Federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the Securities and Exchange Commission brought the case Thursday against Matthew C. Devlin, who authorities said enabled clients and friends to make millions of dollars while he was rewarded with gifts including cash, a Cartier watch, a widescreen television and tuition at a Porsche driving school.

"By providing inside information, Devlin curried favor with his friends and business associates and received in return cash, luxury items and other benefits," the SEC said in court papers.

The SEC said those who received tips so treasured the information Devlin took from his wife that they began referring to him and his wife as the "golden goose." Devlin, 35, of Manhattan, also referred to his wife as the "golden goose," the SEC said.

A second ex-Lehman Brothers broker, Frederick Bowers, 40, of Manhattan, was charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy.

Marc Agnifilo, a lawyer for Bowers, said his client had "a highly minimal role in the alleged insider trading and we're going to fight the case in court and put the government to its proof." He said Bowers had never been in trouble before.

The SEC said Devlin took secrets from March 2004 through last July about more than a dozen pending mergers and acquisitions from his wife, Nina, a partner at Brunswick Group LLC, an international public relations firm.

Attorney Jim Benjamin, who represents Nina Devlin, said her husband obtained the information without her knowledge by being close to her and monitoring her travel schedule.

In a statement, Brunswick Group called the insider trading scheme a "violation of trust between husband and wife." It said there was no indication Matthew Devlin accessed Brunswick's confidential systems.

"We believe she was unaware of her husband's activities and is devastated by these events," the company said, noting that Nina Devlin has not been charged "or implicated in any way."

Brunswick is an international firm that employs more than 400 people, including more than 75 partners, as it advises major companies about financial and corporate communications and opinion research. It has 15 offices in 11 countries.

Investors who lost their fortunes in Madoff's alleged Ponzi scheme will end up paying far less in taxes and may even be eligible for refunds, according to accounting experts.

By some estimates, the Internal Revenue Service could be out as much as $17 billion in lost tax revenue.

"This is one more thing federal, state and local officials will have to deal with," said John Berrie, a tax partner at the law firm Bryan Cave in New York City. "It's another heavy box on their back."

In addition, investors may be counting on a federally mandated insurance fund to bail them out, but that program lacks the money to pay for all the claims that are likely to come.

The timing couldn't be worse. Unemployment has surged, meaning fewer workers are paying payroll taxes. And housing prices have dropped, reducing property taxes.

The recession so far has cost the federal government $200 billion in tax revenues for the 12 months that ended in November, according to estimates by Moody's Economy.com.

The Madoff case, which reportedly involves $50 billion, adds another layer to the fiscal crisis gripping the nation.

In New York, for instance, where thousands of workers have lost jobs on Wall Street and big-name investment firms have tallied massive losses, State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli has estimated tax revenues will be down at least $3.5 billion by March 2010.

In wealthy enclaves nationwide, Madoff's investors are desperately seeking ways to get some of their money back. Some refunds might come from the Securities Investor Protection Corp., an industry-funded organization set up by the government to protect investors from fraud. Investors who qualify could get as much as $500,000 from the SIPC.

But that will not replace the millions of dollars than many lost, and such payments, if they come, will not happen fast. SIPC officials this week said the books of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC are in complete disarray. It could take six months or more to untangle them.

In addition, there are concerns that SIPC does not have enough money to pay out claims. It currently has $1.6 billion to make payouts, though the agency can tap a $1 billion line of credit and a $1 billion injection from the Treasury Department to get more money.

That's why some investors are considering the option of reporting "theft losses" under the IRS rules. Taxpayers who are defrauded by investment advisers or brokers can claim a deduction, as well as offset tax liabilities from the past.

Under the rules, an investor who lost $20 million with Madoff and whose adjusted gross income was $10 million can claim a theft loss of about $19 million.

To calculate the theft loss, investors must reduce the amount of the loss by 10 percent of their adjusted gross income plus $100, according to Robert Willens, an expert on tax and accounting issues for Wall Street clients.

Munich-based Siemens would not comment on the report.

"We're hoping on an agreement with the SEC before Christmas," a Siemens supervisory board member told the newspaper, referring to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. "If necessary, we'll meet December 23rd."

