almost all conflicts analyses. As previously noted, if there is any reason that an ethics official might

need more information to resolve a potential conflict, the filer can be asked to provide it.

d) Eliminate the requirement to provide an itinerary in connection with the

reporting of travel reimbursements.

The current requirement to provide an itinerary when reporting travel reimbursements is

generally not useful to an ethics official; it is the source and value of that travel reimbursement that

is significant for conflicts analysis, not the details of the travel arrangements.

e) Eliminate the reporting of dates for agreements and arrangements involving

future employment, leaves of absence, or continuation of employee benefits

(except for the date of a formal agreement for future employment). 

We believe that the current requirement for dates, other than those involving formal

agreements for future employment, are unnecessary for most conflicts analyses. The rare situation

where a date might be needed should not dictate the rule, especially when that information can be

sought by an ethics reviewer from the filer on an individual basis, if in a given case it is deemed

necessary. 
16

5. Eliminate redundant reporting.

a) Eliminate the requirement to report separate sources of individual

compensation involving personal services, if already reported elsewhere on the

financial disclosure report as a source of earned income.

Information about employers or business firms of the nominee during the current or

preceding calendar year will have already been reported elsewhere on the financial disclosure report,

both as a source of earned income and as a position held. There is no reason to require filers to

separately report those sources again. This section of the financial disclosure report should be

reserved for a listing of major clients. That information will not ordinarily appear elsewhere on the

report. (As indicated above, we are also recommending that the threshold value be raised from the

current $5,000 to $25,000). 

b) Eliminate the requirement to report separate transactions involving the

purchase, sale or exchange of real property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures

or other securities, if already disclosed elsewhere on the financial disclosure

report. 

We believe that the purchase, sale or exchange of real property, stocks, bonds, commodity

futures and other securities need not be separately reported if the asset that was the subject of the

transaction is already listed as a current asset or income source elsewhere on the financial disclosure

report. Only those assets not already disclosed on the report because they were disposed of during

the reporting period need to be reported.
9

The White House has recently made interim revisions of the PDS taking into account other

information nominees are required to provide. Because a new Congress was also seated during the

middle of our study, it is possible that each Senate confirming committee of the 107th Congress may

have changed its questionnaire. Therefore, we have treated the Senate questionnaires as historical

documents to be used for illustrative purposes.

17

Part II. Eliminating the Duplication of Required Financial Information.

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee stated in its report on the Transition Act that

a system of duplicative requests for financial information from potential Presidential appointees has

developed. There are at least four forms or questionnaires requiring information that must be filed

by each potential nominee. These are the White House Personal Data Statement (PDS), the

Questionnaire for National Security Positions (SF 86) with supplemental questions, the SF 278, and

a separate background questionnaire required by the appropriate Senate committee. The requested

financial information has often overlapped. Not surprisingly, given the different objectives of the

entities seeking information, the information sought has been inconsistent in the details required,

time frames and family or household members covered, and reporting thresholds. This part of the

report discusses the overlap and inconsistency among the several forms requiring financial

information that must be filed by each potential nominee.

OGE reviewed and compared the financial information required by each Senate committee

questionnaire in use at the end of the 106th Congress, the SF 86 with the current supplemental

questions, and the SF 278.9

 We charted the financial information required by each questionnaire and

form in a manner that would allow for comparisons. We include as Appendix D samples of these

charts for the SF 278, the SF 86 with supplemental questions, and the questionnaire for the Senate

Governmental Affairs Committee. We identified extensive overlap and inconsistency among the

forms. For example, the information requested by all for just one subject -- sources of earned

income -- varied by time frames covered (ranging from “since last Federal tax return” to “since age

21”) and by reporting thresholds established (ranging from “any compensation” to amounts “over

$1,000”). The forms and questionnaire also varied as to whose information (spouse, children and/or

members of the nominee’s household) was covered by the request.

The following chart shows these variations for earned income only and for information from

the nominee only (no family or household member’s information):
18

Overlap and Inconsistency in Time Frame

 and Reporting Threshold Requirements 

for Sources of Earned Income 

Forms/Questionnaires Time Frame and Reporting Threshold Requirements

SF 278 For current and previous CY sources and actual amount of income over $200

SF 86 No information regarding amounts of earned income although names of positions held and past employers are

requested

Senate Committees

106th Congress:

Agriculture For current and preceding CY, sources and amount of $200 or more.

Armed Services For past 10 years, details of any compensation from foreign government or foreign government-controlled entity.

Banking For past 3 years, sources and amounts over $500 or more or all schedules from taxes for these years itemizing

each source.

Commerce For past 3 years, sources and amounts over $250.

Energy For past 10 years, details of any compensation from foreign government or foreign government-controlled

entity.

Environment None.

Finance Since last Federal tax return, sources and amounts over $1000.

