Virgin Islands Law Blog

Good Housekeeping for Business: E-Verify and I-9 Compliance

Laura C. Nagi — Mon, 20 May 2013 18:16:47 -0400

The immigration laws of the United States require companies to employ only people who are able to work in the United States legally. This can be as U.S. citizens or foreign citizens who have the appropriate and necessary authorization. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the government agency that is tasked with overseeing lawful immigration to the United States. USCIS manages the process that permits individuals from other countries to work in the United States. Some of these opportunities can be short-term, while others provide a path to a green card (permanent residency).

USCIS also manages the system that allows participating employers to electronically verify the employment eligibility of their newly hired employees. This system, called E-Verify, is an Internet-based system that lets businesses determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the U.S. E-Verify is free and the best way employers can ensure a legal workforce.

I-94 Automation
E-Verify is linked closely to Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, and is used to fortify the Form I-9 employment eligibility verification process that all employers are required to follow. Although using the E-Verify system is voluntary for most employers, the completion of Form I-9 is required.

In April of this year, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) automated the Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record process at air and seaports. Their plan expands the automated process nationwide to all air and seaports of entry by the end of May 2013. The CBP will continue to provide the paper Forms I-94 to certain individuals arriving in the United States by air or sea. This includes refugees, certain asylees, and parolees, as well as where the CBP deems the paper Form I-94 appropriate. Also, USCIS will continue to issue the paper Form I-94 to aliens who are already in the United States.

The automation of the CBP I-94 record does affect E-Verify. If an employee provides their foreign passport with their Form I-94 arrival/departure record, they will be required to enter the foreign passport information when creating a case in E-Verify.

The attorneys in the International Practice Group at BoltNagi PC have worked with many immigration issues, and has the experience and resources to assist you and your business. Attorney Ashley D. Dworsky, Chair of the BoltNagi International Practice Group, together with Attorney Laura C. Nagi handle all areas of immigration law, with an emphasis on business and family immigration and visa law. Please contact BoltNagi PC today to address your immigration concerns.

What Type of Insurance Do You Need for Your Small Business?

Lisa Kömives — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:43:56 -0400

When starting your own business, insurance is an important consideration. Protecting your business investment with insurance minimizes the risks that can arise from unforeseen events, liabilities, and losses. Finding the right insurance for your business can be a difficult task. There are many variables that decide the right insurance for a small business. These include the business structure, business activities, location, whether or not you hire employees—just to name a few.

Whether you are just starting a business, hiring additional employees for the first time, or changing the structure of your business, you need to have solid information to make the right decisions. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, most of the information on the Internet about business insurance is published by insurance companies and their agents. Because this information is written with their interests in mind, it can be frustrating and confusing trying to find accurate information on small business insurance laws and best practices.

We will look at the two fundamental types of insurance - commercial business insurance and employer insurance.

Commercial Business Insurance

Typically commercial business insurance is not required by law; however, it can be a very prudent decision to acquire sufficient business insurance to protect your assets against things like the death of your partner, a natural disaster, or lengthy litigation. Some people believe that structuring a business as a corporation or limited liability company negates the need for business insurance. Although these types of business structures protect the owner's personal assets from business liabilities, depending on the business structure alone to protect your assets is no substitute for liability insurance. Commercial business insurance protects the business from losses. In some situations the law can require that a specific type of business activity be covered by some form of insurance. Here are the types of business insurance policies to look at for your small business:

• General Liability Insurance: This insurance has broad coverage and provides protection against the legalities that come with accidents, injuries, and claims of negligence (like a slip and fall complaint).

• Product Liability Insurance: This type of insurance is valuable if you are in the business of manufacturing, distribution, and wholesale or retail sales of a product. Product liability insurance will protect against financial loss as a result of a product defect that causes injuries.

• Professional Liability Insurance: If your business provides a service to a customer, this insurance will protect your company against malpractice, errors, omissions, and negligence in providing those services to your customers. Some state and territorial governments require certain professions, such as doctors and attorneys, to carry a malpractice policy.

• Commercial Property Insurance: Just as it sounds, this type of insurance covers losses and damage of company property due to many different causes. These will include things like fire, smoke, severe weather, and vandalism. "Property" usually includes lost income, business interruption, buildings, computers, company papers, and money.

• Home-Based Business Insurance: As a general rule, your homeowner's insurance policy will not cover home-based business losses. In some situations you may be able to add on property damage riders to your policy to cover specific items of property, additional policies may need to be purchased in order to cover other risks like general and professional liability.

There is a wide variety of insurance policies available. It's a good idea to discuss your individual business insurance needs with one of the risk management attorneys at BoltNagi PC.

Insurance Requirements for Employers

If your small business has employees, you are usually required by state law to pay for certain types of insurance. The key employee insurance requirements are listed below:

• Workers Compensation Insurance - Businesses with employees are required to carry workers' compensation insurance.

• Unemployment Insurance Tax: If you have employees, you will be required to pay unemployment insurance taxes as set out in the Virgin Islands Unemployment Insurance Act and administered by the Virgin Islands Department of Labor, Unemployment Insurance Service.

• Disability Insurance - In the U.S., this type of insurance is not mandatory in the U.S. Virgin Islands. It is only if your business is in certain states (California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island). A business located in the U.S. Virgin Islands may purchase and provide this as part of your company's employee benefits through commercial insurance companies.

If you need assistance determining the types of insurance needed for your business or any other corporate tax and business matters, contact the law firm of BoltNagi PC. BoltNagi PC is one of the largest firms in the United States Virgin Islands and has experienced legal professionals in small business and corporate risk management to assist businesses in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Please contact BoltNagi PC today.

Avoiding Foreclosure: First Talk to Your Lender

A. Jennings Stone, III — Wed, 15 May 2013 18:34:11 -0400

Money troubles can be embarrassing. Some people take it as a sign of weakness, and many people don't like to admit that they need help. This is the main reason that people avoid contacting their mortgage lenders when they have cash flow problems that affect their ability to remain current on their mortgage payments. This reasoning, however, can have devastating legal consequences. As counterintuitive as it may sound, the onset of a financial hardship is precisely the time that you need to reach out and talk to your lender.

