KenneyMcCaffertyTax

Posts Tagged ‘Tax cheat’

Corporate Attorneys and Investigators Represent the Company – Not Whistleblowers

Wednesday, May 4th, 2011

Corporate investigators and attorneys will protect the company. It's their job.

A long time corporate investigator recently shared his concern that whistleblowers look to corporate investigators and attorneys for help and protection when they blow the whistle.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  “There’s nothing I can do,” said the investigator.  “I’ve seen it over and over again.  They are going to get their heads cut off.”

The investigator said he knew that whistleblowers, no matter the merit of their report, would be skillfully and systematically terminated with a substantial paper trail to support management’s actions.

“They look to me for help,” he said.  “I work for the company.  I tell them that, but they don’t seem to understand.”

Neither did CEO Ian Norris of Morgan Crucible Company.  Morgan Crucible came under government investigation for an international price fixing conspiracy.  CEO Norris began a campaign to obstruct a grand jury investigation, and he shared details of his campaign with Morgan Crucible’s attorney.  When the government learned of Norris’s obstruction, it charged Norris with corruptly persuading, and attempting and conspiring to corruptly persuade, others with intent to influence their testimony in grand jury proceedings.  Morgan Crucible waived its attorney client privilege and granted permission for corporate counsel to testify.  Norris fought the testimony, saying the corporate attorney also represented Norris in his individual capacity and was prohibited from testifying. 

The Third Circuit disagreed, but found that communications about scope of representation were ambiguous.  Ultimately, the court ruled that Morgan Crucible, alone, held the right to waive attorney client privilege, and the attorney testified.

The attorney testified that Norris, in front of counsel, disseminated a false cover story and scripts about the price fixing and encouraged everyone, including counsel, to relay the false information to investigators.  The attorney said he did not know the information was false.

Attorneys and investigators should provide employees with explicit explanations about their role in investigating allegations of fraud within a corporation.  They often do not, for a variety of reasons.  Bottom line – employees need to take steps to protect themselves when they report corporate misconduct internally. 

For a free consult about whether you have a potential government fraud claim, call K&M today.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Corporate Tax Fraud, Employment Tax Fraud, False Claims Act, Money Laundering Tax Fraud, Offshore Accouts Fraud, retaliation, SEC Whistleblower Program, Tax Fraud, Uncategorized, Whistleblower Protection | Comments Off

Tax Whistleblowers Must File within 30 Days of No Answer Letter

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

30 Days to File IRS AppealsIn Friedland v Commissioner (T.C. Memo 2011-90), the United States Tax Court dismissed the IRS whistleblower’s appeal because it was not filed within thirty days of the date of the “no answer letter” sent to Friedland by the IRS Whistleblower Office.  The Tax Court reiterated its ruling in Cooper – the “no answer letter” constitutes a final determination of a whistleblower claim.

Murray Friedland, a CPA, reported two corporations for tax violations in September 2009.  On November 13, 2009, the IRS Whistleblower Office sent Friedland a letter explaining that it had reviewed and evaluated the claim and then said that prevailing law prevented it from explaining why a claim would be denied.  Friedland found the letter confusing.  He sent additional information about his claim to the Whistleblower Office, and he called for an explanation.  The WO responded with three letters, one memorializing a conversation in which Friedland was told that he could write to the US Court of Federal Claims.  The letters also confirmed that the WO would not change its determination about Friedland’s claim.

Friedland followed the suggestion of the WO and appealed to the Court of Federal Claims.  The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the appeal on May 26, 2010, because the CFC does not have jurisdiction to hear IRS whistleblower appeals.  On June 18, 2010, Friedland filed an appeal with the Tax Court.

Friedland filed his appeal 217 days after the date of the first letter, the “no answer letter.”  As decided in previous Tax Court rulings, the “no answer letter” is notice of a final determination that the IRS is denying the claim.  Whistleblowers have thirty days from the date of the no answer letter to file their appeals.  Because Friedland filed 217 days after the date of the no answer letter, the Tax Court ruled that it had no jurisdiction over the claim because it was filed too late.

With regard to Friedland’s obvious confusion about the appeal process, the Tax Court said, “We recognize that petitioner may have relied on the erroneous advice of the Whistleblower Office in filing his initial appeal with the Claims Court. . . We sympathize with the petitioner.  We cannot expand our jurisdiction, however, even where the Commissioner provided bad advice.”

Kenney & McCafferty, P.C., has successfully represented IRS whistleblowers, even before the passage of the 2006 whistleblower statute. For knowledgeable and trustworthy representation, contact K&M for a free assessment today.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Abusive Tax Shelters, Corporate Tax Fraud, Employment Tax Fraud, Estate Tax Fraud, IRS Whistleblower Office, Money Laundering Tax Fraud, Offshore Accouts Fraud, retaliation, Tax Fraud, Uncategorized, Whistleblower Protection | Comments Off

NY Attorney General Goes after Tax Cheats

Wednesday, February 23rd, 2011

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman recently announced the creation of a taxpayer-protection unit to target tax cheats, pension plan frauds, and corrupt government contractors.  Schneiderman is hopeful the unit, with the help of whistleblowers, will recover hundreds of millions of dollars to help close the state’s budget gap.

In 2007, New York passed its False Claims Act [FCA].  The Act allows the state’s Attorney General, local governments and whistleblowers to bring actions against anyone that defrauds the government.  If found liable, defendants must pay the government triple damages and civil penalties.

Recently, New York lawmakers enhanced the State’s FCA by adding the power to crack down on large-scale, multi-state corporate tax fraud schemes, expanding whistleblower protections and making it easier to prosecute corrupt subcontractors.  The enhancement, titled Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA), was authored by Schneiderman himself.  The revised FCA allows the State to bring false claims actions against those who commit tax fraud, including offshore cases.

Working with whistleblowers, the newly-formed Taxpayer Protection Unit will target multi-state corporate tax fraud schemes, corrupt contractors who over-bill taxpayers, and firms that rip off pension funds.  The unit will be comprised of lawyers and investigators who will conduct civil investigations and criminal prosecutions against those who defraud the government.

“We cannot afford to lose any more money to companies and individuals who seek to defraud the State,” Schneiderman said.  “Today’s announcement is a signal to anyone thinking of ripping off New York taxpayers:  We will go after you with every tool we have, and you will pay the price for these crimes.”

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

|