ILNews

Biofuels fraud cheated victims of $100M, feds say

Dan Human , IBJ Staff
September 18, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Federal prosecutors announced charges Wednesday connected to a Henry County biofuel refinery as part of a massive tax and securities fraud investigation, saying the operation cheated victims out of more than $100 million.

The fraud is alleged to be the biggest instance of tax and securities fraud in state history.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission launched an investigation last year into E-biofuels LLC in Middletown. E-biofuels filed for bankruptcy in April 2012. Its parent company, Evansville-based Imperial Petroleum Inc., received subpoenas from the SEC and a grand jury that May, according to a regulatory filing.

Imperial had to hand over an array of documents relating to E-biofuels’ accounting, purchases and sales of biodiesel, and tax credits and other incentives received from government agencies, the filing said.

“The purpose of the subpoena is to determine whether any federal laws have been violated,” the filing said.

Charging documents released Wednesday afternoon cited 88 counts against seven people and three corporations. Charges included allegations of conspiracy, wire fraud, false tax claims, false statements under the Clean Air Act, obstruction of justice, money laundering and securities fraud.

Prosecutors allege that E-biofuels actually wasn’t producing biofuel. Instead, it was purchasing fuel and selling it to customers as its own product for a profit.

E-biofuels also fraudulently collected on about $35 million in federal tax breaks reserved for biofuel producers, according to charging documents.

Brothers Chad and Craig Ducey launched E-biofuels in 2007. The plant was supposed to produce 10 million gallons of biodiesel per year. Lawsuits against the company indicate that it did not reach that mark.

Chad Ducey is a Fishers resident and Craig Ducey lives in Fortville, according to a bankruptcy filing. Both are named as defendants in the fraud case. They, along with co-defendants Chris Ducey and Brian Carmichael, were the primary operators of E-biofuels, according to charging documents.

The four men conspired with co-defendants Joseph Furando and Evelyn Katirina Pattison—two executives with a pair of related New Jersey-based companies—to purchase lower-grade fuel from third parties and then pretend that it was high-grade fuel from the E-biofuels plant.

The government alleges that the defendants sold more than 35 million gallons of the inferior fuel between July 2009 and May 2012. Unwitting customers paid an inflated price. All told, they were defrauded of more than $55 million.

Imperial bought E-biofuels in 2010 for $3.75 million in Imperial’s thinly traded stock and $15 million in debt. In a regulatory filing from April 30, 2012, Imperial said that 99.6 percent of its revenue stemmed from E-biofuels.

The government alleges that Jeffrey Wilson, the president and CEO of Imperial, knew that E-biofuels was purchasing biodiesel from third parties instead of making its own. He hid this fact from investors, sharholders and outside auditors. He also made false statements in Imperial's annual and quarterly reports filed with the SEC.

Imperial’s accounting firm resigned in August 2012, citing concerns its auditors could not rely on the company’s financial reporting for E-biofuels, according to an SEC filing. The filing did not specify what the problems were.

Carmichael reportedly has offered to plead guilty to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States. If convicted, he faces up to five years in federal prison.

The six other defendants face up to 20 years in federal prisoon on some counts, as well as significant fines. The three companies indicted Wednesday also face significant fines and other regulatory action.

Story originally published at IBJ.com.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT