UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
-v.-
GIAN GISLER,
Defendant.
-x
il
\COUNT ONE
(Conspiracy)
The Grand Jury charges:
INDICTMENT
11 Cr.
The Defendant and Associated Entities
1. At all times relevant to this Indictment, GIAN
GISLER, the defendant, was a citizen and resident of
Switzerland.
2. At all times relevant to this Indictment, UBS AG
("UBS") was a bank organized under the laws of Switzerland and
was Switzerland's largest bank.
3. At all times relevant to this Indictment, two
Swiss asset management firms ("Swiss Asset Manager No.1" and
"Swiss Asset Manager No. 2") provided wealth management and tax
advice to individuals around the world, including to U.S.
taxpayers. Swiss Asset Manager No. 1 and Swiss Asset Manager
No. 2 were not depository institutions. As a result, other
financial institutions maintained custody of the accounts of the
clients of Swiss Asset Manager No. 1 and Swiss Asset Manager No.
2. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ both Swiss Asset
Manager No. 1 and Swiss Asset Manager No. 2 did not maintain an
office in the united States.
4. From in or about the mid-1990's until in or about
late 2008/ GIAN GISLER, the defendant, was a client advisorat
UBS AG ("UBS"). From in or about early 2009 until in or about
mid to late 2009, GISLER was a client advisor at Swiss Asset
\
Manager No.1. From in or about mid to late 2009 until at least
in or about 2010, GISLER was a client advisor at Swiss Asset
Manager No.2.
Overview of the Conspiracy
5. From at least in or about the mid-1990's through
at least in or about 2010, GIAN GISLER, the defendant, conspired
with various u.S. taxpayers and others to ensure that his u.S.
taxpayer clients could hide the U.S. taxpayers' Swiss bank
accounts, and the income generated in them, from the taxation
!authority of the United States, the Internal Revenue Service
(the "IRS"), via false and fraudulent federal income tax
returns.
6. In or about 2001, UBS,/ one of the Swiss banks at
which GIAN GISLER/ the defendant, helped his u.S. taxpayer
clients hide accounts, voluntarily agreed with the I;RS to
/
undertake new obligations with respect to, among other things,
2
,i J

obtaining concerning the beneficial owners of accounts
at those banks. In furtherance of the' conspiracy, GISLER,
together with his U.S. taxpayer clients and others, used,sham
erttities created under the laws of countries other than the
United States to hide the Swiss bank accounts, and the income
generated in them, from the IRS and to circumvent the
commitments that UBS and, later, other Swiss banks to which
GISLER had transferred his clients' assets, had made to the IRS.
7. And in or about 2008, it became publicly known
that UBS was being investigated by law enforcement in the United
States and UBS began to exit the business of assisting U. SI.
taxpayers in maintaining undeclared accounts at UBS in
Switzerland. At or around this time, it became, as a practical
matter, impossible for GIAN GISLER, the defendant, to conduct
his usual business of assisting U.S. taxpayers in maintaining
undeclared accounts at UBS. As a result, GISLER left the
employment of UBS in or about late 2008.
8. Starting in or about early 2009, GISLER became
employed by Swiss Asset Manager No.1. In connection with
GISLER's leaving UBS for the employment of Swiss Asset Manager
No.1, GISLER undertook to transfer the accounts of his U.S.
taxpayer clients from UBS to other Swiss banks, which held the
assets that he managed through his work at Swiss Asset Manager
No.1.
3
\
9. Starting in or about mid-2009, Swiss Asset
Manager No.1 itself began to e:x;it the business of assisting
u.S. taxpayers in maintaining undeclared accounts in
Switzerland, which again made. .'t, as a practical
impossible for GISLER to conduct his usual business of assisti'ng
u.S. taxpayers in maintaining undeclared accounts while he was
employed at Swiss Asset Manager No. 1. As a result, in or about
mid to late 2009, GISLER left the employment of Swiss Asset
Manager No. 1 and, thereafter, became employed by Swiss Asset
Manager No.2. In connection with leaving Swiss Asset Manager
No. 1 for the employment of Swiss Ass.et Manager No.2, GISLER
undertook to transfer the management of his u.S. taxpayer
clients from Swiss Asset Manager No. 1 t,o Swiss Asset Manager
.
2 so as to continue tb manage his u.S. taxpayer clients'
undeclared accounts.
10. The collective maximum value of the assets in
undeclared accounts beneficially owned by u.S. taxpayer clients
of GIANGISLER; the defendant, and that were either opened with
GISLER's assistance or were managed by GISLER, was more than
approximately $215.3 million, as set forth, more fully below.
.\
'4
Background
Obligations of United States Taxpayers
with Respect to Foreign Financial Accounts
11. Citizens and residents of the United States who
have income in anyone calendar year in excess of a threshold
amount ("U.S. taxpayers") are obligated to file a U.S.
Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 ("Form 1040"), for that
calendar year with the IRS. On Form (1040, U. S.' taxpayers are
obligated to report their income from any source, regardless of
whether the source of their income is inside or outside the
united States. In addition, on Schedule B of Form 1040, the
filer must indicate whether "at any time during [the relevant
calendar year]" the filer had "an interest in or a signature or
other authority over ~ financial account in a foreign country,
such as a,bank account, securities account, or other 'financial
account." If the U.S. taxpayer answers that question in the
affirmative, then the u.S. taxpayer must l.ndicate the name of
the particular country in which the account is located.