Foreign Relations For past 5 years, an explanation of any compensation from foreign government or interest.

Governmental Affairs For past 3 years, sources and amounts over $100.

Health, Ed, & Labor For past 3 years sources and amounts over $500 or copies of U.S. income tax returns for these years.

Indian Affairs None.

Judiciary For current and preceding CY, sources and amounts over $500 or more or a copy of the SF 278.

Rules None.

Intelligence For past 10 years, details of any compensation from foreign government or foreign government-controlled

entity and for the past 5 years, sources and amounts over $200 or copies of income taxes for these years.

Small Business For past 5 years, sources and amounts of all earned income (no threshold) or copies of income tax returns for

these years.

Veterans Affairs For past 3 years, sources and amounts over $500.
19

 There may be historical reasons for such variation and overlap in the financial questions and

in the forms themselves. For example, many of the financial questions on the committee

questionnaires may have been included initially when committees were evaluating financial conflicts

of interest without the input from OGE’s review of the nominee’s SF 278. However, we suggest that

the wide variations in amounts of earned income, as reflected on this chart, (i.e., “all sources,”

“sources over $100,” “sources over $200,” “sources over $250," “sources over $500,” or “sources

over $1000) could be resolved by establishing a single threshold amount without sacrificing the

original purposes for gathering this information.

We recognize that it is certainly within the prerogative and the responsibility of a confirming

committee to ask for whatever information it believes is necessary to fulfill its role in the nomination

and confirmation process. Nevertheless, to the extent that some of the financial information

currently being requested is already provided on the public financial disclosure report, we believe

that it might be advantageous for the confirming committees to review their current practices with

an eye toward harmonizing these various systems. While having one set of questions on a single

form may not meet divergent needs and objectives for gathering information, discussions involving

the Senate, the White House and this Office could result in significant streamlining of the reporting

requirements for nominees. The White House has indicated to OGE its interest in participating in

such discussions, and we encourage the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate

leadership to engage the participation of the confirming committees, as well.

With regard to the financial questions on these forms, it may be that the Senate confirming

committees will determine that the financial information that is required to be reported publicly by

the Ethics in Government Act is sufficient to meet their individual needs for financial information

on nominees including a net worth statement. Alternatively, if a separate document from the

nominee addressing financial information is needed, we hope that any such requests follow the

requirements of the public reporting system so that the same information can be imported from one

document to another. 

With regard to the financial information requested on the SF 86, we must defer to those who

are responsible for conducting background investigations as to the information that is needed to

decide suitability questions and who may have access to sensitive national security information. We

have noted, however, that one series of questions on the SF 86 may need reevaluation in light of

current investment vehicles. For example, one of the questions on the SF 86 asks whether the

individual has any “foreign property, business connections or financial interests?” If the answer is

affirmative, then the individual must describe further details of the financial interest. This question

appears to be over-broad to the extent that it could be interpreted to require the listing of any mutual

fund that holds a foreign property or interest. A complete listing of such interests would not only

require a burdensome search but also might obscure the information that is intended to be gleaned
10A recent practical aid to nominees in providing this information is that both standard forms,

the SF 278 and SF 86, can now be completed electronically. In addition the Government Paperwork

Elimination Act requires OGE to have electronic filing of the SF 278 in place by October 2003. At

the present time, OGE is gathering and evaluating information on available Web-based technology,

including the use of digital signature technology, that would allow potential nominees to

electronically enter, update, sign, and transmit their public financial disclosure (SF 278) information

over a secure Internet connection to OGE for review and approval. This is similar to a system which

we understand is currently under development by the Office of Personnel Management’s

Investigations Service (OPM-IS) to facilitate the collection and processing of detailed personal

information on the standardized form SF 86. Data transmitted to OPM would reside in a central

database, with access provided to the applicant, the Government agency, or investigative service

provider as defined by role-based access privileges.

20

from the answer. We understand that OPM is reviewing the SF 86 and we have offered to work with

them during this review.10
11These statutes cover officers and employees of all three branches and address

representations of private parties before the Government; participating in Government matters

affecting one’s own financial interest; supplementation of Government salary by outside parties; and

post employment. 

21

Part III. Other Statutory Considerations.

This part of the report addresses possible amendments to existing law that would result in

substantial benefits for the executive branch ethics program. One immediate area for legislative

action would be an expansion of the existing tax code provision that deals with gain resulting from

the divestiture of an asset by an executive branch employee for conflict of interest purposes. This

reform would not only improve the appointments process but also would benefit the executive

branch ethics program as a whole. It also contains our response to calls for various changes to the

criminal conflict of interest statutes.

