Hail! Hail! to Michigan!

The Michigan Wolverines football team hasn’t done very well this year, losing their first two games to Appalachian State and Oregon, both at home. There are probably a lot of angry Wolverines fans. While the University of Michigan struggles, the budget in Michigan is struggling, too. Indeed, it appears that the state legislature and the governor are leading Michigan to a government shutdown come October 1st.

Michigan faces a $1.8 billion deficit. Like most states, each year the budget must be balanced. The governor and the lower house are controlled by Democrats while the upper house is controlled by Republicans. Governor Jennifer Granholm wants to increase taxes by $1.5 billion and cut $300 million in services, while State Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop wants to increase taxes by $600 million, and cut services by about $1 billion. The two sides haven’t made much headway, and time is running out.

Needless to say, if you live in Michigan, you can expect your taxes will go up. I believe quite strongly that anyone thinking of starting a business in Michigan today might want to consider a neighboring state with a better business climate, lower taxes, and a better football team.

News Story: Detroit Free Press

Posted in Michigan | Comments Off on Hail! Hail! to Michigan!

Tennessee Crack Tax Ruled Unconstitutional

Lawmakers in Tennessee had an interesting idea a couple of years ago. Why not tax illegal drugs? So legislators in the Volunteer State required sellers of illegal drugs to get a tax stamp on their merchandise. If sellers were caught selling illegal drugs without the tax stamps, they would face tax charges (and probably charges relating to selling illegal drugs, too).

Of course, if you want to have such a tax, you must make sure that there’s a wall between revenue agents and the drug police (or the tax would likely be unconstitutional under the 5th Amendment). A lower court found that Tennessee’s tax violated that.

However, the Tennessee Court of Appeals ruled that the tax also violates the Tennessee Constitution, in that “…the statute is arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable and, therefore, invalid under the Tennessee Constitution, in that it seeks to tax as a privilege, activity that prior legislation has designated as criminal activity….”

Tennessee will appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court.

News Story: The Tennessean

Hat Tip: Tax Foundation

Posted in Tennessee | Tagged | Comments Off on Tennessee Crack Tax Ruled Unconstitutional

It’s Not Racial, It’s That Your Famous

Joe Kristan of Roth Tax Updates has an update on the Wesley Snipes case. For those of you who don’t remember, Wesley Snipes is accused of asking for a fraudulent refund of $12 million. Snipes used tax the argument that only foreign income is taxable (hint to anyone who wants to try that: don’t). The IRS wasn’t amused, and Snipes is now a Florida courtroom.

When we last reported on Snipes, he had accused the prosecutors of being “racially motivated.” The judge denied that motion, and stated:

“From a prosecutor’s point of view, especially in tax cases, the primary objective in deciding whom to prosecute is to achieve general deterrence. Here, Defendant Snipes is admittedly a well known movie star, and a person of apparent wealth, whose prosecution has already attracted considerable publicity. By contrast, the Defendant Eddie Ray Kahn does not appear to share Defendant Snipes’ notoriety. “Since the government lacks the means to investigate and prosecute every suspected violation of the tax laws, it makes good sense to prosecute those who will receive, or are likely to receive, the attention of the media.” United States v. Catlett, 584 F. 2d 864, 868 (8th Cir. 1978) (internal citations omitted); see also United States v. Hastings, 126 F.3d 310, 314 (4th Cir 1997) (no selective prosecution in case against prominent businessman and Republican party leader charged with failure to file income tax returns).”

Wesley Snipes was wrong. If you’re famous, and the IRS thinks that you’ve evaded taxes, you are much more likely to be prosecuted. It also helps (if you want to be prosecuted) when you persist with tax protester arguments after the IRS warns you to stop (which Wesley Snipes did).

So Mr. Snipes will soon go on trial. And if he (and his attorney) continue down this path, he will likely find himself at ClubFed.

Hat Tip: Roth Tax Updates

Posted in Tax Evasion | Tagged | Comments Off on It’s Not Racial, It’s That Your Famous

Your Name in Lights!

Last year, a law was passed by the California Legislature requiring past due taxpayers’ names to be posted on the Internet. Earlier this year, the Board of Equalization listed their biggest debtors. Next month, 250 lucky taxpayers may find their names on the Franchise Tax Board’s list.

According to this news report, the FTB is finally about to release their list. If you owe at least $185,000, your name may soon be in lights! The FTB is sending out one final request for payment to those lucky individuals giving them a chance to pay within the next 30 days. The largest amount owed to the FTB is $26 million.

When the list is published, I’ll let you know.

Posted in California | Comments Off on Your Name in Lights!

Into the Swamplands…Again

It happens every year. No, I’m not talking about school starting (here in Irvine, today is the first day of school), or the leaves changing colors. I’m talking about the corruption arrests in New Jersey.