If you are having trouble finding your lender, look in the following places for their contact information:

• The billing statement you receive each month;
• Your payment coupon book; or
• Conduct a search on the Internet—many lenders have websites that are specifically for borrowers experiencing financial distress.

Prior to contacting your lender, make sure that you have all of the important information readily accessible for your reference during the call. This information includes:

• Most recent monthly mortgage statement;
• Pay stubs or other documents showing your household income;
• A copy of your most recent tax return;
• Any second loan or home equity line of credit statements;
• Account balances and minimum monthly payments required on all credit cards;
• Your most recent checking, savings, and investment statements; and
• The basis for your financial hardship and all supporting proof.

Most lenders require the borrower to fill out a loan workout package. This loan workout package should be completed and returned to your lender quickly. This will help you to be considered for assistance. The completed package will be examined by the lender before they speak to you about a solution, and in some instances the lender can't proceed to the next step of this process without the completed and signed documents.

You might also need to provide updated documents to your lender as the workout process continues. It is vitally important that you provide these documents and any other information that your lender requests as soon as possible. In my experience, the Number One reason that borrowers don’t receive the workout assistance that they need is simply because they fail to provide the necessary documents.

This is not a quick process. You should be ready to have several conversations with your lender, and the sooner you act, the better. Seeking mortgage assistance from your lender works best when you are only a few payments behind on your mortgage—the further behind you are on your payments, the fewer options are available. If you need help, ask for it today.

Here are some suggested questions to ask your lender:

• How much time do you allow to complete a workout?
• What are your obligations under the workout package?
• What are the specific due dates and deadlines?
• Will a foreclosure sale of your property be put on hold while your lender considers a workout package?

Make sure to keep a record of all of your contacts with you lender for future reference. Also, don't give up if you are not successful in reaching your lender right away. You have to be persistent, because your mortgage problem will not go away by itself. Don't expect your lender to do everything for you. In fact, I often suggest that borrowers set aside a specific time each week to call their lenders and ask the following questions:

• What is the status of my workout package?
• Do you have all of the documents that you need?
• Do any of my documents need to be updated?

It will take time and effort to get your mortgage back on track, and you have to take an active role in the process. Don't give your lender the brush-off. Make sure that you are doing everything that you can to keep your home and straighten out your financial situation.

The law firm of BoltNagi PC is a full service business law firm located in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands representing both local and national mortgage lenders.

Tax Ramifications of Selling a Business

Steven K. Hardy — Sun, 12 May 2013 08:12:27 -0400

There are many reasons and motivations for selling a business. On this list somewhere towards the top is the idea of cashing out and making money. Part of this is concern over how much money you will actually keep and how much you will need to give to the government in taxes.

The amount of taxes you pay will be determined in large part by the structure of the sale and the type of business entity you have. Your business was created as a sole proprietorship, a partnership/limited liability company (LLC), or some type of corporation.

If your business is structured as a sole proprietorship or as a general or limited partnership, the sale will be considered a sale of assets. The buyer only purchases the assets of the company, and not the liabilities or the business in its entirety. The assets of a business will usually include the inventory, accounts receivable, any fixed assets, customer lists and on-going business, and the company's goodwill. The IRS says that the income derived from the sale of the sole proprietorship or the partnership's assets must be reported on the individual owner's tax return. An allocation of the purchase price to assets will determine the manner in which the income will be taxed. A business buyer generally would like to see the majority of the purchase price as possible allotted to assets that would be considered “ordinary gain” to the seller. As a result, the buyer can usually expense those items in the first year of business, rather than capitalizing the assets and taking a depreciation in subsequent years. When selling this type of business the attorneys at BoltNagi PC strongly you to consult with your tax and legal advisors as to the fair allocation of the sale of each asset.

The seller may enter into an installment sale with the buyer for the purchase price of the business. Simply stated, an installment sale is a sale where the seller issues a note to the buyer to have the purchase price paid over a period of time as defined in the sales contract. One advantage to this type of sale is that the seller is allowed to defer the taxes paid on the sale of the business over the term of the note. The profit that the seller sees each year of the note's life would be calculated in the first year and then applied to the later years' payments. The buyer pays interest on the note to the seller, and this interest must be reported to the Internal Revenue as interest income. In circumstances when it is believed that the tax rates are to increase or if the seller will be in a higher income tax bracket in future years, the installment sale may well not be the most beneficial vehicle for selling the business.

If the business you are selling is an limited liability company or a corporation, the sale may be an asset sale or a stock sale. An asset sale will result in the same tax consequences as if your business was a sole proprietor or partnership: the income is taxable to the owner.

In contrast, the sales of a C corporation creates the same types of income as other entities; however, the corporation itself—rather than the business owner—would be responsible for paying the tax on the income. The C corporation would then decide if the sales proceeds are attributable to the shareholders through distribution where the corporation doesn't see a deduction or, in some cases, through additional compensation to the employee shareholders. Experts warn of a double tax on the sale income.

The sale of a company's stock in a limited liabilty company (but not a single member LLC or partnership) or any form of corporation would mean capital gain treatment for the seller, in the same way as if they were selling shares of a publicly traded company. This type of sale is very beneficial to the seller because capital gains taxes are presently lower than standard income rates. A stock sale, however, can be less attractive to buyers in that they are required to take on the company's current debts and liabilities.

Understanding the tax implications of the sale of your business will help you manage your expectations and better equip you when negotiating with potential buyers. Your exit strategy is critical and should be considered when you start your business. The attorneys in the Corporate, Tax and Estate Planning Practice Group at BoltNagi PC work with businesses in creation, merger, sale, and other operational matters. BoltNagi PC has attorneys with the skills and business experience to assist your company. Contact the attorneys at BoltNagi PC today to discuss your business concerns and receive sound, authoritative advice that you require.