A. Expansion of Certificates of Divestiture Program 

Currently, OGE is authorized by 26 U.S.C. § 1043 to issue “Certificates of Divestiture” to

any executive branch employee (other than a special Government employee) if it determines that the

divestiture of specific property is reasonably necessary to comply with conflict of interest statutes

or regulations, or if requested by a congressional committee as a condition of confirmation. These

certificates allow an employee who sells property to defer any capital gain realized as a result of the

sale if non-conflicting property is purchased with the proceeds. The basis of the new property is

adjusted so that when it is sold, any tax on capital gains will be due at that time. This authority was

given to OGE under the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. 

Arrangements for compensation in the private sector have changed significantly since 1989.

The vast majority of Presidential nominees are selected from the private sector. Often these

nominees hold stock options which they have received in lieu of other forms of compensation during

their private sector employment and which they must, for conflicts reasons, divest when they enter

Government service. Generally, these options must be held for at least one year or their sale results

in being taxed at the ordinary income rate rather than a lower capital gain rate. OGE is currently

discussing with the Department of the Treasury possible expansion of OGE’s Certificate of

Divestiture authority to address this substantial cost of entering Government service.

B. Revision of the Criminal Conflict of Interest Statutes

The Office has an ongoing responsibility to assist the Department of Justice in evaluating the

effectiveness of the conflict of interest laws and to recommend appropriate amendments. (5 U.S.C.

App. § 402(b)(1)). A number of the outside studies we read suggested that the criminal conflict of

interest statutes be revised or decriminalized.11 OGE agrees that the conflicts laws may be complex.

Nevertheless, they provide essential safeguards for the integrity of Government operations and
22

programs. It may be that these laws, however, can be simplified without sacrificing the protection

that they provide for a fair and impartial Government process. The revision of these laws is no easy

task and we are not prepared to make detailed recommendations for changes at this time. We have

already been in contact with the Department of Justice to begin exploring revisions of the conflict

laws.
23

Conclusion.

There are number of steps that can be taken now to move forward in addressing many of the

issues discussed in this report. Some of those steps can be taken by OGE alone, but most require

the participation of, or actions by, others. To summarize, OGE will --

--draft language that would amend the Ethics in Government Act to streamline the

reporting requirements for the executive branch in the manner described by Part I of

this report; 

--continue to serve as a resource to the White House in its review of the PDS; 

--work with OPM on its review of the SF 86; 

--continue to work with the Department of Justice regarding the issue of the assets

a legal trustee must report on a financial disclosure form;

--work with the Department of Justice in any review of criminal conflict statutes; and

--continue working with the Department of Treasury on expanding legislatively

OGE’s Certificate of Divestiture authority.

In reaching out to Senate confirming committees, OGE will --

--approach each confirming committee with the comparison charts that we have

created and offer to serve as a resource to the committee in its review of its

questionnaire; and

--approach each Senate committee which, as a practice, requires nominees to part

time boards, commissions and committees to complete an SF 278 to seek their

acceptance of an OGE Form 450. 

OGE is optimistic that through these collective efforts, improvements can be made to the

nomination and confirmation process that will reduce burdens to public service without lessening

the public trust goals that were the original purpose behind the Ethics in Government Act.
24

Appendix A

Outreach

OGE’s goal was to ensure that a broad range of views were heard and significant input

received regarding the issues in this report. In preparing this report, OGE conducted:

Outreach to the following organizations:

American Enterprise Institute

American Society for Public Administration

The Brookings Institution

The Center for the Study of the Presidency

The Council for Excellence in Government

The Heritage Foundation

National Academy of Public Administration

White House 2001 Project

Meetings with:

Department of the Treasury

Federal Bureau of Investigation

National Academy of Sciences

Office of the Presidential Transition, 2001

Representatives of the Executive Branch Departments and major agencies

Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Majority and Minority Staff

White House Staff, Bush Administration

White House Staff, Clinton Administration

Additional Outreach:

Federal Register, Volume 65, Number 251, Friday, December 29, 2000 - Asking for comments

on study.

January 4, 2001 letter to all executive branch ethics officials seeking input and recommendations

for the Presidential Transition Act report.
25

Appendix B

Non-Governmental Organizations Studies Reviewed

American Bar Association Committee on Governmental Standards. “Keeping Faith: Government

Ethics & Government Ethics Regulations.” Administrative Law Review, Volume 45, No. 3,

Summer 1993.

Council for Excellence in Government and The Presidential Appointee Initiative. A Survivor’s

Guide for Presidential Nominees. The Presidential Appointee Initiative, a Project of the

Brookings Institution funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Washington, DC:

November 2000.

Donilon, Thomas and Norman Ornstein. “The Confirmation Clog.” Foreign Affairs,

November/December 2000.

Hess, Stephen. First Impressions: Presidents, Appointments, and the Transition. The Presidential

Appointee Initiative, a Project of the Brookings Institution funded by The Pew Charitable

Trusts. Washington, DC: September 2000.

