Jack Townsend offers this blog on Federal Tax Crimes principally for tax professionals and tax students. It is not directed to lay readers -- such as persons who are potentially subject to U.S. civil and criminal tax or related consequences. LAY READERS SHOULD READ THE PAGE IN THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN TITLE "INTENDED AUDIENCE FOR BLOG; CAUTIONARY NOTE TO LAY READERS." Thank you.
Pages
▼
Friday, May 1, 2009
Townsend Publication on Tax Obstruction
The Tax Prof Blog here reports that an appendix to my article, John A. Townsend, Tax Obstruction Crimes: Is Making the IRS's Job Harder Enough? (article to be published later by the Houston Business and Tax Journal), has been put online here. The article addresses the Government's expansive claim as to the two principal tax obstruction crimes -- 26 U.S.C. (IRC) § 7212(a) and the Klein / defraud conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371. The Government claim is that even legal actions undertaken to impair or impede the IRS may be prosecuted under these provisions. Sometimes, although often not in outcome determinative context, courts rotely say that also. In the article (to be published), I address the Government's claim in the context of audit avoidance, a common feature of tax practice. The article argues that something more than mere legal action to impair or impede or influence an audit is required for the obstruction crimes. There must be a false component of the action in order to sustain a prosecution. The Supreme Court so held in the defraud conspiracy context in Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182 (1924), but the Government continues to attempt to end-run that holding. It is that end-run that is the focus of the article. As noted, the article is not yet published (indeed, I am making my final changes after receiving back the edited draft as we speak). I will post here later when the article is published.
2 comments:
Comments are moderated. Jack Townsend will review and approve comments only to make sure the comments are appropriate. Although comments can be made anonymously, please identify yourself (either by real name or pseudonymn) so that, over a few comments, readers will be able to better judge whether to read the comments and respond to the comments.
Does this mean that so-called egg shell audits can be criminalized as obstruction?
ReplyDeletePerhaps a picky point, the audits cannot be criminalized. The taxpayers' and practictioners' actions in audits can be criminalized by their intentional obstructive behavior to impair or impede the audits. Now, the thesis of my article to which this publication relates is that otherwise legal action even with an intent to impair or impede alone is not sufficient to make the action criminal. There must be some other element, captured best in the concept of the lie -- a lie told to the agent, a false document, etc.
ReplyDelete