12. Separate and apart from the obligation to file
Forms 1040 that include all income, U.s. taxpayers who have a
financial interest in, or signature authority over, a financial
account in a foreign country with an a g g r e g a t ~ value of more
than $10,000 at any time during a particular calendar year fare
required to file with the IRS a Report of Foreign Bank and
5
Financial Accounts, Form TD F 90-22.1 ("FBAR"). The FBAR for
any calendar year is required to be filed on or before June 30
of the following calendar year. In general, the FBAR requires
that the u.s. taxpayer filing the form identify the financial
institution with which the financial account is held,the type
of 'account (bank, securities, or other), the account number, and
the maximum value of the account during the calendar year for
which the FBAR is being filed.
Swiss Banks at Which GISLER's
U.S. Taxpayer Clients Held Accounts
13. While GIAN GISLER, the defendant, was employed by
UBS from in or about the mid-1990's until at least in/or about
late 2008, GISLER was typically assigned to serve as a client
advisor to U.S. taxpayers, who had, through other client
advisors at UBS, already opened undeclared accounts at UBS.
Thereafter, as set forth above, GISLER was employed by Swiss
Asset Manager No.1 and, later, Swiss Asset Manager No.2.
14. Among the various bankscat which GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, managed accounts and/or arranged for undeclared
accounts to be opened and held (collectively, the "Gisler
Banks") were:
a. UBS: At all times relevant to this
Indictment, UBS was a bank organized under the laws of
Switzerland and was Switzerland's largest bank. UBS owned and
6
operated banking, investment banking, and stock brokerage
businesses around the world, including in the Southern District
of New York and elsewhere in the United States.
b. Swiss Bank No.1: At all times relevant to
this Indictment, Swiss Bank No. 1 was a bank organized under the
laws of Switzerland. At all times relevant to this Indictment,
Swiss Bank No. 1 did not maintain an office in the United
States ..
c. Swiss Cantonal Bank No.1: At all times
relevant to this Indictment, Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 was a
bank organized under the laws of Switzerland. At all times
relevant to this Indictment, Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 did not
maintain an office in the United States. Swiss Cantonal Bank
No. 1 is one of approximately 24 banks that are either entirely
or majority owned by one of the cantons (member states) of
Switzerland.
d. Swiss Bank No.2: At all times relevant to
this Indictment, Swiss Bank No. 2 was a bank organized under the
laws of Switzerland. Until in or about 2005 or 2006, Swiss Bank
No. 2 maintained an office in the Southern District of New York.
e. Swiss Bank No.3: At all times relevant to
this Indictment, Swiss Bank No. 3 was a bank organized under the
laws of Switzerland. At all times relevant to this Indictment,
7
Swiss Bank No. 3 did not maintain an office in the United
States.
f. Swiss Bank No. 4: At all times relevant to
this Indictment/ Swiss Bank No. 4 was a bank organized under the
laws of Switzerland. At all times relevant to this Indictment/
Swiss Bank No. 4 did not maintain an office in the United
States.
15. Among other services/ the Gisler Banks provided
private banking services -- that is/ banking/ investment/ wealth
management/ and other financial services typically involving
sizable assets and as contrasted with mass-market retail banking
-- to U.S. taxpayers.
The IRS' Qualified Intermediary Program
16. In or about 2000/ the IRS launched a new
initiative called the Qualified Intermediary ("QIII) Program.
The program took effect starting in or about January 2001. The
QI Program was intended/ among other things/ to encourage
foreign financial institutions to report "U.S. source income
ll
to
the IRS and to withhold taxes on that income as required by O.S.
tax law so that U.S. taxpayers were properly paying U.S. tax.
"U.S. source income
ll
. includes dividends paid on U.S. stock and
capital gains paid on sales of U.S. stock/ regardless of whether
such dividends and capital gains are paid to a U.S. taxpayer.
8
17. The QI Program'was also designed to help ensure
that non-U.S. persons are subject to the proper U.S. withholding
tax rates, including at reduced tax rates under applicable tax
treaties, with respect to U.S. source income generated in an
account overseas.
18. In or about 2001, each of the Gisler Banks
separately entered into a Qualified Intermediary Agreement ("QI
Agreement") with the IRS. The QI Agreements with the Gtsler
Banks were later renewed and were in effect throughout 2010.
19. Among other things, the QI Agreements that the
\
Gisler Banks each separately executed required them, in general,
to verify the identity and citizenship/domicile of certain of
their clients through the execution of various forms. The QI
Agreements also required the Gisler Banks, in general, to
. withhold and pay over, to the IRS, taxes on certain transactions
in accounts that were beneficially owned by U.S. taxpayers.