Various elected officials in New Jersey are now finding themselves under arrest after the FBI set up a sham company in a corruption sting. Eleven individuals were arrested; these include the Mayor of Passaic, Samuel Rivera; Assemblyman Mims Hackett, Jr (who is also Mayor of Orange, NJ); and Assemblyman Alfred Steele, who doubles as the Passaic County Undersheriff. From published reports, it appears that all 11 who were arrested are Democrats.

The defendants are accused of asking for bribes of between $1500 and $17,500. The probe stemmed from last year’s corruption scandal in the Pleasantville, NJ school district.

Business as usual continues in New Jersey…

News Stories: New York Times, NorthJersey.com

Posted in New Jersey | Comments Off on Into the Swamplands…Again

Skin Deep Fraud

I was joking with a client today about how the computer age has really cut back on the amount of paper we deal with. Yeah, right. I buy paper by the case at Costco. There’s a dermatologist in West Virginia who wishes that good records weren’t kept.

David Tolliver has a dermatology practice in Bluefield, West Virginia. On his tax return, he showed income of about $35,000. And that’s how he paid his taxes.

But that’s what he told the government. He told the truth when he applied for some loans; he noted that his income was between $150,000 and $500,000. Court documents show his income was about $385,000 a year. So what happened to the other $350,000?

The money apparently made its way to some trusts. The trusts, though, were controlled by Dr. Tolliver, and he used the money to buy expensive cars and remodel his home. Somewhere along the way, the IRS and the Department of Justice picked up the scent of a scam.

With a loss to the Treasury in taxes of around $130,000, and a case that was paper-made, Dr. Tolliver pleaded guilty to filing a false tax return. He’ll likely have to make restitution, and he’s looking at 18 to 24 months at ClubFed. The trust looked so good on the surface as a tax shelter…but it’s what’s underneath that counts.

News Story: Bluefield Daily Telegraph

Posted in Tax Fraud | Comments Off on Skin Deep Fraud

“Loan? What Loan?” Leads to ClubFed

Ken Jenne has been a public servant in Florida for many years. After obtaining his law degree, he served in the Florida State Senate from 1978 – 1996, and then was appointed as Sheriff of Broward County in 1998. He was a rising star in the Democratic party.

But then things went wrong. Local10.com reports that he received payments for various items that didn’t make their way to his tax return. A surveillance company that serviced the Sheriff’s Office made $5500 in payments. His old law firm helped him with loan payments on his car—to the tune of $41,000 from 2002 through 2004. He received two payments from developers totaling nearly $20,000. And then in 2003, Jenne had trouble paying his income tax. His secretary got a $20,000 loan, which was then loaned to Jenne.

That loan became a big issue. When the Florida Department of Law Enforcement questioned the then-Sheriff about the loan, his answer was basically, “What loan?” And then he paid his secretary $21,000 to pay to the developer who gave the loan in the first place to cover the scheme up.

And then the US Department of Justice began investigating. The toothpicks holding up the scheme began to fall down, and Jenne resigned his post yesterday, and agreed on a plea deal today. He has pleaded guilty to three counts of tax evasion and one count of mail fraud. The plea deal will send the former sheriff to ClubFed for nearly two years.

It sure would have been easier to just pay those taxes in the first place…and if he had done so, Ken Jenne might still be sheriff.

Posted in Tax Evasion | Comments Off on “Loan? What Loan?” Leads to ClubFed

Municipal Bond Interest, California, and the Supreme Court

As I mentioned previously, the Supreme Court will hear Department of Revenue v. Davis this Fall. If the Supreme Court rules for the Kentucky Department of Revenue (overturning the Kentucky Court of Appeals), then nothing will change, and states will be able to continue discriminate in favor of their own municipal bond interest for tax deductions. However, if the Court upholds the decision, then states will have to choose between taxing no municipal bond interest and taxing all municipal bond interest.

California allows taxpayers to file protective claims on issues that have not been decided. This is one such issue. I hadn’t advised clients to file such claims yet because the Franchise Tax Board wasn’t ready. Indeed, the FTB denied such claims. If you filed such a claim, and it was denied and the status is final, you must appeal to the State Board of Equalization or you will lose your claim.

The FTB is no longer denying such claims, and is now accepting protective claims. If you are impacted by this issue, and wish to file such a protective claim, you can do so by mailing such claims to:

FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
PO BOX 942867
SACRAMENTO CA 94267-2222

Make sure you note that you are filing a protective claim on the “Department of Revenue v. Davis” decision. Any client who feels that they are impacted by this should contact our office so we can advise them on this issue.

Posted in California, Supreme Court | Comments Off on Municipal Bond Interest, California, and the Supreme Court

Fraud Over the Holiday

I hope you’re enjoying the Labor Day weekend. These individuals didn’t have a pleasant holiday.

>From Shreveport, Louisiana comes the story of bozo tax preparer Betty Jean Thomas. Thomas had a not-so-good way of helping her clients: she invented phony business expenses. Even worse, those clients didn’t have a business. The total cost to the government was $67,000. Ms. Thomas received a year and a day at ClubFed and must pay a $3,000 fine.

