DOCSLIB.ORG

Criminal Tax Manual 26 U.S.C. § 7201

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Criminal Tax Manual 26 U.S.C. § 7201 Criminal Tax Manual 26 U.S.C. § 7201 ............................................................................................................. 1 Tax Evasion –The Nature of the Offense Charged ..................................................... 1 The Statute Defining the Offense Charged ................................................................. 2 The Essential Elements Of Attempt To Evade Or Defeat A Tax ............................... 3 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged......................................................... 4 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged......................................................... 5 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged......................................................... 6 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged......................................................... 7 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged......................................................... 8 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged....................................................... 10 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged....................................................... 11 The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged....................................................... 12 Tax Evasion .............................................................................................................. 13 Tax Evasion .............................................................................................................. 14 Tax Deficiency .......................................................................................................... 16 Proof of Precise Amount of Tax Owed Not Necessary ............................................ 17 Each Tax Year is Separate ........................................................................................ 18 “Attempts in Any Manner to Evade or Defeat Any Tax” -- Explained .................... 19 “Willfully” -- Defined ............................................................................................... 20 Knowledge of Falsehood .......................................................................................... 21 (Deliberate Ignorance) .............................................................................................. 21 When the Offense May Be Complete ....................................................................... 23 No Need for Tax Assessment ................................................................................... 24 Tax Evasion - Elements of the Offense (26 U.S.C. § 7201) ..................................... 25 Tax Evasion - Tax Deficiency Defined .................................................................... 26 Tax Evasion - Computation of Tax Deficiency ........................................................ 27 Tax Evasion - Affirmative Attempt to Evade or Defeat Defined ............................. 28 Tax Evasion - Willfully Defined............................................................................... 29 Willfully Defined (26 U.S.C. §§ 7201, 7203, 7206, 7207) ..................................... 30 26 U.S.C. § 7202 ........................................................................................................... 32 Willful Failure To Truthfully Account For Or Pay Over Tax: ................................. 32 Statute Defining Offense -- 26 U.S.C. 7202 ............................................................. 33 Elements of the Offense ............................................................................................ 34 9288598.1 Taxability of Wages .................................................................................................. 35 Requirement To Report Withholding Of Income And Social Security Taxes ......... 37 Requirement To Pay Over Withheld Taxes To The United States ........................... 38 A Failure To Comply With Any One Of The Three Duties Is A Violation Of The Statute ....................................................................................................................... 39 Wages - Defined ....................................................................................................... 40 Employer - Defined................................................................................................... 41 Employee - Defined .................................................................................................. 42 Person Required To Collect, Account For, And Pay Over Tax ................................ 43 More Than One Responsible Person......................................................................... 45 Willfulness ................................................................................................................ 46 26 U.S.C. § 7203 ........................................................................................................... 48 The Nature of the Offense Charged .......................................................................... 48 Failure to File -- Statute ............................................................................................ 49 Failure To File -- The Essential Elements of the Offense Charged .......................... 50 Failure to File -- The Requirement to File a Return–Explained ............................... 51 Failure to Pay Tax or File Tax Return -- Offense Charged ...................................... 