20. In order to verify the identity and
citizenship/domicile of certain of its clients, the QI
Agreements generally required the Gisler Banks to obtain and
maintain one of two forms:
\.
a. The first form, Request for Taxpayer
Identification Number and Certification (IRS Form W- 9) (\\W- 9") ,
generally applied to bank clients who were U.S. persons. For
such persons, the Gisler Banks were required generally to file
9
)
..
annually with the IRS a FOrm}099 reporting the bank client's
name, taxpayer identification number, and all reportable
payments made to /the bank client' saccounts, stich as dividends
paid on U.S. securities.
b. In contrast, the second form, Certificate of
Foreign Status of Beneficial Owner for United States Tax
Withholding (IRS Form W":'SBEN) ("W-SBEN"), generally applied to
bank 'clients who n.on-U.S. persons. On the Form W-SBEN, the
,
(
bank client was required to provide various identifying
information and to complete applicable certifications under
penalties of perjury. One of the certifications under penalties
of perjury on the Form W-SBEN was that the beneficial owner was
not a U.S. person. Under'the QI Agreements, the Gisler Banks
were required to accept the Form W-SBEN, or a
similar substitute, and verify the information on it. using other
. ., ,
documents accepted as part of their account-openJ.ng procedures,
such as articles of incorporation of the e:ntities identified in
the Form W-SBEN, in accordance with the rules already
established by the jurisdiction in which QI participants were.
located. As exemplified more fully below, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant 7 accepted and caused others to accept, as part of the
records of UBS and other Gisler Banks, Form W-SBENs, or the
substitute forms utilized by UBS and other Gisler Banks, that
falsely and fraudulently stated under penalties of perjury that,
10
among other things, the beneficial owner of accounts maintained
at UBS was'''not a u.s. person." In truth and in fact, and as
GISLER then and there knew, the beneficial owners were u.s.
persons, a fact that was evident from documents maintained in
the files of UBS and other Gisler Banks, among other ways.
21. The contractual requirement in the QI Agreements
that the Gisler Banks verify\the identity of the beneficial
owner of accounts held at the Gisler Banks was generally
consistent with a voluntary code of conduct adopted by the Swiss
Bankers Association, of which the Gisler Banks were members,
which was referred to in an addendum to the QI Agreements. The
Swiss Bankera Association, founded in 1912, was a professional
membership organization that, among other things, sought to
develop self-regulatory standards for Swiss banks. The
Agreement on the Swiss B a n k s ~ Code of Conduct with Regard to the
Exercise of Due Diligence (the "Swiss Banks Code") provided, in
general, that signatories to the Swiss BJnks Code engage in
substantial efforts to verify the identity of the client in
whose name the account was opened (referred to in the Swiss
Banks Code as the "contracting partner") and, if not the same as
the "contracting partner," verify the identity of the beneficial
owner of the account. The 1998 version of the Swiss Banks Code
was identified in the QI Agreements themselves as one of the
11
,
regulations governing the obligations of the Gisler Banks to
)
obtain documentation concerning the identity of account ,holders.
,
22. For example, as of 2008, the Swiss; Banks Code
provided, in part, that:
If the contracting partner is not the same as the
beneficial owner, or if this is in doubt, .the banks
must require the contracting partner to complete Form
JA., thereby providing a written declaration of the r
identity of the beneficial owner.
As of 2003, the Swiss Banks' Code provided, in part, that:
, ,
All due diligence which can be reasonably expected
under the circumstances must be exercised in
establishing the identity of the beneficial owner. If
there is any doubt as to whether the contracting
partner is himself the beneficial owner, the bank
shall require by means of Form A a written declaration
setting forth the identity of the beneficial owner.
I
The Swiss Banks Code attached a specimen Form A to be used for
\
this purpose. In general, Form A required the pers'on executing
it to declare the identity of the beneficial owner of the assets
"
.deposited in the account that was opened in the name of the
contracting partI1er. The Gisler Banks generally employed FOrm ~
,for this purpose.
The Conspiracy
23. From at least in or about the mid 1990's through
at least in or about 2010, GIAN GISLER, the defendant, agreed
'-
with various u.S. taxpayers and qthers known and unknown, to
defraud the United States, to conceal from the IRS en false tax
I
returns.the existence of ,bank accounts maintained at. the Gisler
i2
)
Banks, and the income earned in these accounts, and to evade
u.s. taxes on income generated in these accounts.
Means and Methods of the Conspiracy
24. Among the means and methods by which GIAN GISLER,
the defendant, and his co-conspirators would and did carry out
the conspiracy were the following:
a. GISLER and his co-conspirators opened and
maintained "undeclared accounts" on behalf of U.S. taxpayers at
the Gisler Banks, that is, financial accounts maintained outside
the United States and beneficially owned by U.S. taxpayers, but
that were not disclosed to the IRS on Schedule B of Form 1040 or
on an FBAR and the income generated in which was not reported to
the IRS on Form 1040.
b. GISLER and his co-conspirators used sham
"foundations" formed under the laws of Liechtenstein to conceal,
from the IRS and others, the ownership by U.S. taxpayers of
accounts established at the Gisler Banks and the income
generated in those accounts.
c. GISLER and his co-conspirators used sham
corporations formed under the laws of Hong Kong to conceal, from
the IRS and others, the ownership by U.S. taxpayers of accounts
established at the Gisler Banks and the income generated in
those accounts.