Dram Shop Act Signed Into Law by VI Governor

Tom Bolt — Fri, 10 May 2013 17:37:46 -0400

Last Friday, U.S. Virgin Islands Governor John P. deJongh signed into law Act No. 7485 amending Title 8, Virgin Islands Code by adding Chapter 8. This new law shields individuals who serve and sell alcoholic beverages to persons of drinking age from liability. Thel legislation, however, does not extend the liability exemption to those selling or furnishing alcoholic beverages to monorss or those addicted to alcohol. Laws such as Act No. 7485 are known as "dram shop laws" which are state or territorial laws pertaining to selling and serving alcoholic beverages and the public liability these activities may entail.

The bill, originally proposed by Senate President Shawn-Michael Malone as Bill No. 30-0082, is designed to protect against frivolous lawsuits brought by individuals who sue establishments for serving them alcohol, after which they become drunk and cause damage and injury.

Tom Bolt of BoltNagi PC, Counsel to the U.S. Virign Islands Hotel & Tourism Association and who represents a number of hotels, restaurants and tourist related establishments spoke in support of the legislation. He noted that during his practice of law over the past 30 yearshe noted few, if any, cases in the Territory regarding liquor liablity. Within the past two years, however, he stated that there have been a number of cases filed by stateside law firms where visitors to the islands sustained an injury and brought suit against various bars and restaurants that sold them alcoholic beverages.

Act No 7485 utilizes language similar to that of Florida's dram shop law as it was considered "easy to understand" and because Florida, like the U.S. Virgin Islands, has an economy that is based, in part, on tourism and tourists that consume alcoholic beverages while on vacation." Throughout the United States few jurisdictions still rely on courts to decide this issue. The vast majority of states (41 out of 50) now have statutes that preclude "dram shop" liability, remarked Mr. Bolt.

The costs of a defense on a liquor liability suit—even against a fraudulent claim, is very extremely high. Mr. Bolt stated and it can frequently run into six figures. "This issue goes beyond just restaurants and bars and others in the hospitality industry, as convenience stores, gas stations, and downtown merchants also sell alcoholic beverages and would be subject to lawsuits in the absence of the new law," he explained. Private homeowners would also be protected from this type of claim brought by social guests.

The law signed by Governor deJongh on May 3, 2013 provides:

"§161. A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person of lawful drinking age does not thereby become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such person, However, a person who willfully and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age, or who knowingly serves a person habitually addicted to the use of any or all alcoholic beverages may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person."

For more information about protecting business owners and their companies, please contact the legal professionals at BoltNagi PC to discuss your business concerns and receive sound, authoritative advice on risk management in the United States Virgin Islands.

Does Your Business Qualify for a Small Business Health Care Tax Credit?

Nycole A. Thompson — Tue, 07 May 2013 15:45:57 -0400

Did you know that the health reform legislation signed by President Obama includes a Small Business Health Care Tax Credit? This credit is designed to assist small businesses with the cost of covering their employees.

If you are a small employer here on the U.S. Virgin Islands with less than 25 full-time equivalent employees, pay an average wage of less than $50,000 a year, and pay at least half of employee health insurance premiums, then this tax credit may help your company.

Here are some important facts about the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit:

It's effective immediately;
It covers up to 35% of premiums that a small business pays to cover workers (50% in 2014); and
Small for-profit businesses and non-profit organizations are eligible (Tax-exempt organizations are eligible for a 25%. In 2014, it will be 35%).

So, if you pay $50,000 annually for your employees’ health care premiums, and you qualify for a 15% credit, you would save $7,500!

The Council of Economic Advisors estimates that 4 million small businesses are eligible for the credit if they provide health care to their workers. The amount of the credit you receive is based on a sliding scale. The smaller the business or charity, the larger the credit. The credit phases out gradually for firms with average wages between $25,000 and $50,000 and for firms with the equivalent of between 10 and 25 full-time workers.

If you are a small tax-exempt employers, the credit is refundable. As a result, if your organization doesn't have taxable income, you still may be eligible to receive the credit as a refund, provided it doesn't exceed your income tax withholding and Medicare tax liability.

One last thing: if you qualify for the credit but didn't claim it on your tax return, you can still file an amended return. Also, you may be able to carry the credit forward.

If you need assistance determining if your small business or tax exempt organization qualifies for the credit or any other corporate tax and business matters, contact a memer of the legal team at BoltNagi PC, an experienced law firm in the United States Virgin Islands providing quality legal services for value.

U.S. Third Circuit Uses Vento for Guidance on Residency

Tom Bolt — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:34:55 -0400

U.S. Virgin Islands residents pay income taxes to the Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue (VIBIR) rather than the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The appellants in the recently decided case, Vento v. Director of Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue, (C.A. 3 April 17, 2013). Richard and Lana Vento filed a joint 2001 income tax return with the VIBIR, as did their three adult daughters. The United States argued that Richard and Lana Vento and their daughters (collectively, "The Ventos") were required to file those returns with the IRS instead. The proper tax jurisdiction depended upon whether they were bona fide residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands as of December 31, 2001.

Richard Vento sold his company, and the Ventos realized $180 million in capital gains for the 2001 tax year. The VIBIR issued Notices of Deficiency and Final Partnership Administrative Adjustments (FPAAs) to the Ventos of over $31 million against the Richard and Lana and roughly $6.3 million against each of the daughters. That same year, the IRS issued similar FPAAs to the Ventos. As a result of the types of taxes levied, the IRS assessed deficiencies and penalties against the Ventos totaled over $9 million more than those assessed by the VIBIR. The Ventos challenged these taxes by the VIBIR's and IRS—the only issue at trial was whether they were bona fide residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands as of December 31, 2001. The District Court held that they were not, and the Ventos, joined by the VIBIR, appealed.

Richard and Lana Vento were married and filed a joint 2001 tax return. They lived from 1995-2000 in Incline Village, Nevada, but also owned homes in Hawaii, California, and Utah. Their eldest daughter, Nicole, lived in Incline Village, Nevada with her husband and children; the second child, Gail, lived in Colorado; and their youngest daughter, Renee, lived in San Diego. The Ventos also maintained a family office in Incline Village.

