Skip to main content

Wir­e­card chief Markus Braun is ready to take the stand.

 ‘Braun is as cred­ible as Baron Münch­hausen,’ says a Ger­man law­maker, refer­ring to the 18th-cen­tury

Wirecard building

noble­man fam­ous for out­land­ish tales. Wir­e­card chief exec­ut­ive Markus Braun had barely man­aged to reas­sure share­hold­ers rattled by news of an internal fraud probe in 2019 when the law­yers lead­ing it all but called him a liar. The let­ter is one of the sev­eral examples of Braun being accused of mak­ing incor­rect, and mis­lead­ing state­ments to investors, an FT ana­lysis of Wir­e­card emails and other doc­u­ments reveals. The incid­ents raise fur­ther ques­tions about Braun’s cred­ib­il­ity, just as he is due to take the stand at the Munich trial examin­ing the com­pany’s fail­ure.

«A CEO who does not notice that his most import­ant cli­ents are not real may exist in fic­tion, but I am cer­tain that Braun was very aware of his com­pany’s situ­ation». So far, Braun has not made a state­ment in court. Instead, Braun has been implic­ated heav­ily by one of his co-defend­ants, the former Dubai-based exec­ut­ive Oliver Bel­len­haus.

With a lack of con­clus­ive evid­ence that Braun knew about or was dir­ectly involved in the alleged fraud, the trial, to an extent, hinges on which man the panel of five judges believes. Internal emails and other doc­u­ments reviewed by the FT sug­gest that fac­tual state­ments by Braun were not always truth­ful and were some­times chal­lenged by law­yers hired by the group and by its aud­it­ors and super­vis­ory board. After an FT story in Janu­ary 2019 repor­ted that a com­pli­ance probe by Rajah & Tann had found evid­ence indic­at­ing «ser­i­ous offences of for­gery and/ or of falsi­fic­a­tion of accounts», Braun told ana­lysts that the investigation had not found «any proof, or con­clus­ive find­ings, that any of these alleg­a­tions are true» and was not expec­ted to do so. The firm said it dis­agreed with Wir­e­card and Braun’s view that it «has not made, and is not expec­ted to make, any find­ings of mater­ial non-com­pli­ance as to the gov­ernance and account­ing prac­tices of any Wir­e­card sub­si­di­ary or employee».

Rajah & Tann said Braun and Wir­e­card’s pub­lic pos­i­tion «causes us con­cern» and urged the com­pany to stop mak­ing pub­lic state­ments about the invest­ig­a­tion «until after our final report has been issued». One year on, it was KPMG’s turn to tell Braun that his depic­tion of facts was not in line with real­ity.

www.sba.tax

Comments

  1. The comparison with Baron Münchhausen si quite accurate I think. This man can't be trusted because it's in his interest to lie and spin the facts. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They won't get any good information out of him, that's for sure. But maybe he will make a mistake, who knows?

      Delete

Post a Comment

Cloud Bookkeeping

HS2 cost cuts new routes and add delays.

 Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have begun work on «Project Sil­ver­light» sug­gest­ing the high­speed rail scheme might face four addi­tional years of delay. The planned High Speed 2 rail line faces fur­ther delays of up to four years and more cuts to the project under plans being drawn up by min­is­ters to rein in its bal­loon­ing costs. The extra delays to the coun­try’s biggest infra­struc­ture project would mean that it would not be com­pleted until as late as 2045 — 12 years after ori­gin­ally planned. «This is a func­tion of infla­tion; we are hav­ing to find huge sav­ings because the cost of everything the depart­ment is already doing will have become so much more expens­ive by then,» said one gov­ern­ment offi­cial. In Octo­ber, the FT repor­ted that the Treas­ury had asked HS2’s man­age­ment team to identify poten­tial cuts or «scope reduc­tions» to the high-speed line. Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have sub­sequently begun work on Project Sil­ver­light aimed at fi...

Small business will be excluded from fraud law.

  Min­is­ters are plan­ning to exclude small busi­nesses from anti-fraud legis­la­tion by nar­row­ing the scope of a crim­inal offence tar­get­ing com­pan­ies that fail to pre­vent eco­nomic crimes. MPs and anti-cor­rup­tion cam­paign­ers had hoped the gov­ern­ment would seek to amend the eco­nomic crime and cor­por­ate trans­par­ency bill to ensure the new offence covered all com­pan­ies. The plans to limit the scope of the amend­ments will also dis­ap­point those who had hoped the legis­la­tion would remove key hurdles to the pro­sec­u­tion of white-col­lar crime. A new «fail­ure to pre­vent» offence for fraud would bring it in line with exist­ing sim­ilar cor­por­ate offences for bribery and tax eva­sion. At present, pro­sec­utors need only prove that organ­isa­tions lacked «reas­on­able» or «adequate» con­trols to pur­sue the offence in bribery and tax eva­sion cases. «It would be much more sens­ible for the gov­ern­ment to provide strong guid­ance for SMEs on what these pro­ce...

Doubt on CS's collateral.

  Credit Suisse provided an emergency $140mn loan to Greensill Capital based partly on invoices to companies that deny ever doing the business stated on the documents. The Swiss bank provided the loan in October 2020, less than five months before the collapse of Greensill, a supply chain finance firm that counted former British prime minister David Cameron as a senior adviser. Invoices issued by metals magnate Sanjeev Gupta’s Liberty Commodities and sold to Greensill formed part of the collateral for the loan, according to documents seen by the Financial Times and people familiar with the transaction. Yet several of the parties named on the invoices have told the FT they did no business with Liberty. GFG has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Credit Suisse’s loan had a clause dictating that the collateral value had to be equal to or greater than the $140mn borrowed. The terms of the debt agreement only allowed invoices on Green-sill’s balance sheet to count towards this tally if t...