April 4, 2025   Jacksonville, Florida – United States Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe announces that Eduardo Anibal Escobar (44), Carlos Alberto Rodriguez (35), and Adelmy Tejada (57), all residents of Orlando, have pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit tax fraud.   Each are legal permanent residents from El Salvador. Each faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison for the wire fraud offense and up to 5 years in federal prison for the tax fraud offense.   These individuals are subject to an order requiring them to forfeit at least $8,764,652 in proceeds which they obtained as a result of the wire fraud offense and two houses in Orlando that were purchased with those proceeds.   The defendants are also subject to an order requiring them to pay restitution in the amounts of $12,992,908 to four insurance companies for unpaid workers’ compensation insurance premiums, $397,895 to two of the companies for workers’ compensation claims that the companies paid, and $36,957,616 for unpaid employment taxes on approximately $146,077,535 in payroll that was not reported to the IRS. The sentencing dates have not yet been set.   According to court documents, over the period of approximately January 2015 through August 2024, the defendants engaged in a scheme to defraud involving misrepresentations concerning workers’ compensation insurance.   The purposes of the scheme were to facilitate the employment of workers who were not legally authorized to work in the United States, to avoid paying for adequate workers’ compensation insurance, and to avoid paying required payroll taxes.   To carry out the scheme, Escobar, Rodriguez, and Tejada obtained workers’ compensation insurance policies in the names of companies they registered with the State of Florida. The policies covered a handful of employees and a minimal payroll. They then reached agreements with hundreds of construction subcontractors to represent to construction contractors that the subcontractors were employed by the defendants’ companies.   The subcontractors provided the defendants with the names of the contractors for whom they wanted to perform work, and the defendants sent the contractors documents representing that the subcontractors worked for the defendants’ companies and that they were covered by the companies’ workers’ compensation insurance.   This representation allowed the subcontractors to obtain contracts with, and perform work for, the construction contractors. The contractors wrote payroll checks to the defendants’ companies for work performed by the subcontractors and the defendants distributed the payroll to the workers, after keeping 6% to 8% as a fee.   Most of the workers were undocumented aliens working illegally in the United States. Over the course of the scheme, approximately $146,077,535 in payroll flowed through the companies, on which the defendants were paid fees totaling at least $8,764,652.   Although the workers’ compensation insurers believed they were providing coverage for the limited payroll reflected in the insurance applications and reported by the defendants, the insurers unknowingly provided coverage for the approximately $146,077,535 in payroll that flowed through the defendants’ companies.   If the insurers had known the amount of payroll they were in fact covering, they would have charged additional annual premiums totaling at least $12,992,908. Neither the defendants nor the contractors nor the subcontractors reported to the IRS the payroll that flowed through the defendants’ companies, and no one paid either the employees’ portion or the employers’ portion of payroll taxes due. If the total payroll of approximately $146,077,535 had been properly reported to the IRS, the total payroll taxes due would have been approximately $36,957,616.   This case was investigated by Homeland Security Investigations, Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation, and the Florida Department of Financial Services. It is part of a continuing investigation by those agencies of the use of shell companies and “ghost” employees in the construction industry. It is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Arnold B. Corsmeier. The asset forfeiture is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Jennifer M. Harrington.

March 20, 2025   Jacksonville, Florida – U.S. District Judge Harvey E. Schlesinger has sentenced Jacksonville residents Travis Morgan Slaughter and Tripp Charles Slaughter to 41 months and 21 months in federal prison, respectively, for conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and conspiracy to commit tax fraud related to Jacksonville roofing businesses they operated. The Slaughters pled guilty on November 25, 2024.   As part of their sentence, the court entered an order of forfeiture against Travis Slaughter in the amount of $2,780,947.56 and against Tripp Slaughter in the amount $416,799.66, which were proceeds traceable to the mail and wire fraud offenses. The court also ordered Travis Slaughter to pay restitution in the amount of $6,768,612.32 to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for payroll tax losses, $2,780,947.56 to two insurance companies for unpaid workers’ compensation insurance premiums, and $271,217.39 to the same two companies for two paid workers’ compensation claims. The court ordered Tripp Slaughter to pay restitution of $623,269.64 to the IRS for payroll tax losses, $416,799.66 to an insurance company for unpaid workers’ compensation insurance premiums, and $137,778.39 to the same company for a paid workers’ compensation claim.   According to court documents, beginning in 2007, Travis Slaughter operated a roofing business in Jacksonville, first under the name Great White Construction and then under the name Florida Roofing Experts. In January 2020, the business began operating under the name 5 Star Roofing Services, which Tripp Slaughter incorporated. Although the name changed, each business operated in the same manner, banked at the same financial institutions, and employed the same employees.   