After the sale of the company and a vacation in U.S. Virgin Islands, the Vento family started looking for homes in the U.S. Virgin Islands. In May 2001, they bought a home in Estate Frydendahl. The Ventos began to split their time between the U.S. Virgin Islands and the mainland. They obtained U.S. Virgin Islands driver's licenses and registered to vote there in the fall of 2001. The Ventos created only a post office box for their business, which they listed as their billing address when they established utilities at their new home.

The law states that a bona fide U.S. Virgin Islands resident who fully reports their income and satisfies their obligations to the VIBIR do not pay taxes to the IRS. This is true even if the bona fide U.S. Virgin Islands resident is also a resident of the mainland United States.

On appeal, United States Third Circuit Judge Thomas Hardiman wrote that the meaning of residency may vary based on its context. As far as residency in the tax realm, the judge said that it required far less than domicile, and that while an individual can have only one domicile, he can be a resident of multiple places at the same time. The District Court, Judge Hardiman recalled, at the parties' urging, applied the Sochurek test to this case. The Third Circuit said it would do the same. The judge stated that courts that apply Sochurek are to consider these various factors to determine whether a taxpayer's claimed residency is bona fide:

Inntent of the taxpayer;
The establishment of their home temporarily in the foreign country for an indefinite period ("Obviously, the U.S. Virgin Islands is not a “foreign country,” but, as the parties and the District Court agreed, Sochurek applies nonetheless");
Participation in the activities of their chosen community on social and cultural levels, identification with the daily lives of the people and, in general, assimilation into the foreign environment;
Physical presence in the foreign country consistent with their employment;
The nature, extent and reasons for temporary absences from his temporary foreign home;
The assumption of economic burdens and payment of taxes to the foreign country;
The status of resident contrasted to that of transient or sojourner;
The treatment accorded their income tax status by their employer;
The marital status and residence of their family;
The nature and duration of their employment; whether their assignment abroad could be promptly accomplished within a definite or specified time;
The good faith in making their trip abroad; whether for purpose of tax evasion.

Sochurek said that “[w]hile all such factors may not be present in every situation, those appropriate should be properly considered and weighed.”

Judge Hardiman said that the 11 Sochurek factors could be grouped into four broad categories: intent, physical presence, relationships, and the taxpayer's representations. First, in considering the taxpayer's intent, the taxpayer should intend to remain in a place for an indefinite or at least substantial period of time in order to support a finding of residency in that place. Evidence can be the establishment of a long-term home, a long-term employment assignment, or other evidence indicating an intent to become more than a mere transient. Second, a taxpayer's sustained physical presence in a place will support a finding of bona fide residency. A taxpayer who is present at a home they have established and maintain year-round will have a stronger claim to bona fide residency than one who is present without such a home.

Third, in examining a taxpayer's social, family, and professional relationships, a claim of bona fide residency will be supported if they assimilate into the locale by building social and professional ties with the local community. The same is true if their spouse and any dependent family members also live there. Finally, if a taxpayer self-identifies as a resident of a place, by paying taxes there and observing the other economic burdens, civic obligations, and legal formalities of residency, that would support a finding of bona fide residency.

Judge Hardiman applied these criteria to the Ventos and decided the following: the Ventos' purchase and costly renovation of their Estate Frydendahl home shows that, by the end of 2001, they planned to remain on St. Thomas “at least for a substantial period.” Richard Vento's establishment of business interests in the U.S. Virgin Islands supported his claim of bona fide residency. At the end of 2001, the Ventos' social ties to the U.S. Virgin Islands were limited, but the judge explained that community social relationships are not the only type of relationships that factor into the residency determination. Professional, marital, and family relationships matter as well. In those areas, he said, the Ventos had a stronger case. Richard developed professional relationships by having discussions with the University of the Virgin Islands in order to collaborate on developing a physics department. The Ventos spent a significant amount of time with each other on St. Thomas, where they lived together at their home. The Ventos' professional and family relationships, Judge Hardiman determined, did not undermine their claim of bona fide residency.

The Court of Appeals also said that the Ventos self-identified as residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands at the end of 2001 and observed all the legal formalities of residency. Richard and Lana attempted to pay their 2001 income taxes to the VIBIR. They also obtained U.S. Virgin Islands driver's licenses and registered to vote there. As such, this weighs in favor of finding bona fide residency. Taken as a whole, the judge wrote, the Sochurek factors indicated that the Ventos were bona fide residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Although the District Court erred in holding that Richard and Lana Vento were not bona fide residents of the Territory as of December 31, 2001, the Third Circuit did agree that none of the Vento daughters were bona fide resident at that time.

Applying the Sochurek factors to Nicole, it is clear that she did not intend to become a U.S. Virgin Islands resident by the end of 2001. Nicole did not have a sufficient physical presence in the Territory. Gail was not a bona fide resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands at the end of 2001, as she did not intend to become a resident of the Territory by that time. Gail herself testified that she moved to the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2002. Renee was not a bona fide resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands at the end of 2001, in that she visited only three times that year.

The Third Circuit reversed the District Court's judgment with respect to Richard and Lana Vento and held that they were bona fide residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands on December 31, 2001, but affirmed the judgment that Nicole Mollison, Gail Vento, and Renee Vento, the Vento daughters, were not bona fide residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands on December 31, 2001.

If you have specific questions about the VIBIR, this new Third Circuit decision, Vento v. Director of Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue and how it may affects your company or your tax status contact the attorneys in the Corporate, Tax and Estate Planning Practice Group at BoltNagi PC. BoltNagi PC has skilled attorneys with years of experience and success assisting companies in relocating to the U.S. Virgin Islands to take advantage of its various tax abatement programs. Please contact BoltNagi PC today.

Staying Discovery Pending a Dispositive Motion to Dismiss

A. Jennings Stone, III — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:26:25 -0400

Although discovery is part and parcel of litigation, it is universally regarded as expensive and burdensome, and (sometimes) ripe for sharp practices. One area where the legitimate fact-finding purpose of discovery runs up against the hardship of discovery is where a court orders discovery to proceed while a motion to dismiss that would, if granted, resolve the matter, remains pending.

