This is a very big deal. Destroying evidence cannot be done by accident; it has to be willful.

At the oil works we kept records forever even though the law said we only had to keep them for seven years. Seven years might be good enough for the Courts, but we liked to look back and see how we did things in the 30's so we would not have to relearn them again.

I have linked the New York Times version of this story because I read the one on Fox and found it very hard to understand. Having read hundreds of reports like this I could see that the Fox report was leaving out a lot of details. For instance, Fox reports that Halliburton will pay the maximum fine. The NYT points out that this is $200,000, which is a solid three hours work for Halliburton.

Fox also dosen't even hint at what they were pleading guilty to or why destroying that bit of evidence was a bad thing. The NYT makes this rather clear and, as someone who has been in this business a long time, I find amazing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/26/business/halliburton-pleads-guilty-to-destroying-evidence-after-gulf-spill.html?_r=0

Our rule of thumb in deciding what to keep when it came to records was: Keep everything. If you are dragged into court (and if you are an oil company you will be) evidence is your best friend. No one wants to face a Jury and say, "We would love to show you the evidence, but we destroyed it."

We might as well just be saying, "Trust me. I'm with an oil company."

The stock is up ~4% in midday trading.

I bet Cheney has a nice evil grin across his face...

__________________
"Time's never wasted when you're wasted all the time"

IRS says 3 years

And why is that?

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

For no particular reason...I just thought it was fitting to find a scapegoat before poor Bush gets blamed.

__________________
"Time's never wasted when you're wasted all the time"

I used to like their cases for camera equipment . . .

Not in our line of work.

And the Texas Railroad Commission, which has far more power than the IRS in the oil business, says a minimum of seven.

To us that meant: Forever.

Folks still do. The cases were developed by them for overseas travel. In the oil biz you get into some pretty weird places and not all of them have the facilities to care for your luggage.

So strong and light luggage was called for. There was none on the market, so they just invented their own.

I still use one of their suitcases when I travel, but I don't fly so there is no trouble with it being x-rayed.

Is that the same company, I always wondered about that?

__________________
1979 Black on Black, 300CD (sold), 1990 Black 300SE, Silver 1989 Volvo 780, 1988 300CE (vanished by the hands of a girlfriend), 1992 300CE (Rescue).

This is normal in the oil biz.

If you are facing money damages that could be beyond imagination investors don't want to buy stock that may be worth far less after a case is decided.

But now that this episode is behind them investors can evaluate the company on its' merits.

And Halliburton does good work. I would hire them in a minute if I needed any sort of well service.

Because he always does?

Actually he seems to always have a scowl on his face, but I think a lot of that is just mugging for the cameras.

Zero Corporation bought the luggage division of Halliburton (yes, oil guys) and became Zero Halliburton; then they were bought by a Japanese company.

The puny fine that HAL will pay (200K) has nothing to do with it. The fact that the Department of Justice considers the case closed is why the stock rallied today.

To prove my point, HAL's Q1 earnings statement included a $635,000,000 charge for damages from the Macondo tragedy. Yes, $635,000,000!!! The stock rallied ~6% following the news.

When you have been watching this stock stuff concerning oil companies for 40 years then please get back with me.

I used to talk to these investment guys are the time and they always wanted some inside tip into how this case was going or that case was going. Nobody wanted to see the stock tank if the company was hit with a mega fine, and when you are dealing with cases like this no one knows until the Judge signs off on it just how big a hit you are going to take.

Yes, $200,000 is small change, but until the deal was struck nobody knew if that was going to be the max or if some hard prison time was going to be handed out.

Investors hate the unknown. There is too much risk to manage for what you might win or lose when the Courts are involved.