d. GISLER and his co-conspirators prepared and
accepted W-8BENs l or the substitute forms utilized by the Gisler
Banks I that falsely and fraudulently stated under penalties of
perjury that the beneficial owner of a given undeclared account
maintained at the Gisler Banks was "not" aU. S. person
l
II when I in
truth and in facti GISLER and his co-conspirators knew that l as
reflected on Form A/s and other documents contained within the
files of the Gisler Banks I the beneficial owner of the
part*cular undeclared account was a U.S. taxpayer.
e. Co-conspirators of GISLER filed false and
fraudulent Forms 1040 1 whichl among other things I failed to
report their interest in their undeclared accounts and the
income generated in their undeclared accounts.
f. Co-conspirators of GISLER failed to file
FBARs identifying their undeclared accounts or filed false and
fraudulent FBARs omitting their undeclared accounts.
g. When GISLER and his co-conspirators believed
that UBS might be forced to identify the beneficial owners of
undeclared accounts held at UBS to the,IRS I GISLER and his co-
conspirators transferred the assets in the U.S.' taxpayers I
undeclared accounts at UBS to other Gisler Banks to which GISLER
had introduced his U.S. taxpaye:r; clients / " While GISLER was
employed at Swiss Asset Manager No. 1 and Swiss Asset Manager
14
No.2, GISLER continued to manage these assets after their
transfer from UBS.
h. GISLER and his co-conspirators arranged for
account statements for the undeclared accounts of U.S. taxpayers
not to be sent to the U.S. taxpayers in the United States.
i. GISLER, while in the United States, accepted
cash from the undeclared accounts of at least one of his U.S.
taxpayer clients, which GISLER distributed, while in the United
States, to another of his U.S. taxpayer clients.
GISLER'S U.S. Taxpayer Clients
25. At various times relevant to this Indictment,
GIAN GISLER, the defendant, acting through UBS, Swiss Asset
Manager No.1, and Swiss Asset Manager No. 2 opened and/or
managed more than 60 undeclared accounts for more than 38 U.S.
taxpayers.
26. For example, GIAN GISLER, the defendant, managed
and/or assisted in opening more than approximately 40 undeclared
accounts for U.S. taxpayers at UBS, more than approximately 7
undeclared accounts for U.S. taxpayers at Swiss Bank No.1, and
more than approximately 5 undeclared accounts for U.S. taxpayers
at Swiss Cantonal Bank No.1. Details for several examples of
U.S. taxpayers for whom'GISLER helped maintain undeclared
accounts are set forth more fully below.
15
27. The collective maxi1Ilum value of the assets in
undeclared accounts beneficially owned by clients of GISLER that
were either opened with assistance or were managed by
GISLER was more than approximately $215 . 3 million, as reflected
in paragraphs 36, 47,57,. 74, and 77.
Client 1
28. In or about 1993 or 1994, a lawful permanent
resident of the United States who was a U.S. taxpayer ("Client
1") opened an undeclared account to be held at UBS in
Switzerland. Clienc 1 did so at UBS's branch office in
Manhattan. At or about the same time, Client 1 executed a
instructing UBS to hold all mail related to Client l's
account at UBS. In connection with opening up the undeclared
f
account, Client 1 was advised by a representative of UBS to fund
Client l's UBS account with cash so as to minimi;ze any "paper
trail." Thereafter, Client 1 accumulated cash through his
lawful business activities in the United States. Client 1
. .
brought the accumulated cash either to UBS's branch office in
Manhattan or to UBS'sheadquarters in Zurich, Switzerland, to be
credited to Client l's account in Switzerland.
29. In or about 1996, Client 1 became a citizen of
the United States.

16
30. In or about 1998 or 1999, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, became Client l's client advisor at UBS.
31. In or about October 1999, Client 1 opened, and
caused to be opened, an account in the name of Jeleit
Foundation, an entity previously formed under the laws of
Liechtenstein, into which the assets from Client l's original
undeclared account at UBS were transferred.
32. Thereafter, Client 1 and GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, met approximately twice a year in Manhattan and
sporadically in Zurich, to discuss, among other
things, the investment results in Client l's account at UBS.
33. In or about late 2000, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, advised Client 1 at a meeting in Switzerland that, as
a result of changes, Client l's holding an account in the name
of the Liechtenstein foundation was not safe anymore and that
Client 1 should hold Client l's account in the name of a Hong
Kong corporation. Thereafter, GISLER introduced Client 1 to a
Swiss attorney, Matthias W. Rickenbach ("Rickenbach"), a co-
conspirator not named as a defendant herein.
34. In or about 2000", Rickenbach assisted Client 1 in
setting up Aljeleit Trading Ltd., a corporation organized under
the laws of Hong Kong. .. Rickenbach was a director of Alj elei t
Trading Ltd. The purpose of Aljeleit Trading Ltd. was for
Client 1 to hold Client l's undeclared account at UBS.