52 The Requirement to File a Tax Return ..................................................................... 53 When a Person is Obligated to File Return ............................................................... 54 When An Entity Is Obligated To File Return ........................................................... 55 Time Required by Law ............................................................................................. 56 Willfulness ................................................................................................................ 57 Failure To Pay -- Willfulness Defined ...................................................................... 58 Good Faith Belief Defense -- Failure to File ............................................................ 59 (disagreement with law or belief law is unconstitutional) ........................................ 59 Willfulness -- Good Faith Belief Defense ................................................................ 60 (claim inadequate records) ........................................................................................ 60 Willfulness -- Failure to File/Good Faith Belief Defense ......................................... 61 (disagreement with law) ............................................................................................ 61 Willfulness -- Failure to File/Good Faith Belief Defense ......................................... 62 Fifth Amendment Defense ........................................................................................ 63 Tax Return Must Contain Sufficient Information ..................................................... 64 26 U.S.C. § 7205 ........................................................................................................... 65 False Withholding Allowance Certificate (Form W-4) ............................................ 65 Offense Charged -- False No. of Allowances ........................................................... 65 - ii - 9288598.1 Statute Defining Offense........................................................................................... 66 Elements of Offense .................................................................................................. 67 Withholding Allowances .......................................................................................... 68 Exempt Status ........................................................................................................... 69 Withholding Allowances (Exempt Status)................................................................ 70 False or Fraudulent ................................................................................................... 71 Willfulness -- Section 7205 ...................................................................................... 72 Knowledge Of Contents Of Form W-4 ..................................................................... 73 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1) ...................................................................................................... 74 Offense Charged ....................................................................................................... 74 False Return -- Statute Involved ............................................................................... 75 Elements of Section 7206(1) ..................................................................................... 76 (False Income Tax Return) ....................................................................................... 76 False Return -- Essential Elements (False Income Tax Return) ............................... 78 False Return - Essential Elements............................................................................. 79 (False Income Tax Return) ....................................................................................... 79 False Return -- Essential Elements (False Income Tax Return) ............................... 80 Subscribed – Defined Proof of Signing of Return .................................................... 81 Subscribed-Defined..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trespass Torts and Self-Help for an Electronic Age
    Tulsa Law Review Volume 44 Issue 4 The Scholarship of Richard A. Epstein Summer 2009 Trespass Torts and Self-Help for an Electronic Age Catherine M. Sharkey Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Catherine M. Sharkey, Trespass Torts and Self-Help for an Electronic Age, 44 Tulsa L. Rev. 677 (2013). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol44/iss4/2 This Legal Scholarship Symposia Articles is brought to you for free and open access by TU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Tulsa Law Review by an authorized editor of TU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sharkey: Trespass Torts and Self-Help for an Electronic Age TRESPASS TORTS AND SELF-HELP FOR AN ELECTRONIC AGE Catherine M. Sharkey* INTRODU CTION ................................................................................................................ 678 1. SELF-HELP: THE MISSING THIRD REMEDY .......................................................... 679 II. CONCEPTUALIZING SELF-HELP IN CYBERTRESPASS DOCTRINE ........................... 684 A. Self-Help in Plaintiff's Prima Facie Case ................................................... 684 1. Threshold Prerequisite to Invoke Legal Process ................................... 684 2. Liability for Evasion of Self-Help ........................................................ 687 B. Self-Help "Opt-Out" as Affirmative Defense ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transfer Pricing As a Vehicle in Corporate Tax Avoidance