In some instances, when a defendant files a motion that will dispose of the case early in the litigation, the parties may informally agree to stay discovery until the judge rules on the motion. If the plaintiff wants to go ahead with discovery despite the undecided dispositive motion, a defendant may move to stay discovery.

There is no uniform standard for determining whether and under what circumstances discovery should be stayed in light of a potentially dispositive motion to dismiss. To the extent that a standard exists in the Virgin Islands, it appears to be that a stay is disfavored, but may be overcome with a “strong showing” of good cause. Weeks v. Leeward Islands Apothecaries, LLC, 1:09-CV-50, 2010 WL 2160281 (D.V.I. May 26, 2010). In practice, however, courts appear to “know it when they see it”—that is, they grant stays according to the circumstances of the case.

The discovery process is a necessary element of the litigation process and in many cases helps to facilitate a settlement. However, its effectiveness comes with a cost. Despite the flexibility of the “strong showing” approach, it would be better if there were a uniform standard whereby discovery can be stayed to conserve resources if resolution of the motion to dismiss will eliminate or significantly reduce the need for discovery.

The discovery process can be costly, time-consuming, and burdensome; the rules are complex to those unfamiliar with pre-trial procedure. However, it is a necessary element of the litigation process and in many cases helps to facilitate settlement.

BoltNagi PC has seasoned trial attorneys in its Litigation Practice Group with years of litigation success. If you find yourself or your business facing litigation contact BoltNagi PC today.

Getting to the Court On Time!

Ravi S. Nagi — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:12:59 -0400

The statute of limitations is the deadline for filing a lawsuit. Federal law or the laws of a state or territory establish the amount of time an individual has to commence their lawsuit by filing their complaint. If a party fails to file within the timeframe, in all but the rarest of instances, they will be barred from moving forward with their case, and it will be dismissed.

The amount of time that a person has to file suit also varies based upon the type of action. For example, the laws in the U.S. Virgin Islands provide that an action for breach of contract in a sale has to be initiated within four years after the cause of action has accrued (The statute states that the parties to the original agreement are permitted to reduce the period of limitation to not less than one year, but they can't extend it.)

Accrual is from when the breach occurs, even if the aggrieved party's did not know of it at that time. In a claim against a health care provider for the professional services or health care they provided or should have provided—whether in contract or tort—must be filed within two years from the date of the alleged act, omission or neglect.

The statute of limitations can be suspended or “tolled.” That is, the clock that's running to the filing deadline is paused until the judge starts it again. Tolling can occur when a defendant is out of the jurisdiction, in prison, or incapacitated. The tolling of the statute of limitations can be a tricky thing to figure out. Just as knowing when the statute of limitations runs out on somone's claim is not a simple task.

You should seek the advice and assistance of an experienced litigation attorney for calculating when the statute of limitations on potential claim will run out. The attorneys in the Litigation Practice Group at BoltNagi PC have the experience and resources to assist you. If you are faced with the prospect of litigation please don't hesitate contact us today to discuss the case.

Liability Dangers of Sole Proprietorships & General Partnerships

Tom Bolt — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:05:53 -0400

As a small business owner, you have several different ways to form your business in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The type of business entity that you select will hinge on numerous factors and conditions. It is always best to seek the counsel of a corporate attorney who is familiar with business formation,such as those in the Corporate, Tax and Estate Planning Practice Group at BoltNagi PC.

Taxes and liability are typically the two biggest factors to look at when making the business formation decision. Of the four major types of entities—sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies, and corporations—each has varying degrees of these two issues. Additional considerations to think about are start-up costs, the number of business owners, record-keeping, and reporting requirements. Each has its own benefits, and we will look at the most popular forms of business organizations.

The easiest business to create is a sole proprietorship. Not only is it the easiest, but it is the least expensive. Generally there is no requirement to register this business with the Corporate and Trade Name Division of the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. From a tax standpoint, you must remember that the sole proprietorship and the owner are deemed to be one entity. As a result, there really are no tax advantages to this type of business. Also, the owner has complete personal liability for any claims that arise in the business. That means that a sole proprietor is the company, and so are their personal assets and property (i.e., the owner's bank account, boat, and car!).

Instead of a sole proprietor, an individual can limit their liability by transforming the sole proprietorship into a limited liability company (LLC), the newest business entity in the Territory. Just as the name says, an LLC offers limited liability to the owners. Also, if the LLC owes money to a creditor, the owner of the LLC would generally have at risk only the money they invested in the business. Their personal assets would not be touched.

Partnerships have one or more people who agree to split the profits and losses of their business. General partnerships and limited partnerships are the two kinds of partnership provided by the Virgin Islands Code. A general partnership dictates that the partners manage the company as a group and agree to be liable for the partnership debts. In a general partnership, all of the owners have equal amounts of investment, liability, risk, and control, including personal liability and assets. It is also important to note that the partnership is liable for the conduct of each of the partners. So if a partner decides to embezzles, all of the partners are on the hook for the crime. Similar to a sole proprietorship, a general partnership's owners have unlimited liability.

A limited partnership is somewhat different. In this situation, there are investors who provide the investment capital. These investors have little control or management of the company. The limited partners are liable for the partnership's debts only for as much the money they contributed to the partnership. Talk to one of our corporate attorneys at BoltNagi, as specific U.S. Virgin Islands laws may vary from state laws on the U.S. mainland. Currently, the Territory allows limited liability partnerships, as well as limited liability limited partnerships.

A corporation has shareholders or investors and is usually a larger organization with at least a half dozen or more employees. With a corporation the business liability is broken off from personal liability. Legally speaking, a corporation is a "person," with required functions, reporting, and responsibilities. Business debts are the corporation's, not the investors' or the members'. There are two types of corporations—the S-Corporation and the C-Corporation.

A C Corporation is very common in the U.S. This corporation has a particular organizational structure with shareholders, directors, and officers. If a corporation has $10 million in assets and 500 shareholders, it is required to register with the Securities Exchange Commission.

The S corporation is one that is created to pass the corporate income, losses, deductions, and credit through to its shareholders for federal tax purposes.

These various corporate entities can get quite complicated rather quickly, so you should definitely speak with an experienced corporate attorney at BoltNagi PC to make sure that you have the best fit for your business.