Siemens is subject to fines in the U.S. because it's also listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Siemens, which makes everything from trains to light bulbs, was first rocked by claims of corruption in 2006. Evidence began to surface in 2007 and the company has since acknowledged dubious payments to secure business around the world of up to euro1.3 billion ($1.7 billion).

In November, Siemens said it had set aside approximately euro1 billion to be booked in the last quarter of its 2008 fiscal year for any settlements related to the case. The company's fiscal year ended in September.

Siemens has said including the provision last fiscal year, the total cost of the corruption scandal is about euro2.5 billion to date.

The Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve have been in discussions over the weekend to devise a strategy to stabilize the company, according to people familiar with the talks. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were ongoing.

One option being considered is taking some of the risky assets held by Citigroup off its balance sheet, a move that would give the company more breathing room and put it in a better position to raise capital. It was unclear, however, exactly how that option might be structured, the people said. Another option would be for the government to make another cash injection into the company.

A spokesman for New York-based Citigroup declined comment.

The company has seen its shares lose 60 percent of their value in the past week, reflecting a crisis of confidence among skittish investors. They are worried all the risky debt on Citigroup's balance sheet will turn into losses as the economy worsens and the markets stay turbulent — losses that could be nearly impossible to reverse.

Citigroup is such a large, interconnected player in the financial system that if it were to collapse it would wreak havoc on already fragile financial and economic conditions. The company has operations stretching around the globe in more than 100 countries.

Analysts consider Citigroup the most vulnerable among the major U.S. banks — especially after it failed to nab Wachovia Corp., which was bought instead by Wells Fargo & Co. That was a missed opportunity for Citi to gets its hands on much-needed U.S. deposits that would bolster its cash position.

Quan-Sheng Shu, 68, pleaded guilty to two counts of violating the federal Arms Control Act and one count of bribery at a hearing in U.S. District Court in Norfolk.

Shu is president of AMAC International Inc. of Newport News. He is a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in Shanghai.

Prosecutors said Shu, an expert in cryogenics, sold technology to China for the development of hydrogen-propelled rockets.

The Chinese government is developing a space launch facility in the southern island province of Hainan that will house liquid-propelled launch vehicles designed to send space stations and satellites into orbit.

Shu also was charged with bribing Chinese officials to award a $4 million hydrogen liquefier contract to a French company acting as an AMAC intermediary.

Shu received more than $386,000 in commissions for securing the contract, authorities said. He already had agreed to forfeit that money. His company also has offices in Beijing.

The scientist and his wife refused to comment as they left the courtroom. As part of the plea agreement, prosecutors agreed not to prosecute his wife for the role she allegedly played in the scheme.

Shu faces up to 10 years on each arms count and five years for the bribery charge and fines of up to $2.5 million. Sentencing is scheduled for April 6.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Alan M. Salsbury said Shu's conviction was the result of an ongoing FBI investigation, but he declined further comment after the hearing.

Federal authorities in recent years have prosecuted more than a dozen cases of either traditional spying or economic espionage related to China. U.S. officials have warned in the last year of increasing espionage efforts by Beijing.

A Harrison County jury awarded the damages to residents last year, after finding the chemical giant downplayed and lied about health threats at a former zinc smelting plant in Spelter.

The high court accepted DuPont's appeal of the verdicts, and of the circuit judge's order holding it liable for the conduct of the site's previous owner.

They've been combined with an appeal from the plaintiffs, who want more people compensated for private property cleanups.

The consolidated argument hearing has not been set.

Justice Robin Davis voted to refuse each of the appeals.

Gov. Joe Manchin had urged the justices to accept the case, citing its $196 million punitive damage award.

In a precedent-setting move, a divided Federal Communications Commission last month determined that the company is violating a federal policy that guarantees unfettered access to the Internet.

Comcast challenged the FCC decision Thursday in the U.S. District Court of Appeals in Washington.

Comcast executive vice president David L. Cohen said in a statement that the company is seeking "review and reversal" of the FCC order and that the commission's action was "legally inappropriate and its findings were not justified by the record."

The Comcast case arose from complaints by users of a type of "file-sharing" software often used to download large data files, usually video.

Tests by The Associated Press and others found that file-sharing transmissions were aborting prematurely. It was later discovered that the company was cutting off transfers without informing customers.