asset protection course
Asset Protection Tax Evader
Take the Free Quiz
Change the Font-Size on this pageLargest Article Text SizeLarger Article Text SizeNormal Article Text Size

Anderson denied bond

Telecommunications tycoon Walter Anderson, a man accused of being the biggest tax cheat in U.S. history, will remain in jail until his trial, which will commence in either in late spring or early summer.

Anderson, 51, has been in federal custody since he was arrested last month at Dulles International Airport. He will be facing charges of concealing nearly $450 million of his personal income in offshore shell corporations and for failure to pay over $200 million he owed in federal and District of Columbia taxes for over two decades.

In bond hearing last week both Anderson, who was attempting to negotiate his release on bond, and his attorney argued that he had been a lifelong resident of the Washington D.C. area and that he intended to defend himself against government accusations. In an interview with the Washington Post, Mr. Anderson stated the government's charges were inaccurate and that not all of his income was for his personal use, but also for the benefit of a charitable foundation that he managed.

Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled that there was "ample reason to doubt that Mr. Anderson would appear for trial if released." He further added that the grand jury indictment portrayed Anderson as a man who moved hundreds of millions of dollars out of the United States through a web of corporations located in Panama, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the British Virgin Islands and also kept this hidden for more than a decade.

Judge Friedman also noted that Anderson had concealed his identity by using aliases and had many properties and connections in other countries, thereby making it easy for him to hide from U.S. law enforcement.

"The nature and the circumstances of the offense with which Mr. Anderson is charged demonstrate not only his considerable incentive to flee and evade prosecution, but also his considerable experience in conducting business abroad and moving money and assets across borders without detection," the judge wrote.

The judges decision means