Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-LA  2:18-cr-00189
Case Name:   USA v. Joachim et al
  Press Releases:
WASHINGTON – A Covington, Louisiana, couple and their company pleaded guilty for their roles in a scheme to create, market and operate a fraudulent medical reimbursement program that defrauded the IRS and program participants out of over $48 million.    

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Peter G. Strasser of the Eastern District of Louisiana, Special Agent in Charge Thomas J. Holloman of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation’s (IRS-CI) Atlanta Field Office, Special Agent in Charge Eric J. Rommal of the FBI’s New Orleans Field Office, Special Agent in Charge Steve Grell of the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General’s (DOL-OIG) Dallas Regional Office and Regional Director James Purcell of the U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration’s Kansas City Regional Office made the announcement. 

Denis Joachim, 53, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering; Donna Joachim, 52, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States; and The Total Financial Group, Inc. (TTFG) pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to make false statements and representations in connection with a multiple employer welfare arrangement and five counts of making false statements and representations in connection with a multiple employer welfare arrangement.  All the pleas took place before U.S. District Judge Carl J. Barbier of the Eastern District of Louisiana on May 30, 2019, and were unsealed yesterday.  Sentencings have been scheduled for Sept. 5, 2019, before Judge Barbier.  As part of their guilty pleas, the defendants have agreed to forfeit assets previously seized with a collective value of approximately $6.3 million.  Additionally, the defendants acknowledged a potential loss to the victims totaling more than $48 million and agreed to repay restitution for the amount of loss.

According to admissions made as part of the guilty pleas, TTFG was a Louisiana business incorporated by Denis Joachim and Donna Joachim with the Louisiana Secretary of State that was most recently located at 406 N. Florida Street in Covington.  TTFG and its owners created and marketed a medical reimbursement account program called “Classic 105,” which operated from about 2012 until January 2017.  Classic 105 claimed to be a multiple employer welfare arrangement that was marketed to employers as a supplemental benefits plan for their employees to reimburse for medical expenses such as co-pays and deductibles; participants in Classic 105 were required to have a primary health insurance plan unrelated to and in addition to Classic 105. 



According to the defendants’ admissions, Classic 105 claimed to be comprised of several components:  a tax-exempt contribution of between $1,000 and $1,600 per month made by an employee (which reduced the employee’s taxable income), a loan from a financial institution back to the employee to make up for the contribution, an insurance policy payable to the lender at the employee’s death to repay the loan and fees paid by the employee and the employer directly to TTFG.  TTFG told prospective employer-clients that participants would never have to make out-of-pocket payments to repay the loan and that as a result of the tax savings, most participants would receive an increase in their net take home pay.  TTFG also told prospective employer-clients that the contributions would be stored in a unique account for each employee-participant and that any money not used by the end of each calendar year would revert to TTFG.  TTFG also charged employee-participants a fee of between $150 and $250 per month and the employer a fee of five percent of each employee’s contribution amount.  At its peak, over 350 employer-clients and 4,400 employee-participants nationwide were enrolled in TTFG’s Classic 105 program. In total, TTFG took in not less than at least $25,543,340.70 in fees from the employer-clients and employee-participants, the defendants admitted.

According to the defendants’ admissions, TTFG never obtained a single loan or insurance policy for the Classic 105 program, and participants never made any actual contributions.  Rather, TTFG arranged for the contribution, loan and insurance policy to appear as a series of “paper transactions” that, in effect, did nothing more than reduce participants’ taxable wages and employers’ FICA payments improperly, without their knowledge of the impropriety.  Consequently, TTFG and the Joachims admittedly caused the underpayment of at least $23,343,442.70 in federal FICA taxes, as well as the underreporting and underpayment of personal federal income taxes. federal unemployment taxes and state unemployment taxes—amounts for which the employer-clients and employee-participants may be individually responsible.  It also exposed participants to other adverse financial consequences, including fees and penalties on the unpaid tax and ineligibility from certain government programs, including unemployment payments and reduced Social Security payments, the defendants admitted.

In truth, the only money actually paid to TTFG were the fees, which the Joachims used to make numerous personal expenses, including the purchase of a 26-foot boat, a 2016 Grand Design Solitude recreational trailer, a Chevrolet Corvette, a Jeep Wrangler, a Dodge Ram truck, a Mercedes-Benz CL 550 automobile, a GMC Yukon XL Denali, multiple CAN-AM Maverick 1000R off-road vehicles, jet skis, their 13,000 square foot Covington residence, real property located adjacent to their Covington residence, two residences located in Madisonville, Louisiana, 40 acres of property in Bush, Louisiana, and 125 acres of property in Spring City, Tennessee, the defendants admitted.



This case was investigated by the IRS-CI, the FBI, the DOL-OIG and the Employee Benefits Security Administration.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jordan Ginsberg and Maria Carboni of the Eastern District of Louisiana and Trial Attorney Jared Hasten of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.  Senior Trial Attorney Rebecca Pyne of the Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section, Labor-Management Racketeering Unit also provided assistance with the prosecution. 