.Light, Paul C. and Virginia L. Thomas. The Merit and Reputation of an Administration: Presidential

Appointees on the Appointments Process. The Brookings Institution and The Heritage

Foundation funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Washington, DC: April 2000.

Light, Paul C. and Virginia L. Thomas. Posts of Honor: How America’s Corporate and Civic

Leaders View Presidential Appointments. The Presidential Appointee Initiative, a Project

of The Brookings Institution funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts. Washington, DC:

January 2001.

National Academy of Public Administration. The Presidential Appointee’s Handbook. Second

Edition. National Academy of Public Administration. Washington, DC: 1988.

National Academy of Science, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine.

Science and Technology in the National Interest: The Presidential Appointment Process.

Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.

The Presidential Appointee Initiative. Staffing a New Administration: A Guide to Personnel

Appointments in a Presidential Transition. The nonpartisan Presidential Appointee Initiative,

a Project of the Brookings Institution funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts. Washington,

DC: November 2000.

President’s Commission on the Federal Appointment Process. The Report of the President’s

Commission on the Federal Appointment Process. Washington, DC: December 1990.
26

Transition to Governing Project. The Lengthening Appointment Process and Proposals for Reform.

American Enterprise Institute in conjunction with the Brookings Institution and the Hoover

Institution, funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Transition to Governing Project. “Presidential Transitions: ‘What We Did’ The 1980 and 1988

Transitions, Panel 1.” American Enterprise Institute in conjunction with Brookings

Institution and the Hoover Institution, funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. October 30,

2000.

Trattner, John H. “Presidential Appointments.” The 1997 Prune Book: Making the Right

Appointments to Manage Washington's Toughest Jobs. Council for Excellence in

Government. Washington, DC: 1997.

Trattner, John H. The 2000 Prune Book: How to Succeed in Washington’s Top Jobs. Council for

Excellence in Government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2000.
27

Appendix C

Current SF 278 and “Revised Model”

The current SF 278 and the “revised model.”
SF 278 (Rev. 03/2000)

5 C.F.R. Part 2634

U.S. Office of Government Ethics

Page Number

SCHEDULE A

BLOCK A

Valuation o f Assets

at close of reporting period

BLOCK C

1

2

3

4

IRA: Heartland 500 Index Fund

Doe Jones & Smith, Hometown, State

Central Airlines Common

Kempstone Equity Fund

 None

Income: Income: type and amount. If “None (or less than $201)” is

checked, no other entry is needed in Block C for that item.

Assets and Income

Date

(Mo., Day,

Yr.)

Only if

Honoraria

Other

Income

(Specify

Type &

Actual

Amount)

Law Partnership

Income $130,000

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

BLOCK B

Type Amount

$500,001 - $1,000,000

Over $1,000,000

$1,000,001 - $5,000,000

Excepted Investment Fund

Dividends

Rent and Royalties

Interest

Capital Gains

*

$1,001 - $15,000

$15,001 - $50,000

$50,001 - $100,000

Excepted Trust

Qualified Trust

$201 - $1,000

$2,501 - $5,000

$5,001 - $15,000

$15,001 - $50,000

$50,001 - $100,000

$100,001 - $1,000,000

Over $1,000,000*

$1,000,001 - $5,000,000

x

 x

Examples

None (or less than $1,001)

$100,001 - $250,000

$250,001 - $500,000

$5,000,001 - $25,000,000$25,000,001 - $50,000,000

Over $50,000,000

None (or less than $201)

$1,001 - $2,500

Over $5,000,000

5

6

 * This category applies only if the asset/income is solely that of the filer's spouse or dependent children. If the asset/inco * me is either that of the filer or jointly held

 by the filer with the spouse or dependent children, mark the other higher categories of value, as appropriate.

Prior Editions Cannot Be Used.

Reporting Individual's Name

x

For you, your spouse, and dependent children,

report each asset held for investment or the

production of income which had a fair market

value exceeding $1,000 at the close of the reporting period, or which generated more than $200

in income during the reporting period, together

with such income.

For yourself, also report the source and actual

amount of earned income exceeding $200 (other

than from the U.S. Government). For your spouse,

report the source but not the amount of earned

income of more than $1,000 (except report the

actual amount of any honoraria over $200 of

your spouse).
SF 278 (Rev. 03/2000)

5 C.F.R. Part 2634

U.S. Office of Government Ethics

Page Number

Identification of Assets

Reporting Individual's Name

Report any purchase, sale, or exchange

by you, your spouse, or dependent

children during the reporting period of any

real property, stocks, bonds, commodity

futures, and other securities when the

amount of the transaction exceeded $1,000.

Include transactions that resulted in a loss.

5

3

Transaction Amount of Transaction (x) Type (x)

Date

(Mo.,

Day, Yr.)

2/1/99

4

$500 Examples

Source (Name and Address) Value

$300

x

1

1

3

5

2

Part I: Transactions

Sale

$1,001 -$15,000

$15,001 -$50,000

$50,001 -$100,000

Over$1,000,000*

Purchase

Exchange

$250,001 -$500,000

$500,001 -$1,000,000

SCHEDULE B

Do not complete Schedule B if you are a new entrant, nominee, or Vice Presidential or Presidential Candidate

Certificate ofdivestiture

x

For you, your spouse and dependent children, report the source, a brief description, and the value of: (1) gifts (such as tangible items, transportation, lodging,

food, or entertainment) received from one source totaling more than $260, and

(2) travel-related cash reimbursements received from one source totaling more

than $260. For conflicts analysis, it is helpful to indicate a basis for receipt, such

as personal friend, agency approval under 5 U.S.C. § 4111 or other statutory

authority, etc. For travel-related gifts and reimbursements, include travel itinerary,

dates, and the nature of expenses provided. Exclude anything given to you by

Example Central Airlines Common

Airline ticket, hotel room & meals incident to national conference 6/15/99 (personal activity unrelated to duty)

Brief Description

Frank Jones, San Francisco, CA Leather briefcase (personal friend)

Part II: Gifts, Reimbursements, and Travel Expenses

Nat'l Assn. of Rock Collectors, NY, NY

$1,000,001 -$5,000,000

$5,000,001 -$25,000,000

$25,000,001 -$50,000,000

Over$50,000,000

 *This category applies only if the underlying asset is solely that of the filer's spouse or dependent children. If the underlyi * ng asset is either held

 by the filer or jointly held by the filer with the spouse or dependent children, use the other higher categories of value, as appropriate.

Prior Editions Cannot Be Used.

Do not report a transaction involving None

property used solely as your personal

residence, or a transaction solely between

you, your spouse, or dependent child.

Check the “Certificate of divestiture” block

to indicate sales made pursuant to a

certificate of divestiture from OGE.

None

the U.S. Government; given to your agency in connection with official travel;

received from relatives; received by your spouse or dependent child totally

independent of their relationship to you; or provided as personal hospitality at

the donor's residence. Also, for purposes of aggregating gifts to determine the

total value from one source, exclude items worth $104 or less. See instructions

for other exclusions.

2

4

$100,001 -$250,000
SF 278 (Rev. 03/2000)

5 C.F.R. Part 2634

U.S. Office of Government Ethics

Prior Editions Cannot Be Used.

Report liabilities over $10,000 owed

to any one creditor at any time

during the reporting period by you,

your spouse, or dependent children.

Check the highest amount owed

during the reporting period. Exclude

a mortgage on your personal residence

unless it is rented out; loans secured by

automobiles, household furniture

or appliances; and liabilities owed to

certain relatives listed in instructions.

See instructions for revolving charge

accounts.

 *This category applies only if the liability is solely that of the filer's spouse or dependent children. If the liability is th * at of the filer or a joint liability of the filer

 with the spouse or dependent children, mark the other higher categories, as appropriate.

of absence; and (4) future employment. See instructions regarding the reporting of negotiations for any of these arrangements or benefits.

6

Examples

Example

$5,000,001 -$25,000,000

SCHEDULE C

Creditors (Name and Address) Type of Liability

Promissory note

Page Number

Category of Amount or Value (x)

Reporting Individual's Name

Part I: Liabilities

First District Bank, Washington, DC

John Jones, 123 J St., Washington, DC

Part II: Agreements or Arrangements

None

x

x

Term if

applicable

on demand

 8%

 10%

 1991

 1999

Interest

Rate

Date

Incurred

Mortgage on rental property, Delaware

1

2

3

5

Doe Jones & Smith, Hometown, State 7/85

Status and Terms of any Agreement or Arrangement Parties Date

2

4

$10,001 -$15,000

$15,001 -$50,000

$50,001 -$100,000

$100,001-$250,000

$250,001 -$500,000

$500,001 -$1,000,000

Over$1,000,000*

None

Report your agreements or arrangements for: (1) continuing participation in an

employee benefit plan (e.g. pension, 401k, deferred compensation); (2) continuation of payment by a former employer (including severance payments); (3) leaves

Pursuant to partnership agreement, will receive lump sum payment of capital account & partnership share

calculated on service performed through 1/00.