    The Journal of Applied Business Research – January/February 2017 Volume 33, Number 1 Transfer Pricing As A Vehicle In Corporate Tax Avoidance Joel Barker, Borough of Manhattan Community College, USA Kwadwo Asare, Bryant University, USA Sharon Brickman, Borough of Manhattan Community College, USA ABSTRACT Using transfer pricing, U.S. Corporations are able to transfer revenues to foreign affiliates with lower corporate tax rates. The Internal Revenue Code requires intercompany transactions to comply with the “Arm’s Length Principle” in order to prevent tax avoidance. We describe and use elaborate examples to explain how U.S. companies exploit flexibility in the tax code to employ transfer pricing and related tax reduction and avoidance methods. We discuss recent responses by regulatory bodies. Keywords: Transfer Pricing; Tax avoidance; Inversion; Tax Evasion; Arm’s Length Principle; R & D for Intangible Assets; Cost Sharing Agreements; Double Irish; Profit Shifting INTRODUCTION ver the last decade U.S. corporations have been increasing their use of Corporate Inversions. In an inversion, corporations move their domestic corporations to foreign jurisdictions in order to be eligible O for much lower corporate tax rates. Furthermore, inversions allow U.S. corporations that have accumulated billions of dollars overseas through transfer pricing to access those funds tax free. With an inversion a U.S. corporation becomes a foreign corporation and would not have to pay tax to the U.S. government to access the funds accumulated abroad as the funds no longer have to be repatriated to be spent. Corporations continue to avoid taxation through Transfer Pricing. This article explains transfer pricing and discusses some of the tax issues that transfer pricing pose including recommendations and proposed legislation to mitigate the practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Reemployment of Retired Members: Federal Tax Issues
    MARYLAND STATE RETIREMENT AND PENSION SYSTEM REEMPLOYMENT OF RETIRED MEMBERS - FEDERAL TAX ISSUES There are two key tax issues related to the reemployment of individuals by the State or participating governmental units who are retirees of the Maryland State Retirement and Pension System: (1) the tax qualification of the plans under the Maryland State Retirement and Pension System; and (2) the possibility of the imposition of the 10% early distribution tax on benefits received by retirees. The following information is provided in order that State and participating employers may better understand the rules. 1. PLAN QUALIFICATION – A defined benefit retirement plan, such as the plans under the Maryland State Retirement and Pension Plan, must meet many requirements under the Internal Revenue Code in order to be a “qualified plan” under the Code and receive certain important tax advantages. One of those requirements provides that, in general, a member may not withdraw contributions made by the employer, or earnings on such contributions, before normal retirement, termination of employment, or termination of the plan. Rev. Rul. 74-254, 1974-1 C.B. 94. “Normal retirement age cannot be earlier than the earliest age that is reasonably representative of a typical retirement age for the covered workforce.” Prop. Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.401(a) – 1(b)(1)(i). A retirement age that is lower than 65 is permissible for a governmental plan if it reflects when employees typically retire and is not a subterfuge for permitting in-service distributions. PLR 200420030. Therefore, as a matter of plan qualification, retirement benefits may be paid to an employee who reaches “normal retirement age” once the employee retires and separates from service, and the reemployment of such a retiree by the same employer should not raise concerns regarding plan qualification.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Heavens: Methods and Tactics for Corporate Profit Shifting
    Tax Heavens: Methods and Tactics for Corporate Profit Shifting By Mark Holtzblatt, Eva K. Jermakowicz and Barry J. Epstein MARK HOLTZBLATT, Ph.D., CPA, is an Associate Professor of Accounting at Cleveland State University in the Monte Ahuja College of Business, teaching In- ternational Accounting and Taxation at the graduate and undergraduate levels. axes paid to governments are among the most significant costs incurred by businesses and individuals. Tax planning evaluates various tax strategies in Torder to determine how to conduct business (and personal transactions) in ways that will reduce or eliminate taxes paid to various governments, with the objective, in the case of multinational corporations, of minimizing the aggregate of taxes paid worldwide. Well-managed entities appropriately attempt to minimize the taxes they pay while making sure they are in full compliance with applicable tax laws. This process—the legitimate lessening of income tax expense—is often EVA K. JERMAKOWICZ, Ph.D., CPA, is a referred to as tax avoidance, thus distinguishing it from tax evasion, which is illegal. Professor of Accounting and Chair of the Although to some listeners’ ears the term tax avoidance may sound pejorative, Accounting Department at Tennessee the practice is fully consistent with the valid, even paramount, goal of financial State University. management, which is to maximize returns to businesses’ ownership interests. Indeed, to do otherwise would represent nonfeasance in office by corporate managers and board members. Multinational corporations make several important decisions in which taxation is a very important factor, such as where to locate a foreign operation, what legal form the operations should assume and how the operations are to be financed.