BoltNagi PC is a full service business law firm based in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands with practice groups in Corporate, Tax & Estate Planning, Real Estate & Financial Services, Government Relations, Labor & Employment, Civil Litigation, Creditor Rights, Family Law & Children's Issues, and International Law and Immigration.

Changes Proposed for The Family and Medical Leave Act to Affect Veterans

Ravi S. Nagi — Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:00:00 -0400

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) allows eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons. Employees that are eligible under the Act can take up to 12 workweeks of FMLA leave in a 12-month period for the birth, adoption or placement of a child, to care for a family member with a serious health condition, or because they are unable to work due to their own serious health condition.

The FMLA was changed in 2008 to also give similar benefits to eligible employees who are the spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin of a servicemember in the National Guard, Reserves, or Regular Armed Forces with a serious injury or illness that happened in the line of duty. These individuals are permitted to take up to 26 workweeks of FMLA leave during a single 12-month period to care for the family member, known as "military caregiver leave." In addition, the amendments added a special military family leave entitlement to allow eligible employees whose spouse, child, or parent is called up for active duty in the National Guard or Reserves to take up to 12 workweeks of FMLA leave for “qualifying exigencies” related to the call-up of their family member ("qualifying exigency leave").

Recent Changes Amendments to the FMLA

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 amendments broadened the FMLA’s military caregiver leave and qualifying exigency leave provisions. This legislation extended military caregiver leave to eligible employees whose family members are recent veterans with serious injuries or illnesses. Notably, the 2010 amendments redefined the definition of a serious injury or illness to include serious injuries or illnesses that result from preexisting conditions. These amendments also expanded qualifying exigency leave to eligible employees with family members serving in the Regular Armed Forces. A requirement was added that for all qualifying exigency leave, the military member must be deployed to a foreign country.

Major Provisions of the FMLA Statutory Amendments NPRM

The major provisions of the NPRM include:

The extension of military caregiver leave to eligible family members of recent veterans with a serious injury or illness incurred in the line of duty;
A flexible, three-part definition for serious injury or illness of a veteran;
The extension of military caregiver leave to cover serious injuries or illnesses for both current servicemembers and veterans that result from the aggravation during military service of a preexisting condition;
The extension of qualifying exigency leave to eligible employees with covered family members serving in the Regular Armed Forces; and
Inclusion of a foreign deployment requirement for qualifying exigency leave for the deployment of all servicemembers (National Guard, Reserves, Regular Armed Forces).

To review the proposed rule and submit comments, visit the federal e-rulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov and search by regulation identification number 1235-AA03.

If you have specific questions about the FMLA and how it affects your business, contact Ravinder S. Nagi, Chair of the Labor & Employment Practice Group at BoltNagi PC [Telephone (340) 774-2944/Email rnagi@vilaw.com]. BoltNagi PC is one of the largest firms in the United States Virgin Islands, and has skilled attorneys with years of experience and success with labor and employment as well as full array of business legal concerns.

The H-1B Season is Off and Running April 1st

Laura C. Nagi — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:09:25 -0400

April 1st was the first day employers in the United States are permitted to submit H-1B visa applications to the federal government for fiscal year 2014. These visas cover October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.

Employers annually compete for a limited number of the available H-1B visas. The cap (the numberof H-1B petitions allowed) for fiscal year 2014 is 65,000. In addition, the first 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of individuals with U.S. master’s degree or higher are exempt from the fiscal year cap of 65,000.

The visas are processed on a first-come, first-served basis, so timing is crucial. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) states that cases will be considered accepted on the date that USCIS receives a properly filed petition for which the correct fee has been submitted and not the date that the petition is postmarked.

In 2012 the visa cap ran out in about 10 weeks, however, this year USCIS anticipates that it may receive more than 65,000 cap-subject H-1B petitions and more than 20,000 petitions filed for individuals with a U.S. master’s degree or higher in the first five days. The agency stated that data indicates this could be the first time since April 2008 that the H-1B cap will require a lottery.

You need to file right now!

To make sure you file correctly the first time, you should seek the assistance of an experienced immigration attorney. The law firm of BoltNagi PC has worked with many immigration issues, and as one of the largest firms in the United States Virgin Islands, has the experience and resources to assist you. Please contact Laura Nagi or Ashley Dworksy in the BoltNagi PC International Practice Group today.

FMLA Expands the Definition of "Son" or "Daughter"

Ravi S. Nagi — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 04:38:05 -0400

There is new information on the definition of “son or daughter” as it applies to an employee that wants to take leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) to care for a child with a disability who is 18 years of age or older.

The definition of “son or daughter” under § 101(12) of the FMLA has be updated so that the age of a son or daughter at the start of a disability is irrelevant in deciding a parent’s entitlement to FMLA leave. The FMLA permits qualifying employees to use up to 12 workweeks of unpaid, job-protected leave during a 12-month period to care for a son or daughter with a serious health condition.

The FMLA defines a “son or daughter” as a “biological, adopted, or foster child, a stepchild, a legal ward, or a child of a person standing in the place of the parents, who is: (i) under 18 years of age; or (ii) 18 years of age or older and incapable of self-care due to a mental or physical disability.

The FMLA does not require that a biological or legal relationship exist between the employee and the child: the definition of “son or daughter” includes a child of a person who has the day-to-day responsibilities to care for or financially support a child.

Disability
The FMLA regulations have adopted the Americans with Disabilities Act's (ADA) definition of “disability,” which is as "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity (as interpreted by the EEOC) to define “physical or mental disability.”

Self-care
The FMLA regulations define “incapable of self-care because of mental or physical disability” as when an adult son or daughter “requires active assistance or supervision to provide daily self-care in three or more of the ‘activities of daily living’ (ADLs) or ‘instrumental activities of daily living’ (IADLs).” Activities of daily living include grooming and hygiene, bathing, dressing, and eating, among others. Instrumental activities of daily living are things like cooking, cleaning, shopping, taking public transportation, paying bills, maintaining a residence, using telephones, and using the post office.