4

3

1

 5

$1,000,001-$5,000,000$25,000,001 -$50,000,000

Over$50,000,000

25 yrs.
SF 278 (Rev. 03/2000)

5 C.F.R. Part 2634

U.S. Office of Government Ethics

SCHEDULE D

Nat'l Assn. of Rock Collectors, NY, NY Non-profit education

Law firm

Organization (Name and Address) Type of Organization

Reporting Individual's Name

Part I: Positions Held Outside U.S. Government Government

Report any positions held during the applicable reporting period, whether compensated or not. Positions include but are not limited to those of an officer, director,

trustee, general partner, proprietor, representative, employee, or consultant of

any corporation, firm, partnership, or other business enterprise or any non-profit

Examples

Doe Jones & Smith, Hometown, State Examples

Metro University (client of Doe Jones & Smith), Moneytown, State

1

2

3

4

5

Legal services

Legal services in connection with university construction

Prior Editions Cannot Be Used.

 6

organization or educational institution. Exclude positions with religious,

social, fraternal, or political entities and those solely of an honorary

nature.

6

non-profit organization when

you directly provided the

Do not complete this part if you are an

Incumbent, Termination Filer, or Vice

Presidential or Presidential Candidate.

services generating a fee or payment of more than $5,000. You

need not report the U.S. Government as a source.

Source (Name and Address) Brief Description of Duties

3

4

5

Part II: Compensation in Excess of $5,000 Paid by One Source

Report sources of more than $5,000 compensation received by you or your

business affiliation for services provided directly by you during any one year of

the reporting period. This includes the names of clients and customers of any

corporation, firm, partnership, or other business enterprise, or any other

None

1

 From (Mo., Yr.) To (Mo.,Yr.)

None

Doe Jones & Smith, Hometown, State

 2

Page Number

Position Held

President

Partner 1/00

Present

 7/85

6/92
32

“Revised Model” SF 278

Reporting Individual’s Name Schedule A 

Assets and Income Asset Value

at close of reporting period

Type Am

For you, your spouse, and dependent children, report each assetheld for investment or the production of income which had a fairmarket value exceeding $1,000 at the close of the reportingperiod, or which generated more than $500 in income during thereporting period.For yourself, and your spouse, also report the source of earnedincome exceeding $500 (other than from the U.S. Government).For honoraria earned prior to Government service report sourceas earned income -- do not report exact amount. For honorariaearned during Government service, report source, exact amount,and date. None

$1,001-$15,000

$15,001 - $100,000

over $100,000

Excepted Investment Fund

Excepted Trust

Qualified Trust

Investment Income

Earned Income

Honoraria

$501 - $20,000

12345
33

Reporting Individual’s Name Schedule B Part I: TransactionsReport any real property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures, or other securities not already listed on Schedule A, which were value

at over $1000 at any time during the reporting period but which you no longer hold.12345*

Part II: Gifts, Reimbursements, and Travel ExpensesFor you, and your spouse, and dependent children, report the source, a brief description, and the value of: (1) gifts (such and tangible itemsentertainment) received from one source totaling more than $260, and (2) travel-related cash reimbursements received from one source totaling morit is helpful to indicate a basis for receipt, such as a personal friend, agency approval under 5 U.S.C. § 4111 or other statutory authority, etc. Ex

U.S. Government; given to your agency in connection with official travel; received from relatives; received by your spouse or dependent child totalto you; or provided as personal hospitality at the donor’s residence. Also, for purposes of aggregating gifts to determine the total value from one or less. See instructions for other exclusions. 

Source (Name and Address) Brief Description 

12345
34

Reporting Individual’s Name Schedule C Part I: Liabilities

Report Liabilities over $20,000 owed to any one creditor at any time during the reporting period by you, your spouse, or dependent children. 

amount owed during the reporting period. Exclude a mortgage on your personal residence unless it is rented out; loans secured by automobiles, ho

or appliance; and liabilities owed to certain relatives listed in instructions. See instructions for revolving charge accounts.

Creditor’s Name Type of Liability Date Incurred Interest Rate $20,001 -

$100,000

12345

Part II: Agreements or ArrangementsReport your agreements or arrangements for (1) continuing participation in an employee benefit plan (e.g. pension, 401k, deferred compensationof payment by a former employer (including severance payments); (3) leaves of absence; and (4) future employment. See instructions regardinnegotiations for any of these arrangements or benefits. 

Status and Terms of any Agreement or Arrangement Par

123456
35

Reporting Individual’s Name Schedule D 

Part I: Positions Held Outside U.S. Government

Report any positions held during the applicable reporting period, whether compensated or not. Positions include but are not limited to those of an officer, directrepresentative, employee, or consultant of any corporation, firm, partnership, or other business enterprise or any non-profit organization of educational instituti

social, fraternal, or political entities and those solely of an honorary nature.

Organization (Name and Address) Type of Organization Position Held 

123456

Part II: Compensation in Excess of $25,000 Paid by one SourceReport sources of more than $25,000 compensation received by you or your business affiliation for services provided directly by youduring any one year of the reporting period. This includes the names of clients and customers of any corporation, firm, partnership,or other business enterprise, or any other non-profit organization when you directly provided the services generating a fee or paymentof more than $25,000. You need not report the U.S. Government as a source.