\
17
35. In or about November and December 2000,
Rickenbach and/or GIAN GISLER, the defendant, executed and/or
accepted into UBS's .files for Client 1 various documents
necessary to open an account at UBS in the name of Aljeleit
Trading Ltd., including, among others:
a. A Form A indicating that the beneficial
I
owner of the account opened in the name of Aljeleit Trading Ltd.
was Client 1 and that Client 1 was a U.S. citizen; and
b. A substitute W-8BEN in which Rickenbach
falsely and fraudulently swore under penalties of perjury that
the beneficial owner of the Aljeleit Trading Ltd. account was a
foreign person. In truth and in fact, and as Rickenbach and
GISLER then and there well knew, the beneficial owner of the
Aljeleit Trading Ltd. account at UBS was Client 1 and also a
U.S. person, which was evident from documents maintained in the
files of UBS.
36. In or about December 2000, the Aljeleit Trading
Ltd. account at UBS held assets valued at approximately $5.121
million. At various times from in or about 2000 until in or
about 2008, Client 1 held U.S. securities in the Aljeleit
Trading Ltd. account at UBS.
37. In or about 2002, Client 1 provided approximately
$150,000 in cash to GIANGISLER, the defendant, while GISLER was
in Manhattan, to be credited to Client l's account at UBS. At
18
or about the same time, GISLER informed Client 1 that GISLER was
going to provide the cash to two other UBS clients, a married
couple that resided in Queens, New York, who wished to make a
cash withdrawal from their UBS account. In or about 2003.,
GISLER and Client 1 repeated this same procedure with another
$100,000, which GISLER told Client 1 that GISLER was again going
to give to the same couple to whom GISLER had given the cash
that Client 1 provided to GISLER in 2002. As a result of these
transactions, clients of UBS were able to make cash deposits
into, and withdrawals from, their undeclared accounts at UBS,
without any client of UBS, or a client advisor of UBS, traveling
into, or leaving from, the united States with the cash.
3S. In or about April 2005, and in the presence of
GIAN GISLER, the defendant, Rickenbach falsely and fraudulently
swore in a substitute W-SBEN under penalties of perjury that
Aljeleit Trading Ltd. was "the beneficial owner under US tax law
of all the income to which th[e] form relate[d]." In truth and
in fact, and as Rickenbach and GISLER then and there well knew,
Client 1 was a U.S. person and the beneficial owner of the
income generated in the Aljeleit Trading Ltd. account at UBS,
which was evident from documents maintained in the files of UBS.
GISLER accepted the false and fraudulent substitute W-SBEN into
UBS's files.
19
39. In or about December 2008, Client 1 spoke by
telephone with GIAN GISLER, the defendant. GISLER informed
Client 1 that Client l's account at UBS had been frozen.
40. Thereafter, Client 1 sought the ,assistance of
Rickenbach. Rickenbach informed Client 1 that UBS wanted to
wanted to close all u.S. accounts, but suggested that Client 1
use foreign documents to show UBS that he was not a u.S.
citizen. As a result, Client 1 arranged for friends in Canada
to switch their utility bills into Client l's name and Client 1
opened a Canadian bank account, all for the purpose of
establishing Client l's purported non-U.S. residency. However,
Client 1 was never able to unfreeze Client l's account at UBS.
41. On Client l's Forms 1040 for the tax years 2004
through and including 2009,' Client 1 did not report either
Client l's interest in or signature or other authority over
Client l's account at UBS. Moreover, for the tax years 2000
through and including 2007, Client 1 did not file an FBAR
disclosing Client l's account at UBS.
Client 2
42. In or about 1967, a citizen of the United States
who was a U.s. taxpayer and who then resided in Manhattan
("Client 2") opened an undeclared account at a predecessor of
UBS.
20
43. In or about 2000, GIAN GISLER, the defendant,
became the client advisor for Client 2's undeclared account at
UBS.
44. After becoming Client 2's client advisor, GIAN
GISLER, the defendant, advised Client 2 to be discreet in Client
2's communications with UBS because Client 2's account was
undeclared and, as a result, was illegal.
45. In or about early 2002, Client 2 wrote to GIAN
GISLER fron;t Client 2'sresidence in Manhattan to request that
GISLER periodically send to Client 2's residence in Maine $2,000
( ,
in travelers checks, which were to be purchased with. funds from
Client 2'sundeclaredaccount at UBS.
46. Between ,about 2004 and 2007, Client 2 met with
GIAN GISLER, the defendant, on multiple occasions in Manhattan
to review Client 2's undeclared account at UBS.
47. In or about June 2007, Client 2's account at UBS
held assets valued at approximately $3.525 million.
48. In or about late 2008, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, informed Client 2 that GISLER was leaving the
employment of UBS for employment at Swiss Asset Manager No.1.
At or about the same fime, Client 2 learned thatUBS would no
longer permit him to maintain his undeclared account'at UBS.
49. In or about early November 2008, GIAN'GISLER, the
introduced Clieht 2 to Swiss Bank No.4, where Client
21
2 opened an undeclared account, with GISLER, on behalf of Swiss
Asset Manager No. I, acting as the financial advisor.
50. Thereafter, in or about November 2008, and with
the assistance of GIAN GISLER, the defendant, Client 2 requested
that UBS transfer all assets held in Client 2's undeclared
account at UBS to Swiss Bank No.4.
51. In connection with the opening of Client 2's
account at Swiss Bank No.4, a representative of Swiss Bank No.