Based on these definitions and conditions, a parent can take FMLA leave to care for a son or daughter who is 18 or older, if the adult son or daughter:

(1) has a disability as defined by the ADA;
(2) is incapable of self-care due to that disability;
(3) has a serious health condition; and
(4) is in need of care due to the serious health condition

An eligible employee is entitled to FMLA-protected leave to care for their adult son or daughter only when all four requirements are met.

Questions relative to the FMLA, the ADA, or another issue at your business? The Labor and Employment Practice Group of BoltNagi PC has years of experience and success with Virgin Islands labor and employment issues. Please don't hesitate to contact Ravinder S. Nagi, Chair of the BoltNagi PC Labor and Employment Practice Group today.

Virgin Islands Young Lawyer Elected to National Bar Office

Steven K. Hardy — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:47:47 -0400

BoltNagi Associate Steven K. Hardy was recently elected as the District 10 Representative to the American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division Executive Council at the quarterly meeting of the Virgin Islands Bar (VIBA). Hardy currently serves as Chair of VIBA's Bar Journal Committee, Co-Chair of VIBA's Young Lawyer Committee and as VIBA Delegate to the ABA YLD Assembly.

In response to his election, Hardy expressed his appreciation to the young lawyers that had supported him and stated that he looked forward to bringing the benefits of the ABA to the newest members of the bar.

BoltNagi Managing Attorney Tom Bolt, who has served in the ABA House of Delegates for many years, said, "The Firm encourages our lawyers to be active participants in bar assocation and civic endeavors. We are quite proud of Steve and his continued involvement in the Young Lawyers Division."

As District 10 Representative, Attorney Hardy will represent both the young lawyers from the U.S. Virgin Islands and South Carolina for a two year term on the ABA YLD Executive Council.

BoltNagi is a business law firm based in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands with practice concentrations in Civil Litigation, Insurance Defense, Creditor Rights, Corporate, Tax, Estate Planning, Family Law and Immigration, Real Estate, Financial Services and Government Relations.

CFPB Seeks Oversight of Nonbank Student Loan Servicers

Tom Bolt — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:20:07 -0400

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently proposed a rule that would allow the agency to manage the oversight of nonbank student loan servicers. This growing market affects tens of millions of consumers and has experienced an increase in borrower delinquency in recent years.

“The student loan market has grown rapidly in the last decade, and servicers are now facing the stress of an increasing number of delinquent borrowers,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Our rule would bring new oversight to the student loan market and help ensure that tens of millions of borrowers are not treated unfairly by their servicers.”

At the present, the CFPB currently oversees student loan servicing at the country's larger banks. The proposed rule would broaden that control to other nonbanks that work with student loans. This new rule seeks to define specific nonbank student loan servicers as “larger participants.” If approved, the rule would allow the Bureau to oversee these organizations' activity for compliance with federal consumer financial laws.

The CFPB would be tasked with ensuring that both banks and nonbanks follow the same rules in the student loan servicing market, where most of the student loan servicing is done by nonbank servicers. According to the language of the rule, any nonbank student loan servicer that handles more than one million borrower accounts would fall under the authority and oversight of the CFPB. If that comes to pass, the CFPB would have the authority to supervise the seven largest student loan servicers. In total, the seven companies service the loans of approximately 49 million borrower accounts—the lion's share of the student loan servicing market. The proposed rule would cover both federal and private student loans.

This would be the third market in which the CFPB has defined larger participants. The first two were consumer reporting and debt collection. Student loan servicers collect payments from borrowers for the loan holders, and process those payments, as well as providing statements and other customer service. The agency says that many servicers do a satisfactory job, but some borrowers have experienced a difficult time determining how much they owe; transfers to multiple departments and reaching personnel who are not responsive or empowered to provide clear answers; and having their paperwork lost and errors not always getting fixed.

CFPB supervision would allow the agency to evaluate the extent and scope of borrower issues by direct examination of these larger student loan servicers. The Bureau would review the servicers’ activities to evaluate the potential risks posed to consumers and to assess compliance with federal consumer financial law.

Facing Foreclosure? A Deed in Lieu May Offer Solution

Tom Bolt — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 13:32:46 -0400

Are you trying to avoid foreclosure? Are you unable to maintan your home as you don't qualify for a modification? Are you unable to sell you home?

A deed in lieu of foreclosure may offer you the solution. A deed in lieu of foreclosure or "DIL" is a way that a mortgagor (you the borrower) can voluntarily deed the property as collateral in exchange for a release from all of your mortgage's obligations. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and many others lenders have strict qualifications and pre-requisites, so you want to make sure that a DIL applies to your situation.

Generally speaking, this may be a mortgagor option if you:

Are unable to make the monthly mortgage payments;
Do not qualify for any other HUD Loss Mitigation option;
Are not attempting to default on the mortgage to qualify for this option;
Are more than 31 days delinquent when the DIL Special Warranty Deed is executed;
Do not own any other FHA-insured mortgage or mortgage held by HUD;
Can show evidence of reduced income or increased living expense;
Can show evidence which verifies you need to vacate the property;
Can show evidence that utilities, taxes, and HOA dues are paid;

The Deed in Lieu Foreclosure Agreement

If all of the requirements are satisfied, the mortgagee will develop a written Deed-in-Lieu of Foreclosure Agreement. This contract will be signed by both the mortgagor and mortgagee and have all of the terms by which the deed will be accepted. The main points of the agreement are customarily:

The transfer date of property to mortgagee;
A notice to the mortgagor of possible tax consequences by using the DIL option;
The mortgagor will not be liable for deficiency judgments if they comply with the requirements of the agreement;
The mortgagor's statement of the general physical condition of the property when conveyed;
The mortgagor will convey property vacant and free of personal property unless there is a HUD-approved exception; and
The specific dollar amount that is agreed to (the agreement's consideration).

The mortgagee is allowed to pay up to $2,000 in compensation to the borrower. This doesn't happen until you vacate the property. With exceptions, the DIL must be completed or foreclosure initiated within six months of the date of default. However, if the DIL follows an unsuccessful special forbearance agreement or the pre-foreclosure sale program, then the DIL has to be completed or foreclosure initiated within 90 days of the failure. Also, with some exceptions, the property must be owner-occupied; it can't be a “walk-away” or investment property and not purchased as a rental investment or used as a rental for more than 12 months.