Do not complete thiTermination FilerPresidential Candid 

Source (Name and Address) Brief Description of Duties

123456
36

Appendix D

Comparison Charts

Samples of the comparison charts for the SF 278, the SF 86 with supplemental questions, and

the questionnaire for the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.
37

Assets Investment Income Earned Income Other 

Non-Investment Income

SF - 278

! Each asset held for

investment orproduction of income,currently valued>$1,000, for nominee,S, and DC, withdescription and categoryof value (10 valueranges for nominee, 7for S and DC)

! For current and

preceding CY, > $200,for nominee, S, and DC,with source, type, andamount (9 value rangesfor nominee, 8 for S andDC)

! For current and

preceding CY, > $200for nominee, withsource and actualamount; for S, >$1,000,with source only; forDC/D, nothing

! For current and

preceding CY, > $200for nominee, withsource and actualamount; for S, >$1,000,with source only; forDC/D, nothing

SF- 86

! Any foreign property or

financial interests, withdates, name of firm orgovernment, andexplanation

Notes: 1. All data is for filer (nominee) only, unless otherwise indicated.

2. S=spouse; DC=dependent children; D=dependents
38

 Page 2 Liabilities Agreements/

Arrangements with

Employers

Outside Positions

and Employment

 (excluding political)

Bankr

SF - 278

! Liabilities owed to

any one creditor if >$10,000 at any timeduring current orpreceding CY (forrevolving chargeaccounts, only ifcurrently > $10,000),for nominee, S andDC, with name andaddress of creditor,type of liability, dateincurred, interest rate,term, and category ofvalue (10 valueranges for nominee, 7for S and DC)

! For nominee,

continuingparticipation inemployee benefitplans, continuedpayments fromformer employer,leaves of absence,and futureemploymentagreements, withstatus, terms,parties, and date(current at thetime of filing)

! For nominee, any positions with outside entities

during current or preceding 2 CYs, with name,address, and description of organization, positionheld, and dates (includes officer, director, trustee,partner, proprietor, representative, employee,consultant)

SF- 86 

! Any debts delinquent

over 180 days in last7 years and any debtsdelinquent over 90days currently, withamount, type, nameand address ofcreditor, date incurredand satisfied

! All employment (including full and part time,

military, self, other paid work, and unemployment)for last 10 years (and all Federal civilian service atany time), with name and address of employer orverifying person and supervisor, dates, positionheld, type code (9 choices), and for military includeservice branch/duty stations

! Foreign employment or consultancy at any time,

with dates, name of firm or government, andexplanation

! Separately list all military or merchant marine

service, with branch code (7 choices) dates, servicenumber, officer or enlisted status, active status, stateif National Guard, country if not US, and date/typeof discharge if not honorable

! Indicate whether ever served as officer in an

organization dedicated to violent overthrow of US

! For las

petitioany chbankcode
39

Page 3 Net Worth Statement Tax Returns Trusts Gifts 

SF - 278

! Identify any “excepted”

trusts or “qualified”trusts with asset value>$1,000 or investmentincome >$200, fornominee, S, and DC

SF- 86
40

Page 4 Business

Relationships/Financial

Transactions

Clients Miscellaneous

SF - 278

! Names/addresses of

clients and customers,with description ofservices rendered, forcompensation >$5,000from any single sourceto nominee or businessaffiliate, for nominee’spersonal services duringcurrent CY or either of2 preceding CYs

SF- 86

! Any foreign business

connections, with dates,name of firm orgovernment, andexplanation
41

Assets Investment Income Earned Income Other Non-Investmen

Income

SF-86

Supplemental

Information*

! All interests in real

property (other thanpersonal residence),with nature ofinterest, type ofproperty, address

* See SF-86 summary for the required basic information on that form.
42

Page 2 Liabilities Agreements/Arrangements

with Employers

Outside Positions

and Employment

 (excluding political)

Bankruptcy 

SF-86

Supplemental

Information

! State whether college

financial aidobligations have beensatisfied

! Required SF-86

information ondelinquent debts mustcover past 15 years(but not before 18thbirthday)

! Required SF-86 information on

employment must cover past 15years (but not before 18thbirthday), and include completeaddresses. For Governmentand large employers, indicatedepartment, bureau, division,section. Include volunteerwork and internships. Providecomplete address and phonefor persons verifying self/unemployment.