4 circulated a memorandum internal to the bank stating in
German, among other things, that "[t]he above client is a
citizen of the USA. A W-9 form was not signed." The memorandum
further indicated that the Client 2 would be serviced by Swiss
Asset Manager N o ~ 2. The memorandum sought approval for the
opening of the account "taking into account the management
decision that such accounts may still be opened for this EVV
[the German abbreviation for external asset manager]." Another
representative of Swiss Bank No. 4 approved the opening of the
account.
52. On Client 2 ' ~ . Forms 1040 for the tax years 2004
through and including 2009, Client 2 did not report either
Client 2's interest in or signature or other authority over
Client 2's account at UBS or Swiss Bank No.4. Moreover, for
the tax years 2000 through and including 2007, from in or about
22
,. ,
2001 through in or about 2008, Client 2 did not file an FEAR .
disclosing Client 2's account at DES or Swiss Bank No.4.
Client 3
, '.
53. In or about 1967, a citizen of the United States
who resided in the State of New York; and who was a U.S. taxpayer
("Client 3") inherited an account from a relative that was held
ata predecessor of UBS.
54.
a foundation that had previously l;>een organized under the laws
\
of Liechtenstein by_an attorney recommended by a representative
ofUBS. Thereafter, the assets of the inherited account at UBS
were transferred into the Syntax Foundation account UBS.
55. In or about 1997 or 1998, GIAN GISLER, the
. defendant, became the. client advisQ.! for Client 3" s undeclared
account at UBS.
56. In or about 2000, a director of the
Syntax Foundatiori.'! prepared, and GIAN GISLER, the defendant,
accepted as part of UBR's files for Client a form instructing
UBS to sell all U.S. securities and not to thereafter invest in
;
U.S. securi;:ies "so that reportable amounts for US tax pu:rposes
are not created."
57. At or about the 'end of 2007, Client 3's account
at UBS held assets valued at approximately $1.541. million.
23
58. In or about 2008, Client 3 met with GIAN GISLER,
the defendant, at GISLER's office at UBS in Zurich, Switzerland.
GISLER informed Client 3 that UBS was no longer going to permit
U.S. taxpayers to maintain accounts at UBS. GISLER recommended
that Client 3 open an account at a bank that did not have
reservations about having U.S. taxpayers as account holders and
that would allow Client 3 to maintain Client 3's account as
undeclared. GISLER recommended that Client 3 open an account at
Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1. GISLER escorted Client 3
to Swiss Cantonal Bank No. I, at which time Client 3 opened an
undeclared account/at Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 in the name of
the Syntax Foundation, the same sham foundation in which Client
3 had held Client 3's undeclared account at UBS.
59. In or about the Fall of 2008, GIAN GISLERI the
defendant, informed Client 3 that GISLER was leaving UBS for
Swiss Asset Manager No. 11 but that he would manage Client 3's
account at Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 through Swiss Asset Manager
NO.1.
60. After GIAN GISLER, the defendant I left Swiss
Asset Manager No. 1 for Swiss Asset Manager No.2, and in or
about November 2009 1 GISLER assisted Client 3 in opening an
undeclared account at Swiss Bank No. 3 1 which was to be managed
by GISLER through Swiss Asset Manager NO.2. At the time that
Client 3 opened Client 3's undeclared account at Swiss Bank No.
24
3, Client 3 was provided with an alias, uFlakes." The account-
opening documents prepared for Client 3's account at Swiss Bank
No. 3 and signed by representatives of Swiss Bank No. 3 and
GISLER, among others, indicated that Client 3 was a U.S. citizen
and that Client 3 held ,a U.S. passport. The account-opening
documents prepared for Client 3's account at Swiss Bank No.3
also indicated that Client 3 would not invest in U.S. securities
and that Client 3's account was to be uausserhalb," meaning
Uoutside" in German, the uQI-system."
61. On Client 3's orms 1040 for the tax years 2004
through and. including 2008, Client 3 did not report either
Client 3's interest in or signature or other authority over
Client 3's account at UBS, Swiss Cantonal Bank No. I, or Swiss
Bank No.3. Moreover, for the tax years 2000 through and
including 2009, Client 3 did not file an FBAR disclosing Client
3's account at UBS, Swiss Cantonal Bank No. I, or Swiss Bank No.
3.
Client 4 and Client 5
62. A wife (UClient 4") and husband (UClient 5"), who
were citizens of the United States and Switzerland and who
resided in the State of New Jersey, opened undeclared accounts
at a predecessor of UBS. Client 4 opened her undeclared account
in or about the early 1980's. Client 5 opened his undeclared
25
account in or about 1978. At all times relevant to this
Indictment, Client 4 and Client 5 were U.S. taxpayers.
63. Client 4 periodically met with one of her UBS
client advisors (the "Client 4 and 5 Advisor") in Manhattan and,
on several such occasions, Client 4 gave the Client 4 and 5
Advisor approximately $5,000 to $6,000 in cash to be deposited
into Client 4's undeclared account at UBS.