Fannie Mae and many financial institutions have these programs as well. Make sure that a DIL applies to your situation. The attorneys at BoltNagi's Real Estate and Financial Services Practice Group have considerable experience and resources to assist you with your mortgage situation and answer your questions about a DIL. Please don't hesitate to contact BoltNagi PC today (Telephone 340-774-2944).

Effective Planning for the Newly Divorced

Tom Bolt — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:05:11 -0400

If you are newly divorced, you’re probably overwhelmed with all of the changes going on in your life.You should seriously consider stepping back, taking a deep breath and began developing a plan to secure your future. One of the basic steps in moving forward after this major event in your life is updating your estate plan.

Here are five steps you can take right now to make sure your new life is on the right track:

Update your will and trust: You must change the beneficiary on your will and trust documents if you don’t want your ex-spouse receiving your assets. You should also remove your former spouse from serving as executor of your will or as the trustee of your children’s inheritance;
Update your life insurance and retirement beneficiaries: You must name new beneficiaries on your life insurance and retirement accounts, including your IRA, so that your ex-spouse doesn’t inherit your assets;
Check your credit report: During a divorce, especially a contentious one, bills are often left unpaid. As a result, your credit score may take a hit. Sometimes the credit agencies make mistakes, especially if you’ve changed your last name or address. Go to www.annualcreditreport.com to review your credit score soon after your divorce. You are entitled to one free credit report a year from each of the three major credit agencies; and
Draft or update your power of attorney: You should appoint someone to make both health care and financial decisions for you if you can't due to illness or injury. If you previously had a power of attorney, update it to remove your former spouse.

Taking these steps will bring your estate plan up to date and protect both you and your assets as you begin your new life. If you need legal counsel, we invite you to contact the attorneys at BoltNagi PC's Corporate, Tax and Estate Planning Practice Group to get you on track.

CFPB to Crack Down on Disrcriminatory Car Loans

Tom Bolt — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:41:23 -0400

Auto loans are the third largest source of outstanding household debt after mortgages and student loans. Those loans should be administered fairly without discriminatory practices.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently gave notice to lenders that offer auto loans through dealerships that they are responsible for any unlawful or discriminatory pricing. The CFPB reported that discriminatory markups in auto lending may result in tens of millions of dollars in consumer harm each year.

When consumers finance automobile purchases from an auto dealership, the dealer often coordinates the indirect financing of a loan through a third party lender. In this position, the dealer is given an interest rate that the lender will accept for a given consumer; however, the indirect auto lenders frequently permit the dealer to charge the consumer an interest rate that is higher and thus more costly than the rate provided by the lender. Typically this practice is called the “dealer markup,” and the lender kicks back to the dealer some of the money from the increased interest rate.

As one would expect. these markups create a compensation opportunity for dealers and allows them the discretion to charge consumers different rates regardless of consumer creditworthiness. Lender policies that provide dealers with this type of discretion increase the risk of pricing disparities among consumers based on race, national origin, and potentially other prohibited classifications. The CFPB says that research shows that markup practices may lead to African Americans and Hispanics being charged higher markups than white consumers in similar situations.

“Consumers should not have to pay more for a car loan simply based on their race,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Today’s bulletin clarifies our authority to pursue auto lenders whose policies harm consumers through unlawful discrimination.”

The CFPB's announcement explained how the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) applies to indirect auto lending. Under the ECOA, it is illegal for a creditor to discriminate in any aspect of a credit transaction on prohibited bases including race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, and age. To ensure that such practices are stopped the CFPB will oversee and encourage indirect lenders to: (i) impose controls on dealer markup and markup policies; (ii) monitor and address the effects of markup policies as part of a robust fair lending compliance program; and (iii) eliminate dealers' discretion to markup consumer interest rates.

Keeing the VI Bureau of Internal Revenue at Bay on Audits

Tom Bolt — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 09:52:01 -0400

There is no guarantee that you will not be audited by the Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), but there are four (4) simple steps that you can take to minimize your chances of being audited and, if you are audited, to minimize your chances of having to pay additional taxes, penalties and interest.

The first rule of keeping the BIR auditors at bay is to maintain good records. Many audits are by correspondence and if you quickly produce records to substantiate your deductions, you most probably will not be transferred to a live audit;
File all documents personally with the BIR in order to get a date stamped copy of the original filing. If you are not in the Territory, then identify someone that can submit the filing and obtain an date staemped copy for you. BoltNagi routinely does this for its tax clients;
Secondly, keep and report all Form 1099's provided in your tax return, whether for income or for deductions, e.g. mortgage interest; and
Finally maintain all buisness and personal records and transactions separately. Mixing your peronal finances with your business inceme and expense is the quickest way to lose an audit challenge.

The attorneys in the Corporate, Tax and Estate Planning Practice Group welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss your tax concerns. Tom Bolt can be reached at (340) 774-2944. BoltNagi PC is a full service business law firm.

BoltNagi Attorney Attends ABA Bar Leadership Institute

Nycole A. Thompson — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 18:02:00 -0400

BoltNagi Senior Associate and Virgin Islands Bar Association (VIBA) President-Elect Nycole A. Thompson attended this year's ABA Bar Leadership Institute (BLI) in Chicago, March 13-15, 2013. Sponsored by the ABA Standing Committee on Bar Activities and Services and the Division for Bar Services, the ABA Bar Leadership Institute is the premier program for bar association leaders. The program features a variety of substantive courses in bar leadership and management and attracts Presidents, President-elects and Executive Directors of bar associations large and small from throughout the country.

As 2014 President of the Virgin Islands Bar Association, Thompson will oversee many of the Bar's operations, programs and events and represent the Bar in public, with the judiciary, and in bar governance issues. As President-Elect, Attorney Thompson is pleased to be working alongside a talented and dedicated team of board members, officers, committee leaders and staff in bringing events, programs and activities for the benefit of members and the Virgin Islands community.