    [Show full text]
  • Tanzania the Panama Papers in Africa
    Tanzania The Panama Papers in Africa: Tax Avoidance, Money Laundering or Illicit Financial Flows? Olwethu Majola-Kinyunyu LLB, LLM PhD Candidate, Centre of Criminology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa Email: [email protected] Abstract Early in 2016 the international community was shaken by the news of the biggest data leak in history. Political figures, prominent business people, sportstars and even criminals were the topic of discussion in news outlets across the globe. Following the release of the Panama Papers, many called for the leaders who were implicated to resign from their positions and for business executives to be investigated. There were reports of offshore accounts and companies operating in tax havens and accusations of money laundering, terrorism financing and tax avoidance. What do the Panama Papers mean for Africa? This paper assesses the effects of the Panama Papers on the African continent and evaluates whether the responses by African states are sufficient. What are the Panama Papers? tax haven jurisdictions in the facilitation of tax evasion, money laundering, organised crime, illicit The ?Panama Papers? is the colloquial term referring to the leak of client documents belonging to financial flows and other issues of grave concern to Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca. Details of the the international community. Panama documents were leaked by German newspaper, The Legality of Offshore Accounts and Companies in Süddeutsche Zeitung, in conjunction with the African Jurisdictions International Consortium of Investigative Journalists Holding ownership of a shell company or an offshore (ICIJ), consisting of over 100 media partners in 82 account, in most cases, is not unlawful.
    [Show full text]
  • Avoiding Penalties and the Tax Gap
    Media Relations Office Washington, D.C. Media Contact: 202.622.4000 www.irs.gov/newsroom Public Contact: 800.829.1040 Avoiding Penalties and the Tax Gap FS-2008-19, March 2008 WASHINGTON— The Internal Revenue Code imposes many different kinds of penalties, ranging from civil fines to imprisonment for criminal tax evasion. If you do not file your return and pay your tax by the due date, you may have to pay a penalty. You may also have to pay a penalty if you substantially understate your tax, understate a reportable transaction, file an erroneous claim for refund or credit, or file a frivolous tax submission. If you provide fraudulent information on your return, you may have to pay a civil fraud penalty. Penalties are generally payable upon notice and demand. Penalties are generally assessed, collected and paid in the same manner as taxes. The notice will contain the name of the penalty, the applicable code section, and how the penalty was computed (or information on how to obtain the computation if not included). This fact sheet is the 22nd in the Tax Gap series. It provides additional guidance to taxpayers regarding civil penalties and the consequences for understating income and overstating expenses. Estimated Tax-Related Penalties Employees have taxes withheld from their paychecks by their employer. When you have income that is not subject to withholding you may have to make estimated tax payments during the year. This includes income from self-employment, interest, dividends, alimony, rent, gains from the sale of assets, prizes, and awards. You also may have to pay estimated tax if the amount being withheld from your salary, pension, or other income is not enough to pay your tax liability.
    [Show full text]
  • Schlumberger Non Compete Agreement
    Schlumberger Non Compete Agreement Baxter label his sweeting discontents Somerville or energetically after Quiggly clokes and intercede inchoately, delicate and netted. Half-round and nonpareil Englebert dignifies: which Brady is synchronous enough? Leopold is hollow-eyed and enfetter swingeingly as slumbery Merlin disorientating thence and fumes moderately. To curtail employment by their counsel for our lawyers from working for a finding the company who must compete agreement shall be immediately and agreement and middlesex county chopper versus paul schlumberger Including non-compete agreements at wwwsmoothtransitionslawblogcom. Company agree with your pixel id here with all other provision using good hands are not. Instead provides for messages back if any. The person who were that we address to. Across schlumberger had made at this article submitted on future events or written instrument in any plausible geographic markets. Ex-Halliburton Chairman Lesar to start big oil-services. Analysis Schlumberger lawsuit is lesson 'not to enhance lip review' to. A Global Perspective Summary of Covenants Not always Compete. Because they are stored on your new design support this. Members listen to achieve say no salt everything but write around down. No choice at schlumberger. User and blue pencils; simply has allowed to compel arbitration agreement will vest and. 3 Ways to Get series of a Non Compete Agreement wikiHow. Schlumberger did not yet respond saying a all for comment. Employment Non-Competition and Non-Solicitation Agreement. The priest is granted effective as consider the Grant study by Schlumberger. Fourth Circuit Shoots Down Overbroad Noncompete Agreement. Helmerich & Payne Int'l Drilling Co v Schlumberger Tech.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Compliance Africans Affirm Civic Duty but Lack Trust in Tax Department by Thomas Isbell