64. In or about 2003 or 2004, the Client 4 and 5
Advisor informed Client 4 that the Client 4 and 5 Advisor was
leaving UBS to begin working as an independent financial
advisor. Periodically, thereafter, the Client 4 and 5 Advisor
sought to recruit Clients 4 and 5 to follow him and have him
manage their accounts, which would be held at a Swiss bank other
than UBS. On one such occasion, the Client 4 and 5 Advisor sent
Client 4 and 5 a brochure concerning Swiss Bank No. 1 as a
recommendation of a bank at which to hold an undeclared account.
65. In or about 2004 or 2005, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, became the Client advisor for Client 4 and Client 5
at UBS.
66. In or about 2005 and 2006, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, met with Client 4 and Client 5 in Manhattan on at
least two occasions. The purpose of these meetings was to
review the performance of Client 4 and Client 5' s accounts at
UBS.
26
67. In or about early 2008, the Client 4 and Client 5
Advisor wrote to Client 4 and Client 5 at their New Jersey
address:
THEY finally did what was widely expected 3-4 years
ago! US clients have zero protection anylonger [sic]
and the team in my country will be closed down!
I have known you and your family for a long time.
I am here to help. But, of course, only if you are
willing to accept my help!
The Client 4 and 5 Advisor attached with his letter a copy of a
January 2008 newspaper article from the Financial Times entitled
"UBS to wind down offshore private banking for US clients."
68. In or about late 2008, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, informed Client 4 that GISLER was leaving UBS.
69. Several weeks later, Client 4 and Client 5
traveled to Zurich, Switzerland, to meet with GISLER. By that
point, GISLER was employed by Swiss Asset Manager No.1. During
the meeting, GISLER advised Client 4 and Client 5 that they were
required to close their accounts at UBS. GISLER also proposed
that, through Swiss Asset Manager No.1, he manage their assets,
which would be held at either Swiss Bank No. 1 or Swiss Bank No.
2 .
70. On the same day as the meeting described in
paragraph 69, above, or the next day, GIAN GISLER, the
defendant, escorted Client 4 and Client 5 to Swiss Bank No. 1 to
27
, J
meet with two representatives of Swiss Bank No.1, who were
informed that Client 4 and Client 5 were being required to leave
UBS and were seeking to open undeclared accounts at Swiss Bank
No.1.
71. After the two representatives of Swiss Bank No.1
had completed their interview of Client 4 and Client 5, one of
the two representatives of Swiss Bank No. 1 informed Client 4
and Client 5 that Swiss Bank No. 1 would accept Client 4 and
Client 5 as account holders. Client 4 and Client 5 completed
various account-opening documents necessary for them to open
accounts at Swiss Bank No.1, which were to be managed by GIAN
GISLER, the defendant, through Swiss Asset Manager NO.1. At or
about the time that Client 4 and Client 5 opened their accounts
at Swiss Bank No.1, Swiss Bank No. 1 received and thereafter
maintained Form A's listing Client 4 and Client 5 of New Jersey
as the beneficial owners of their accounts at Swiss Bank NO.1.
72. At or about the time that Client 4 and Client 5
opened their aGcounts at Swiss Bank No.1, one of the
representatives instructed Client 4 and Client 5 to each select
a secret code name for Client 4 and Client 5 to use when
contacting Swiss Bank No.1. In this regard, the account-
opening documents executed by Client 4 and Client 5 provided (in
German), in relevant part:
28
. ,
The Client authorizes the Bank to operate the account
and safekeeping account under number or code name
referred to und,er 1. above. . . .
,Instead of using his/her usual signature in dealings
with the Bank, the Client may write out the number or
code name ,of the account or safekeeping account.
73. Thereafter" in or abopt October 2008, and with
the assistance ofl GIAN GISLR, the defendant, Client 4 requested
that UBS transfer all assets held in Client 4's undeclared
account at UBS to Swiss Bank No. I, which was 1:.0 be managed by
!
! .
.
GISLER through Swiss Asset Manager No.1.
I
74. At or about the end of 2008 , ,Client 4 and Client
S's accounts at Swiss Bank No.1 held assets valued at
approximately $1.948 million.
75. On Client 4 and Client S's joint Forms 1040 fer
the tax years 2004 through and including 2008, Cli,ent'4and
i
C:lient Sc;iid not:report either Client 4 and Client 5' s int,erests
in or signature or other a'l.lthority over their accounts at UBS or
{'
\
Swiss Bank No.1. Moreov;er, for the tax years 2000 through and"
including 2008, from in or about 2001" through :4n or about 2009,
"
'/
Client 4 and Client,S did not file an Client 4
and Client 5' s accounts at UBS
I
or Swiss Bank NO.1. :'.
Additional U.S. Taxpayer Clients of GISLER
76. ! At all times relevant to this Indictment, Swiss
Bank No.5, Swiss Bank No.6, Swiss Bank No.7, Swiss Bank No.
(
8, and Swiss Bank No. 9 were {banks organized under the laws of
29
l I}
j ,
Switzerland. At all times relevant to this Indictment; Swiss
Fund No. 1 was an investment fund and asset
under the laws of Switzerland.
77. In furtherance of the conspiracy, GIAN GISLER, I
the defendant, assisted, among other U. S. taxpayers, the I
following U.S. taxpayers identified below in ways that were
to the services that he provided to .
