Two Recent Tax Crimes Cases Involving Bitcoin (1/19/25)

In my immediately preceding post (2 days ago) on the indictment of Tom Goldstein, I mentioned that among the allegations were allegations that Goldstein had not properly reported his cryptocurrency transactions. I said that I would post some other recent items involving cryptocurrency. These recent items involve Bitcoin, perhaps the most prominent type of cryptocurrency. Goldstein’s indictment does not specify the type of cryptocurrency he allegedly used.

Ahlgren 

In United States v. Ahlgren ((W.D. TX No. 1:24-cr-00031) [CL has two docket sheets here and here with some documents available by checking both sheets], the defendant allegedly failed to report major income from Bitcoin transactions and allegedly certain other cryptocurrency including Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Etherium [Ethereum], and Litecoin. Ahlgren was indicted on seven counts of filing false tax returns and structuring deposits to evade currency transaction reporting requirements. Ahlgren was detained pending trial. (See Dkt. Entry 15 dated 4/9/2024 titled Order of Detention Pending Trial, here; Dkt Entry 22 dated 4/25/24 titled Government’s Advisory to the Court Regarding Detention Remand, here; and Dkt Entry 24 dated 4/22/24 and titled Order, here) Pretrial Detention is unusual in tax crimes cases.

Ahlgren thereafter pled guilty to one count of tax perjury, § 7206(1), and sentencing judgment was accordingly entered. (See Dkt Entry 45 dated 12/13/24 titled Judgment in A Criminal Case, here.) The count of conviction under the plea was a single count with a maximum three-year sentence. The Court sentenced Ahlgren to 24 months incarceration which would permit, with good time credit, a sentence served of less than 24 months. The Court imposed restitution of $1,095,031 which presumably is the unpaid criminal tax loss. Although restitution is not normally imposed in tax cases, it can be imposed if agreed in the plea agreement. This restitution is the amount that the IRS can assess without further ado under the restitution-based assessment (“RBA”) procedures. See §§ 6201(a)(4) & 6213(b)(5). The IRS may further audit Ahlgren's tax liabilities and assert more tax but will have to proceed under the deficiency procedures.

Further, shortly after sentencing, the Court entered a restraining order (See Dkt. Entry 50 dated 1/6/25 titled Restraining Order, here) requiring Ahlgren to

• “Identify all virtual and/or cryptocurrency accounts to include but not limited to Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Etherium [Ethereum], and Litecoin,”
• Precluding Ahlgren or any agent from transferring the interests,
• Requiring Ahlgren to “Identify and provide any and all physical devices used to store virtual or cryptocurrency public key(s), private  key(s), seed phrases or passphrases,”
• Requiring Ahlgren to “Provide any and all other devices or means of storage used for virtual or cryptocurrency private key(s) to include anything in writing.
• Requiring Ahlgren to “Provide any and all passwords or passphrases for any and all physical devices used to store virtual or cryptocurrency  public key(s), private key(s), seed phrases or passphrases.
• Requiring Ahlgren to “ deliver to the United States, the completed Financial Statement Form, together with required supplemental documents, within 30 days of this Order.”

Ver 

There is another Bitcoin case in process now (probably more that I do not know of). In United States v. Ver (C.D. CA. No. 2:24-cr-00103 CL docket sheet here.), the grand jury indicted Ver for tax crimes related to his Bitcoin trading / investing. The indictment (Dkt Entry 1 is here.) After investing in Bitcoin personally and through corporations, Ver expatriated, subjecting him to the expatriation exit tax with a deemed sale of assets. According to the indictment (¶¶ 22-25. Pp. 6-7), using a “clustering analysis,” the Government identified a quantity of Bitcoins belonging to Ver. (I make no attempt to explain how the clustering analysis works.)

Ver’s indictment charges Counts as follows:

• Counts 1-3 Mail Fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, ¶¶ 26 & 27, pp. 7-20,
• Counts 4 and 5 Tax Evasion, § 7201, ¶¶ 29-32, pp. 20-23.
• Counts 6-8 Tax Perjury, § 7206(1),   ¶¶ 33-38 pp. 23-26.

Ver, who remained out of the country, then through his lawyers (Steptoe lawyers) filed a motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 21), here. On January 13, 2025, the United States filed an Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 34, here) urging a threshold issue of Fugitive Disentitlement and, on the merits if reached, that the indictment should not be dismissed. Presumably, Ver will file a Reply, and later the Court will rule. Readers can follow the action on the Docket Sheet linked above. The pleadings on the Motion to Dismiss are very good, although I suspect that, as with most Motions to Dismiss tax indictments, Ver’s Motion will fail to achieve the relief he seeks.

The Government’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (p. 2) indicates that Ver is contesting extradition to the U.S. in the Mediterranean Island of Mallorca.