The Medicare Fraud Strike Force is part of a joint initiative between the Department of Justice and U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) to focus their efforts to prevent and deter fraud and enforce current anti-fraud laws around the country.  Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, which maintains 14 strike forces operating in 23 districts, has charged nearly 4,000 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $14 billion.  In addition, the HHS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

To learn more about the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), go to www.stopmedicarefraud.gov.

 

                                                                       # # #

 

19-683

 

 

U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans announced that DENIS J. JOACHIM, age 52, DONNA K. JOACHIM, age 52, residents of Covington, Louisiana, and their company, The Total Financial Group, Inc. (“TTFG”) were charged yesterday by a federal grand jury in a 34-count Indictment related to their creation, marketing, and operation of what it claimed to be a Medical Reimbursement Program.  In particular, the defendants were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and to make false statements and representations in connection with a multiple employer welfare arrangement (“MEWA”), in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371 (Count 1); aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, in violation of Title 26, United States Code, Section 7206(2) (Counts 2-13); making false statements in connection with a MEWA, in violation of Title 29, United States Code, Sections 1131(b) and 1149 (Counts 14-18), conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349 (Count 19), wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343 (Counts 20-25), conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h) (Count 26), and money laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957 (Counts 27-34).  Additionally, the Government identified the prior seizure of approximately $6,300,000 worth of the defendants’ assets.



According to the Indictment, TTFG was a Louisiana business incorporated by DENIS and DONNA JOACHIM with the Louisiana Secretary of State on about January 6, 2005, that was most recently located at 406 N. Florida Street, Covington, Louisiana.  TTFG and its owners created and marketed a Medical Reimbursement Account program called “Classic 105.”  Classic 105 claimed to be a multiple employer welfare arrangement that was marketed to employers as a supplemental benefits plan for their employees to reimburse for medical expenses such as co-pays and deductibles; participants in Classic 105 were required to have a primary health insurance plan unrelated to and in addition to Classic 105.  Classic 105 claimed to be comprised of several components: a tax-exempt contribution of between $1,000 and $1,600 per month made by an employee (which reduced the employee’s taxable income), a loan from a lender back to the employee to make up for the contribution, an insurance policy payable to the lender at the employee’s death to repay the loan, and fees paid by the employee and the employer directly to TTFG.  TTFG told prospective employer-clients that participants would never have to make out-of-pocket payments to repay the loan and that as a result of the tax savings, most participants would receive an increase in their net take home pay.  TTFG also told prospective employer- clients that the contributions would be stored in a unique account for each employee-participant and that any money not used by the end of each calendar year would revert to TTFG.  TTFG also charged employee-participants a fee of between $150 and $250 per month and the employer a fee of five percent of each employee’s contribution amount.  At its peak, over 350 employer-clients and 4,400 employee-participants nationwide were enrolled in TTFG’s Classic 105 program.  In total, TTFG took in not less than at least $21,000,000 in fees from the employer-clients and employee-participants.

According to the Indictment, TTFG never obtained a single loan or insurance policy for the Classic 105 program, and participants never made any actual contributions.  Rather, TTFG arranged for the contribution, loan, and insurance policy to appear as a series of “paper transactions” that, in effect, did nothing more than reduce participants’ taxable wages and employers’ FICA payments improperly, without their knowledge of the impropriety.  Consequently, TTFG and the JOACHIMS caused at least $20,000,000 in federal FICA taxes to be underpaid as well as a “significant” amount of personal income taxes, amounts for which the employer-clients and employee-participants are individually responsible.  In at least one instance, a former participant did not qualify for unemployment benefits based on her participation in Classic 105.  In truth, the only money actually paid to TTFG were the fees, which the JOACHIMS used to make numerous personal expenses, including the purchase of a 26-foot boat, a 2016 Grand Design Solitude recreational trailer, a Chevrolet Corvette, a Jeep Wrangler, a Dodge Ram truck, a Mercedes-Benz CL 550 automobile, a GMC Yukon XL Denali, multiple CAN-AM Maverick 1000R off-road vehicles, jet skis, their Covington residence, real property located adjacent to their Covington residence, two (2) residences located in Madisonville, Louisiana, 40 acres of property in Bush, Louisiana, and 125 acres of property in Spring City, Tennessee.

If convicted, DENIS faces a maximum term of imprisonment of 271 years, a fine of up to $7,250,000.00, three years supervised release after imprisonment, and a mandatory $100 special assessment.  DONNA faces a maximum term of imprisonment of 261 years, a fine of up to $7,000,000.00, three years supervised release after imprisonment, and a mandatory $100 special assessment.  They may also be required to forfeit the amounts and items already seized and be subject to further forfeiture.

U. S. Attorney Evans reiterated that an Indictment is merely a charge and that the guilt of the defendant must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.





U.S. Attorney Evans praised the work of the Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations; Federal Bureau of Investigation; and United States Department of Labor – Office of Inspector General and Employment Benefits Security Administration and expressed appreciation for the support provided by Senior Trial Attorney Rebecca Pyne, Department of Justice, Organized Crime and Gang Section, Labor-Management Racketeering Unit.  Assistant United States Attorney Jordan Ginsberg is in charge of the prosecution.



Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ByRumOVcRdXsZIpfld3mejcj045L9s7A0YjIo-cjiLE
  Last Updated: 2024-04-01 17:24:15 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E