The company contracted with professional employer organizations (PEOs) to prepare payroll checks for employees, after making deductions for payroll taxes, and to file payroll tax returns and forward tax payments to governmental authorities. However, the company did not provide the PEOs with information about all the hours worked by, or all the wages due to, its employees. Instead, the company also paid the employees directly, with separate checks drawn on company bank accounts, and did not deduct payroll taxes from these checks. By paying employees with “split checks”—one from the PEO and one from the company—the company avoided paying the full amount of payroll taxes due to the IRS. For the period of October 2015 through June 2020, the company paid a total of approximately $23,079,680 in wages that were not reported to the IRS. The payroll taxes due to the IRS on this amount total approximately $4,292,429. The PEOs also secured workers’ compensation insurance coverage for the company. The premiums charged by the workers’ compensation insurers were based on the total amount of payroll that the company reported to the PEOs. If the company had reported the actual amount of payroll, the insurers would have charged additional premiums totaling approximately $2,780,947.   In addition to causing the company to underreport their payroll to the IRS, the Slaughters also underreported their personal income to the IRS. For the tax years 2014 through 2019, the unpaid taxes due on Travis Slaughter’s unreported income totaled approximately $2,467,183. For the tax years 2015 through 2019, the unpaid taxes due on Tripp Slaughter’s unreported income totaled approximately $263,614.   “The actions of these two defendants represent a blatant disregard for U.S. law and our financial systems. Despite operating successful construction businesses that generated millions of dollars in wealth, their greed drove them to lie and cheat for years,” said Special Agent in Charge Ron Loecker, of the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI), Tampa Field Office. “Their scheme to evade millions of dollars in taxes not only undermined the integrity of our tax system but also created an unfair advantage in which law-abiding competitors cannot compete for bids.  Our job is to make sure dishonest offenders like these two face the consequences of their criminal activities.”   “The Slaughters defrauded insurance companies of millions in workers’ compensation insurance premiums and will be responsible for financial restitution for the loss of insurance premiums and death and injury claims,” said ICE HSI Tampa, Jacksonville office Assistant Special Agent in Charge Tim Hemker. “As part of this criminal enterprise, they also exploited the labor of hundreds of illegal aliens.”   This case was investigated by Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, Housing and Urban Development – Office of Inspector General, and the Florida Department of Financial Services. It was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Arnold B. Corsmeier. The asset forfeiture is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Jennifer M. Harrington.

March 20, 2025   Comprehensive training and a robust safety culture are key to preventing electrocution risks in manufacturing settings.   Electrical hazards are one of the most dangerous and often overlooked risks in manufacturing. Many workers assume that factory and production-controlled environments, established protocols, and modern equipment eliminate the possibility of electrocution from high-voltage equipment. However, data proves otherwise.   The manufacturing industry is among the top five industries with the highest number of electrical fatalities. According to the Electrical Safety Foundation International (ESFI), 74% of workplace electrical fatalities occur in non-electrical occupations, indicating that workers outside of traditional electrical roles face significant risks. Additionally, 28% of all workplace electrical fatalities take place on industrial premises, reinforcing the need for heightened safety awareness in manufacturing environments.   Electrocution incidents in manufacturing often occur unexpectedly due to heavy-voltage equipment and arc-flash injuries. Arc flashes, which are sudden releases of electrical energy through the air due to a fault, can result in severe burns, neurological damage, and fatalities. These incidents often are caused by improper procedures, lack of training and PPE usage, and unauthorized personnel interacting with electrical systems.   Beyond the human impact, electrical incidents can result in significant financial and reputational consequences for businesses. The BLS reported 2.6 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses in 2023—the latest data available—with more than 900,000 cases leading to time away from work. These disruptions hinder operations, lower productivity, and drive insurance costs higher, making proactive safety measures essential for maintaining efficiency and financial stability in manufacturing environments.   A 2024 industry report revealed that many manufacturing employees feel unsafe due to inadequate safety training and outdated procedures. This signals a pressing need for leadership to address training gaps and reinforce electrical safety measures as soon as possible.   The reality is that most electrocution accidents are preventable. When organizations and workers disregard or aren’t trained on proper safety protocols, they expose themselves to unnecessary risks. It’s the responsibility of leadership to create and enforce a culture of electrical safety by implementing industry best practices that include proper training and firm adherence to safety regulations.   How to Create a Culture of Electrical Safety Electrical safety in manufacturing extends beyond compliance with regulations—it requires a proactive, company-wide commitment to safety. Risks can be significantly minimized when workers at all levels understand proper procedures, are encouraged to take action, and follow established safety protocols. In addition, many insurers offer risk management programs designed to evaluate safety procedures, identify hazards, and recommend necessary training improvements across your manufacturing production environment.   Building a culture of electrical safety involves a structured approach that includes training, employee empowerment, daily reinforcement, and access to control measures.   Below are four key steps to ensuring a safe manufacturing environment.   Read more

