A US company is restructuring for nearly a decade 3275
The US company then declares chapter 11 in january of 2011. This US company in 2007 signed a guarantor agreement with its UK pension plan guaranteeing a rate of 8.75% yearly on its plan. The UK trustee board becomes fully dominated by executives of the parent company in 2009.%0ALosses are mounting year to year but never reported fully on the full balance sheet of the parent company. They are mentioned in notes about their deficiency only on the last annual report. The company locks into a contractual agreement to fund the pension till 2022 and agrees on the 8.75 % rate objective to hit their fully funded objective. in 2007 the pension plan has a 300 million pound deficit and by 2010 its already 500 million pounds. The company this year comes out and says in march the GAAP loss is now 1.4 billion US dollars. in 3 years without reporting anything to us in bankruptcy the losses have double up again in 3 years ON GAAp rules. The company in question is KODAK. Us shareholders have a long road. I need advice and help to prove their wrongdoings. This will be the most crooked balance sheet i have ever seen in my life. Something has gone amuck. i would like others to look at this and make this a testament of Sarbanes OXLY. The pension plan being controlled by kodak executives is conflicting with the parent company in transactions that are a conflict of interest. Thank you to anyone who is listening. this is an exercise in your knowledge of the Act. I am not sure if the same auditors have been used in both jurisdictions by both controlled entities. How do we get a forensic audit and how do we show any misappropriation of funds by the pension fund into other entities. i am not an expert on sarbanes but this definitely will be a good case study to examine their misdoings.
This post is deleted!
The claim from the KPP was 2.8 billion dollars against the Kodak Estate and lets not forget the whole Trustee Board is dominated with Kodak Representatives. I know there is auditor Sarbanes Oxly regulations. I wonder if this conflict of interest between Kodak Pension Plan dominated by Kodak Representatives in the Board of Trustees has been doing something more sinister. I see a claim of 2.8 billion dollars and Kodak Company has not admitted more in losses against those claim differences… It boggles the mind how one pension plan in the UK with a trumped board and untransparent balance sheet holds Kodak Company hostage. The limited liability gives Kodak protection till 2022. I just do not understand why Sarbanes Oxly regulations do not uncover these differences between Kodak Company reporting this matter on the balance sheets each year properly. They are guarantors to the UK KPP- Kodak Pension Plan. Anyone can take a stab at this case example. Dont be shy. Its a topic of conversation i will love to talk about currently. I need to find offshore regulations in the Act that show how this offshore franchise( the pension plan- trustee board of kodak representatives) has faulted the parent company in their reporting to investors. This is a community forum so all expert opinions are welcome today. This will be an exercise of your wits. Thank you.
kymike last edited by
Was the Kodak Pension Plan in the UK a benefit plan of the Kodak company? If so, then there does not appear to be a conflict of interest under US rules.
I know that in the UK there is a board of trustees that manages each pension plan, but I am not familiar with the rules as to relationships between the plan board and the related company whose employees receive benefits under the plan. However, that would not be subject to SOX rules and would be a UK matter.
Am I missing anything?
with Kodak representatives. The Conflicts of interest have grown larger over the last 5 years. Misappropriation of funds and larger losses have mounted. I figure a Kodak pension plan in the UK should be administered by an elected board of trustees. It is not. Its dominated by Kodak Representatives now. 7 Kodak Representatives against 4 elected board of trustees. The losses from the pension plan mounted greately when the restrictions of limited liability dropped. After the BOD elected to miss their last payment in the summer of 2012. The BOD elected the full 2.8 claim liability came into effect by KPP. Why did they allow this between the two same associated parties. This is a conflict of interest.
The persistent losses between Kodak Pension Plan and Kodak Company are persistant and growing larger for the last 5 years. They should have reported the full GAAP losses on the balance sheets from the KPP in each of the years of 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. SHAREHOLDERS would have never bought the common stock if the GAAP losses were reported properly during those stated years. The full liability of the KPP losses each year were never shown in full detail either. Kodak Company are the full Guarantor for KPP. Kodak Company should have reported these differences earlier. The Act has been broken.
In October 2010 Kodak Company agreed to fund KPP till 2022 with fixed liability payments. Total limited liability of 750 million dollars till 2024 would fullfil the deficiency of 500 million pounds in 2009. The agreement stood till 2022 that would have returned the fund back to full status.
This year in March, Kodak surprise reported that the KPP GAAP losses was officially at 1.4 billion US dollars now. They never reported full GAAP losses any other year till now.