! For military reserves and

national guard, listorganization, location, nameand phone for immediateofficer

! For any office ever held in an

organization that restrictsmembership (sex, race, color,religion, origin, age, handicap),provide name, address, anddates

! All corporations, firms,

partnerships, other businessenterprises, nonprofits, otherinstitutions where affiliated inpast 5 years as officer, owner,director, trustee, or partner; andorganizations with whichaffiliated prior to past 5 yearsthat might present potentialconflict or appearance thereof 

! Required SF-

bankruptcinformation mucover past 15 ye(but not before 1birthday)
43

Page 3 Net Worth Statement Tax Returns Trusts Gifts 

SF-86

Supplemental

Information
44

Page 4 Business

Relationships/Financial

Transactions

Clients Miscellaneous

SF-86

Supplemental

Information

! All corporations, firms,

partnerships, businessenterprises, nonprofits,other institutions whereaffiliated in past 5 yearsas advisor, attorney, orconsultant; andorganizations withwhich affiliated prior topast 5 years that mightpresent potentialconflict or appearancethereof (for anattorney’s clients, onlylist major clients andthose that might presentpotential conflict orappearance thereof)
45

Assets Investment Income Earned Income Other Non-Investment

Income

Questionnaire 

of Senate

Committee on

Governmental

Affairs

(106th Congress)

! Any investments which

could involve potentialconflicts of interest

! As current net worth,

identity and value ofall assets >$1,000, helddirectly or indirectlyby nominee, S, or D

! Identity and nature of

any interests in anoption, mineral lease,copyright, or patentheld directly orindirectly during past12 months by nominee,S, or D, with dates ofany divestment

! Sources, amounts, and

dates for anticipatedreceipts of futurebenefits (deferredincome, stock options,executory contracts, allothers) from current orprevious businessrelationships, fornominee, S, and D(including professionalservices, firmmemberships,employers, clients,customers)

! Sources and amounts

>$100 received bynominee, S, or D duringeach of last 3 years

! Sources and amounts

>$100 received bynominee, S, or D duringeach of last 3 years

! Sources and amoun

>$100 received bnominee, S, or during each of last years

Notes: 1. All data is for filer (nominee) only, unless otherwise indicated.

2. S=spouse; DC=dependent children; D=dependents
46

Page 2 Liabilities Agreements/Arrangements

with Employers

Outside Positions

and Employment

 (excluding political)

Bankruptcy 

Questionnaire 

of Senate

Committee on

Governmental

Affairs

(106th Congress)

! Any liabilities which

could involve potentialconflicts of interest

! As current net worth,

identity of eachliability owed (direct,indirect or byguarantee) >$1,000, bynominee, S, or D, withnature, amount,creditor, terms; and allother direct or indirectliabilities >$1,000owed during last 12months, for nominee,S, or D, with nature,amount, creditor,terms, collateral,current status

! Indicate whether will

sever all connectionswith present employers,business firms, businessassociations or businessorganizations

! Explain any plans,

commitments oragreements for outsideemployment (with orwithout compensation)during Governmentservice

! Indicate any plans,

commitments oragreements, afterGovernment service, toresume employment oraffiliation or practicewith previous employer,business firm,association ororganization

! Indicate any

commitment to nomineefor employment in anycapacity afterGovernment service

! Describe all financial

arrangements, deferredcompensationagreements, othercontinuing dealings withbusiness associates,clients, customers

! All jobs since college,

with title/job description,name of employer,location, and dates

! All part-time service or

positions with Government(Federal, state, or local),including advisory,consultative, honorary, orother

! All positions with business

enterprises, educational orother institutions (includesofficer, director, trustee,partner, proprietor, agent,representative, orconsultant)

! All offices held in

organizations(professional, business,fraternal, scholarly, civic,public, charitable, other)
47

Page 3 Net Worth Statement Tax Returns Trusts Gifts 

Questionnaire 

of Senate

Committee on

Governmental

Affairs

(106th Congress)

! See assets and

liabilities, above

! Copy of Federal income

tax returns for past 3years, for nominee, S,and D

! Indicate whether all

Federal income taxreturns have been filed,for past 10 years, fornominee, S, and D

! Indicate whether taxes

have always been paidon time, for nominee, S,and D

! Indicate whether

Federal, state, and localtaxes are current atnomination, fornominee, S, and D

! Terms of any beneficial

and blind trusts fornominee, S, or D asbeneficiary (with name oftrustee and copy ofagreement for blind trusts)

! Provide copy of any trust

agreements established toresolve potential conflictof interest

! Sources and amoun

>$100 received bnominee, S, or during each of last years
48

Page 4 Business

Relationships/Financial

Transactions

Clients Miscellaneous

Questionnaire 

of Senate

Committee on

Governmental

Affairs

(106th Congress)

! Describe any business

relationship, dealing orfinancial transactionduring last 10 years(for nominee, on behalfof a client, or acting asagent) that couldconstitute/result inpossible conflict ofinterest

! Identity, date, and

amount of all direct orindirect investmenttransactions during last12 months fornominee, S, and D

! Any relationships or

obligations (other thanliabilities and investments)which could involvepotential conflicts ofinterest