We previously told you the story of Athanasios Reglas. Mr. Reglas invented some phony companies to create phony deductions. He pleaded guilty last week, and was sentenced to three years at ClubFed followed by three years of supervised release. He previously forfeited $358,000 in cash that was found when he was arrested.

I also previously wrote about Reverend John Henry Walker. The Charlotte pastor was sentenced last week to five years and three months for tax evasion and stealing from his congregation. The pastor had pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion, bank fraud, and lying to federal agents. He also must make restitution of $277,000. He used his purloined funds for erectile dysfunction medication, two cars (a Lexus and a Mercedes), and a new home. He evaded taxes on $750,000.

Finally, Joe Roth reported on the case of Lakeland, Florida dentist Nancy Montgomery-Ware. She decided to research the tax laws, and “determined” that, “The income tax is not allowable under the Constitution.” That’s what she said during closing arguments during her trial for tax evasion. According to the Lakeland Ledger, it only took one afternoon to find her guilty. She’s looking at several years at ClubFed. Interestingly enough, her husband told her that she was crazy. It would have been much less costly for her to listen to her husband. But she didn’t, and she’ll have to pay the consequences.

Posted in Tax Fraud | Comments Off on Fraud Over the Holiday

Poker Tournaments Takes a Hit

Back in 2005, I speculated that the IRS would write a regulation requiring withholding from poker tournaments. The IRS will, on Tuesday, announce Revenue Procedure 2007-57, requiring withholding from any winner of a poker tournament who has received more than $5000 in winnings from the tournament.

First, this is a Revenue Procedure; this is the lowest form of IRS regulation. (The Tax Code is statutory law; it’s the highest form of regulation. Next are IRS regulations. Those are promulgated under the Tax Code. Then come from Revenue Rulings and then, finally, Revenue Procedures.)

Entities do not have to follow a Revenue Procedure. But Revenue Procedures are written so that entities usually follow them. They include verbiage that reads (this is taken from Revenue Procedure 2007-57), “The IRS will not assert any liability for additional tax or additions to tax for violations of any withholding obligation with respect to amounts paid to winners of poker tournaments under section 3402, provided that the poker tournament sponsor meets all of the requirements for information reporting under section 3402(q) and the regulations thereunder.” Of course, this implies the IRS may assert violations to entities that don’t follow the Procedure. Effectively, all casinos will likely follow the Procedure.

So what does Revenue Procedure 2007-57 say? In Section 3.01, it classifies poker tournaments as a “wagering pool.” It does so by referencing United States v. Berent, 523 F.2d 1360, 1361 (9th Cir. 1975). And IRS regulation §31.3402(q)-1(b)(2) requires withholding on wagers in a wagering pool if the proceeds from the wager exceed $5,000.

Interestingly, the Revenue Procedure states that withholding will be required: “A poker tournament sponsor is required to withhold and report on payments of more than $5,000 made to a winning payee in a taxable year….” Per the regulations, the required withholding rate is 25%.

This has two impacts. First, anyone who wins more than $5,000 will receive 75% of his winnings (unless subject to a higher withholding rate). Second, many casinos will again start issuing W-2Gs to everyone who wins in a poker tournament. Once casinos have to start issuing W-2Gs to a few people, casinos will come to the conclusion it’s easier to issue them to everyone.

As to the Revenue Procedure itself, I think it’s a poor application of the law. As I reported back in 2005, I don’t believe poker tournaments are a wagering pool. Wagering pools are when you wager on something else, such as a horse race. Indeed, the IRS came to that same conclusion as I did in a private letter ruling in 2005. The reality is, though, that I don’t think a casino or cardroom is going to challenge the IRS on this. Their attorneys and tax counsels will say that the easiest thing to do is to go along with the IRS Revenue Procedure. Entities that don’t will potentially be subject to additional IRS scrutiny, so following the Procedure is the course of least resistance.

What will the impact be to tournament poker? First, there will be additional compliance with the Tax Code. Given that more W-2Gs will be issued, and withholding will occur, the IRS will see additional collections (which is their goal). The other major impact of this ruling is that money will be taken out of the poker economy. Once this Revenue Procedure goes into effect (March 4, 2008), about 25% of the prize pool of major poker tournaments will vanish. Of course, the IRS will correctly note that this money should have been paid in taxes at some point. However, given that gambling losses are deductible against wins, some of the withheld funds would never have been owed in taxes because of gambling losses.

Will this impact the number of players in major poker tournaments? Possibly. Where it may have the biggest effect is in a series of major tournaments. Suppose John Doe wins $10,000 on day 1 of a tournament. Under the new Revenue Procedure, he will only keep $7,500. There’s a higher chance of him not entering additional events so that the funds don’t reenter the poker economy.

Link to Revenue Procedure 2007-57

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Poker Tournaments Takes a Hit