Clients 1 through 5, as described above:
30
( I r.
. Approximate Highest Approximate
State of Dates During Value of Account
Residence of Which UBS Bank(s) to Which Assets between Approximately
U.S. Taxpayer Acc()unt Open Were Transferred from UBS 2003 and 2010
New York 1987-2008 Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 $10,201,581
California 1980-2008 Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 $3,781,882
Maryland 1997-2008 Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 $4,700,000
Maryland 2004-2008 Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1 $4,700,000
California 1983-2008 Swiss Bank No. 1 $19,700,000
New Jersey 1995-2008 Swiss Bank No. 2 $2,098,700
Swiss Bank No. 2 and Swiss
New York 2003-2008 Bank No. 1 $1,200,000
New York 1980-2008 Swiss Bank No. 2 $42,743,700
Swiss Bank No. 2 and Swiss
"
New York 1937-2008 Bank No. 1 $43,273,343
Swiss Cantonal Bank No. 1
New York 1962-2008 and Swiss Bank No. 5 $13,334,997
New York 1973-2008
,
Swiss Bank No. 6 $2,332,870
New York 2000-2008 Swiss Fund No. 1 $5,012,975
Florida 19.93-2008 Swiss Bank No. 1 $2,544,609
Washington., DC 1988-2009 n/a $1,216,322
Connecticut 1970-2008 n/a $3,154,060
New York 1970-2008 n/a $1,469,973
New York 1970-2008 n/a more than $2,500,000
Florida 1989-2009 n/a more than $1,000,000
New York 1960-2009 Swiss Bank No. 7 $1,909,000
New York 2004-2008 Swiss Bank No. 8 $1,966,095
New York 1966-2008 Swiss Bank No. 4 $697,855
New York 1970-2008 Swiss Bank No. 1 $3,044,800
New York 1986-2009 n/a $671,000
Maryland 1963-2008 n/a $6,491,000
Rhode Island 1997-2009 n/a more than $2,500,000
New Ybrk 1998-2008 n/a $129,424
New York 1996-2008 Swiss Bank No. 1 $2,569,012
New York 1980-2008 Swiss Bank No. 9 $1,213,220
New York 2005-2008 . n/a $11,708,074
Maryland 1996-2008 n/a $2,531,245
New York 1998-2008 Swiss Bank No. 4 more than $1,000,000
Total
more than $203,183,649
31
Statutory Allegations
78. From at least in or about the mid-1990's through
at least in or about 2010, in the Southern District of New York
and elsewhere, GIAN GISLER, the defendant, together with others
known and unknown, willfully and knowingly did combine,
conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each other to
defraud the United States of America and an agency thereof, to
wit, the IRS, and to commit offenses against the United States,
to wit, violations of Title 26, United States Code, Section
7201, and Title 26, United States Code, Section 7206(1).
79. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy
that GIAN GISLER, the defendant, together with others known and
unknown, willfully and knowingly would and did defraud the
United States of America and the IFS for the purpose of-
impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful
governmental functions of the IRS in the ascertainment,
computation, assessment, and collection of revenue, to wit,
federal income taxes.
80. It was further apart and an object of the
conspiracy that GIAN GISLER, the defendant, together with others
known and unknown, willfully and knowingly would and did attempt
to evade and defeat a substantial part of the income tax due and
owing to the United States of America from clients of GISLER's
32
who were U.S. taxpayers, in violation of Title 26, United States
Code, Section 7201.
81. It was further a part and an object of the
conspiracy that GIAN GISLER, the defendant, together with others
known and unknown, willfully and knowingly would and di'd make
and subscribe returns, statements, and other documents, which
contained and were verified by written declarations that they
were made under the penalties of perjury, and which GISLER,
together with others known and unkn0'1n, did not believe to be
true and correct as to every material matter, in violation of
Title 26, United States Code, Section 7206 (1) .
Overt. Acts
82. In furtherance of the conspiracy and to effect
the illegal objects thereof, GIAN GISLER, the defendant, and
others known and unknown, committed the following overt acts,
among others, in the Southern District of New York and
elsewhere:
a. In or about 2002, Client 1 provided
approximately $150,000 in cash to GISLER, while in Manhattan, to .
be credited to Client l's account at UBS.
b. In or about early 2002, Client 2 wrote to
)
GISLER from Client 2's residence in Manhattan to request that
GISLER periodically send to Client 2's residence in Maine $2,000
33
in travelers checks, which were to be purchased with funds from
Client 2's undeclared account at UBS.
,
c. In or about November 2009, GISLER assisted
Client 3 in opening an undeclared account at Swiss Bank No.3,
which was to be managed by GISLER through Swiss' .Asset Manager
No.2.
d. In o r ~ b o u t 2005 and 2006, GISLER met with
Client 4 and Client 5 in Manhattan on at least two occasions.
(Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.)
FOREPERSO PREET BHARARA
United States Attorney
34
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
-v. -
GIAN GISLER,
Defendant.
INDICTMENT
11 Cr.
(Title 18, United states Code,
Sect,ion 371.)
PREET BHARARA
United States Attorney.
A TRUE BILL
Foreperson.
(