    Tax compliance Africans affirm civic duty but lack trust in tax department By Thomas Isbell Afrobarometer Policy Paper No. 43 | December 2017 Introduction In any economy, balancing expenditures, revenues, and debts is a delicate and often politicized task. Competing interests and priorities buffet those tasked with planning a viable and stable national budget. For any state, taxes raised from individuals and businesses are a central plinth supporting the provision of services, the maintenance of infrastructure, the employment of civil servants, and the smooth functioning of the state. In many African countries, however, tax evasion leaves states with major holes in their budgetary pockets. A 2015 report by the High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows from Africa cites tax abuse as an important contributor (along with laundering of criminal proceeds, corruption, and market abuse) to an estimated $30 billion to $60 billion per year that African governments lose to illicit financial flows, hampering growth through state investment, improvements in education and health services, and lower debt commitments abroad (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 2015a, 2015b; Guardian, 2015). The 2016 leaks of the “Panama Papers” exposing tax evasion and fraud among many African and world leaders and their families further underlined the magnitude of the burden that tax evasion places on the continent (Kuo, 2016; Copley, 2016). Moreover, low tax compliance weakens the state’s ability to invest and develop. In 2005, only 15% of gross domestic product (GDP) in developing countries derived from taxes, compared to 35% in developed countries (Fuest & Riedel, 2009). In some of the poorest countries, this proportion was 12%.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Tax Avoidance Strategies of Top Foreign Multinationals Operating in Australia: an Expose
    UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY Analysis of Tax Avoidance Strategies of Top Foreign Multinationals Operating in Australia: An Expose Ross McClure, Roman Lanis and Brett Govendir 19 April 2016 1 1. Introduction to Tax Aggressiveness The term “tax aggressiveness” first entered accounting research literature in the late 1990’s. At this time, the gap between financial income and tax income in company financial statements was getting wider and wider.1 Research into tax aggressiveness has been concerned with the magnitude, determinants and consequences of these corporate behaviours and activities. It has borrowed from similar research in economics that investigates the tax burden and where the burden lies, and from finance research that examines the effect of taxes on firm value, expected returns and leverage (Hanlon & Heitzman 2010). In tax research, “tax aggressiveness” is generally defined as a broad continuum of activities that range from benign behaviours that were envisioned by tax policies at one end, to outright tax fraud and tax evasion at the other (Hanlon & Heitzman 2010). While the term has a specific meaning within accounting research into tax, in wider practice it is used interchangeably with the term “tax avoidance”, and in Australia, it is often referred to as “aggressive tax planning”. Much of the tax research uses very broad definitions of tax aggressiveness that capture all tax-reducing activities. However, it is the activities at the more aggressive end of the spectrum that is of interest to most stakeholders, such as tax authorities, capital markets, employee organisations and interest groups. The need to encompass the definitions from other disciplines becomes obvious when a firm, or firms, have been identified and accused of being tax aggressive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fairtax Treatment of Housing
    A FairTaxsm White Paper The FairTax treatment of housing Advocates of tax reform share a common motivation: To iron out the mangled economic incentives resulting from statutory inequities and misguided social engineering that perversely cripple the American economy and the American people. Most importantly, ironing out the statutory inequities of the federal tax code need not harm homebuyers and homebuilders. The FairTax does more than do no harm. The FairTax encourages home ownership and homebuilding by placing all Americans and all businesses on equal footing – no loopholes, no exceptions. A specific analysis of the impact of the FairTax on the homebuilding industry/the housing market shows that the new homebuilding market would greatly benefit from enactment of the FairTax. The analysis necessarily centers upon two issues: (1) Whether the FairTax’s elimination of the home mortgage interest deduction (MID) adversely impacts the housing market (new and existing) in general, and home ownership and the homebuilding industry specifically; and (2) Whether the FairTax’s superficially disparate treatment of new vs. existing housing has an adverse impact on the market for new homes and homebuilding. The response to both of the above questions is no. Visceral opposition to the repeal of a “good loophole” such as the MID is understandable, absent a more thorough and empirical analysis of the impact of the FairTax vs. the MID on home ownership and the homebuilding industry. Such an analysis demonstrates that preserving the MID is the classic instance of a situation where the business community confuses support for particular businesses with support for enterprise in general.