Kodak in chapter 11 bankruptcy have brought out the worst in chartered accounting. A Kodak trustee sponsored KPP reported a full 2.8 US billion dollar claim against the Kodak estate last year. Whos right?
Why such a difference now between the 2.8 billion claim loss reported by KPP and the 1.4 billion GAAP loss by Kodak Company. Kodak then says if they don’t sell two company divisions to KPP-Kodak Pension Plan the loss will mount to 2.8 billion dollars thereafter.
I am at a complete loss for words. No chartered accountant I have talked to can find what is going on between the KPP ( Kodak Pension Plan )
and Kodak Company. We keep looking at the balance sheet and also look at docket 3808 by Alix Partners. Its a document worth noting. Its way offshore accounting even two sets of chartered accountants looking at this cannot understand. The debtors are digging themselves more in the muck.
There is no transparency. This will be fully reported to the Justice Department and the SEC. There must be a high degree of transparency for shareholders and stakeholders to be able to decipher the balance sheet properly. Currently there is not enough information to make a proper look at the balance sheet safely. We need a complete Regulator to review the balance sheets over at the KPP and Kodaks offshore facilities.
What is going on? Misappropriation of Pension Fund Assets? The way we are looking at it currently is that assets have continued to fall while losses continue to mount year on year. This is after Kodak Company continued to guarantee their yearly limited liability contract. 2.8 billion dollar claims sounds so high by KPP that the the UK regulator could be at risk of imploding if the Kodak Pension Plan lost heavily on their investments. I just am not sure at the current time. A rush to sell two primary divisions that are massive cash flow generators for Kodak Company to KPP sounds even more corrupt.
Why would Kodak have to sell two divisions that earn Kodak 155 million US dollars a year with sales of 1.4 billion dollars. Kodak Company wants to sell these two divisions to eliminate a 1.4 billion dollar US GAAP loss or rid of the 2.8 billion dollar claim. A difference of 1.4 more billion dollars is way to large for any chartered accountant to grasp.
We have a limited liability with the KPP. I just cannot understand how the situation got so bad but I have reiterated stick the KPP with the bill and the UK regulator to clean up their own mess for not regulating the pension plan properly. Kodak Company should halt all payments to the UK. Any other takers out there. Its a serious mess and the objections are mounting at the courthouse. No doubt this is the beginning.
I know more than a few regulations have been broken. It has to do with offshore reporting rules. All of Kodaks Pension should have been fully reported GAAP losses since 2007 from the KPP. Being a full gurantor should have declared this loss each year. No recovery allowed.
They just reported this first GAAP loss this march 31st 2013 when every other year they did not.
This is just like ENRON now. This is a serious case of deceit going on over at Kodak Company. Why did they not report these GAAP losses by KPP? Thank you all. More digging everyone. Other monies missing will be posted by other members here.
The chartered accountants better be very careful. The SEC regulators are watching now.
I just a matter of accounting. Why did Kodak wait 5 years to report GAAP losses from KPP-Kodak Pension Plan this year? Every other year they never reported full GAAP losses of the KPP pension plan. The guarantor rule should have been clearly addressed to shareholders all the way back to 2007 and it was not. Shareholders need transparency. At the current time KPP and Kodak Company did sign an actuarial agreement back in October of 2010. It brought a new limited liability contract till 2022. I just do not how Kodak Company and Judge Gropper approved of missing a payment to the KPPlan. A pension subsidiary of Kodak Company should have been fully been reported as an offshore transacation. It was not properly addressed. The limited liability contract I believe could be inforced next Thursday by Judge Gropper. Gropper could find a clause or two to stop this sale from occurring. Lets hope for it. There is no transparency from Kodak Company on many issues. KPP a Kodak represented trustee division has no clarity. I investigated this and other chartered accountants believe the rules of Sarbanes Oxly were broken.
Denis last edited by
Not exactly sure that I follow what you are alleging.
Kodak has been in financial difficulty for a while, principally stemming from it’s failure to deal with the challenges arising from imaging becoming mostly digital over the last few years.
Kodak failed to fund it’s contractual liability to the UK pension - KPP - and ended up with a USD2.8 bn liability, that it appears to have recently settled.
Are you alleging that the UK pension liability was somehow inflated? That executives have chosen to inflate the UK liabilty for some unseen ulterior motive?
The UK pensioners (the plan has 15,000 members and nearly 9,000 current pensioners) have certainly not benefitted from this as the settlement will mean that the benefits of the scheme will be significantly reduced.