March 19, 2025 Several bills introduced by Florida legislators aim to strengthen Florida’s E-Verify law—particularly by eliminating the twenty-five–employee minimum for use of the database—and include increased penalties for noncompliance. They also add independent contractors to the definition of “employee.” These changes are part of the state’s and the federal government’s continued initiative to combat illegal immigration.   Quick Hits Florida legislation proposes eliminating the twenty-five–employee minimum threshold requiring private employers to use E-Verify, effectively requiring all private employers to use E-Verify for their workforces, regardless of size. The legislation proposes to include independent contractors within the definition of “employee” for E-Verify purposes, breaking from federal law, which does not require an I-9 for such individuals. The legislation proposes significant business license and financial penalties for noncompliance as well as if an unauthorized alien worker causes injury or death to another. Following the change of presidential administration in late January 2025, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis came under pressure by Republican lawmakers for his office’s perceived failure to enforce the state’s current E-Verify statute. This pressure aligns with the Trump administration’s initiative of combating illegal immigration. Shortly after, Governor DeSantis signed immigration legislation into law with respect to penalties for undocumented immigrants and a new State Board of Immigration Enforcement.   The Florida Legislature is now taking steps to strengthen the existing E-Verify laws for private employers. On February 17, 2025, Florida state Senator Jason Pizzo (D–District 37) filed Senate Bill (SB) 782: Immigration, and on February 25, 2025, Florida state Representative Allison Tant (D–District 9) filed House Bill (HB) 1033: Immigration Status and Employment Eligibility. These bills are identical and contain four main proposals: ·        revising the duties of the Office of Economic Accountability and Transparency within the Department of Commerce; ·        revising penalties for employment of unauthorized aliens; ·        revising the definition of “employee”; and ·        requiring all Florida employers to use E-Verify regardless of size. Regarding the first point, the legislation would move the administration and enforcement of the E-Verify system from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to the Office of Economic Accountability and Transparency, a division of the Department of Commerce.   Regarding the second point, the proposal is to increase the penalties to suspension or revocation of a business license for one year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 for a first-time offender. For a second-time offender, the penalty would be increased to a five-year suspension or revocation of business licenses and a fine not to exceed $50,000. For a third-time offender, the penalty would be increased to a permanent revocation of all business licenses and a fine not to exceed $250,000.   The proposal also includes suspension or revocation of business licenses if an unauthorized alien worker causes injuries or death to another person—five years and up to a $100,000 fine for injuries and permanent revocation and up to a $500,000 fine for death. Any fines collected would be deposited into the Florida Highway Patrol Safety Operating Trust Fund, the creation and operation of which is not publicly available at the time of publication. The current penalties are far less extreme in terms of business license suspension or revocations and do not include monetary fines.   Regarding the third point, the legislation would eliminate the twenty-five-employee minimum threshold for private employers to use E-Verify. It also modifies the definition of “employee” to include individuals who work on an “occasional, incidental, or irregular” basis, as well as independent contractors. The inclusion of independent contractors in this proposal is problematic, considering federal law does not require employers to prepare I-9s for independent contractors; however, an I-9 is required to complete an E-Verify. Regarding the fourth point, the twin bills would allow federal immigration authorities to use the E-Verify system to investigate a detained person’s immigration status.   On February 24, 2025, Representative Berny Jacques (R–District 59) filed HB 955: Employment Eligibility, which proposes to eliminate the required minimum number of employees needed to trigger private employers’ requirement to use E-Verify. The current statute, 448.095, only requires private employers’ use of E-Verify if they employ twenty-five or more employees. HB 995 would eliminate this twenty-five-employee threshold, effectively requiring use of E-Verify for all Florida private employers.   SB 782, HB 995, and HB 1033 all propose to go into effect on July 1, 2025. At the time of publication, all three bills remain in the committee review stage and have each had one of the required three readings. In the Florida Legislature, following three readings, a bill will be put on the floor for a full chamber vote. If it passes in the chamber, either Senate or House, it then goes to the other chamber for an additional vote. If that second vote passes, the bill will go to the governor to sign or veto. The last day of Florida’s regular session is May 2, 2025, effectively making this the deadline for the bill (in its current or modified version) to pass or fail.   Next Steps The landscape for how private employers engage in employment authorization would change significantly if any of this legislation comes to fruition. Moreover, such legislation would significantly increase the consequences for a purported failure to comply with Florida’s E-Verify laws. Employers may want to review existing E-Verify policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the current statute in preparation for these potential changes.