    [Show full text]
  • Indirect Choice of Law)
    Chapter 5 Deliberate Connections (Indirect Choice of Law) 474. A further instrument available for the private ordering of transnational ac- tivities and the resulting legal relations consists in the deliberate creation of links relevant under private international law that connect transnational fact situations with specifi c legal systems which the persons in question prefer to other legal systems for substantive reasons. Th e links brought about by such deliberate activities have traditionally been considered as artifi cial, alleged or pretended connections with a given jurisdiction. Confl ict lawyers have dealt with them under the heading of “ fraus legis”, “ fraude à la loi”, “evasion of laws”, “wetsontduiking” or “Gesetzesumgehung”. Th e negative connotation of these terms results from the assumption of a quasi-natural, deeply rooted and stable connection of individuals, companies, corporeal things and acts with a given jurisdiction, the notion of a pre-established “seat” of the le- gal relation. Where such assumption prevails, the calculated creation of a relevant link with a diff erent jurisdiction may appear as illegitimate. Th e question that has to be asked in our times is whether such quasi-natural and deeply rooted connections to specifi c jurisdictions can still be claimed to exist in all areas of the law. While they still endure in some legal disciplines such as the law of immovable property, others are undergoing a transforma- tion. To employ the term coined by Savigny, the “seat” of some legal relation- ships seems to be increasingly indicated by connecting factors permitting fl exibility and mobility at lower costs for the persons involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Contracts—Restraint of Trade Or Competition in Trade—Forum-Selection Clauses & Non-Compete Agreements: Choice-Of-Law
    CONTRACTS—RESTRAINT OF TRADE OR COMPETITION IN TRADE—FORUM-SELECTION CLAUSES & NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS: CHOICE-OF-LAW AND FORUM-SELECTION CLAUSES PROVE UNSUCCESSFUL AGAINST NORTH DAKOTA’S LONGSTANDING BAN ON NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS Osborne v. Brown & Saenger, Inc., 2017 ND 288, 904 N.W.2d 34 (2017) ABSTRACT North Dakota’s prohibition on trade restriction has been described by the North Dakota Supreme Court as “one of the oldest and most continuous ap- plications of public policy in contract law.” In a unanimous decision, the court upheld North Dakota’s longstanding public policy against non-compete agreements by refusing to enforce an employment contract’s choice-of-law and form-selection provisions. In Osborne v. Brown & Saenger, Inc., the court held: (1) as a matter of first impression, dismissal for improper venue on the basis of a forum-selection clause is reviewed de novo; (2) employment contract’s choice-of-law and forum-selection clause was unenforceable to the extent the provision would allow employers to circumvent North Dakota’s strong prohibition on non-compete agreements; and (3) the non-competition clause in the employment contract was unenforceable. This case is not only significant to North Dakota legal practitioners, but to anyone contracting with someone who lives and works in North Dakota. This decision affirms the state’s enduring ban of non-compete agreements while shutting the door on contracting around the issue through forum-selection provisions. 180 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1 I. FACTS ............................................................................................ 180 II. LEGAL BACKGROUND .............................................................. 182 A. BROAD HISTORY OF NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS ................ 182 B.
    [Show full text]