15 results for 'cat:"Fraud" AND cat:"Tax"'.
J. Hudson finds the trial court properly struck the complaint, finding the attorney is a necessary witness. The department of finance and administration declined a trade-in tax credit on vehicles transferred to the company after they were purchased by individuals with company funds. The attorney representing the vehicle purchasers was in involved in the original scheme, and the trial court properly applied all tests in determining he is disqualified. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson , Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: CV-23-59, Categories: fraud, tax, Attorney Discipline
[Consolidated.] J. Rovner finds that the lower court properly ordered defendant to pay $1.2 million in restitution for her role in a scheme to file hundreds of fraudulent tax returns. The evidence supports the calculation of the restitution figure and does not support characterizing some of the false returns as part of a separate scheme. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Rovner, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 22-1360, Categories: fraud, Restitution, tax
J. Owens finds that the district court properly entered convictions for wire fraud, mail fraud and various tax offenses. Defendant claimed that the 21 days it took the U.S. Marshals Service to transport him from the District of New Jersey to the Central District of California should have triggered a Speedy Trial Act violation. Defendant claimed that the government did not bring him to trial within the 70-day limit under United States Code. The seventy-day clock is triggered by the public filing of the indictment or the first appearance before a judge. The 21-day delay between defendant's detention in New Jersey and his first appearance before a judge was immaterial to the Speedy Trial Act analysis. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Owens, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 22-50047, Categories: fraud, tax, Speedy Trial
J. Southwick finds the district court properly granted summary judgment to the attorney. The attorney and partner formed a "gentleman's" venture to form a business for making settlement-secured medical loans to litigants, but the partner was not listed on any formational document. After some time of a 50/50 profit-sharing arrangement, the partner sought financial information, but was told that he held an economic benefit only interest, and that the business was owned by a trust. Though the parties made a profit-sharing agreement, tax documentation shows a possible change in payments from profit-sharing to services rendered. The statute of frauds applies to the unenforceable oral agreement. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Southwick , Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 23-50297, Categories: fraud, tax, Contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Lloyd- Jones finds a lower court properly dismissed a mail order horticultural grower's unfair tax imposition claims. The horticultural grower argued that the treasury wrongfully imposed value added tax on mail order packets of seeds, which are sent to consumers. However, the tax authority sufficiently showed in court that the horticultural grower engaged in "round tripping" from the U.K. to the Channel Islands to avoid paying taxes. Affirmed.
Court: Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Judge: Lloyd- Jones, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 2024UKSC5, Categories: fraud, tax
J. Morrison finds for the commissioner of internal revenue in this tax liability dispute because underpayment had been due to fraud, and the couple is responsible for all deficiencies and associated fraud penalties.
Court: U.S. Tax Court, Judge: Morrison, Filed On: December 13, 2023, Case #: 2023-148, Categories: fraud, tax
J. Kerrigan finds for the commissioner of internal revenue in this tax liability dispute because evidence supported the determination that liability had been due to fraud, and the taxpayer is responsible for fraud-related penalties.
Court: U.S. Tax Court, Judge: Kerrigan, Filed On: December 13, 2023, Case #: 2023-149, Categories: fraud, tax
J. Lauber denies the commissioner of internal revenue summary judgment in this tax deficiency dispute because genuine issues remain in dispute as to whether the taxpayer intentionally attempted to evade paying taxes.
Court: U.S. Tax Court, Judge: Lauber, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: 2023-124, Categories: fraud, tax
J. Golemon finds the trial court properly denied the domestic partner's motion for a new trial in this dispute over an allegedly fraudulent 1099 issued to him by his family holdings land company, for which his partner worked. The land company temporarily wrote the partner's paychecks to the domestic partner after the partner lost his license, which the domestic partner cashed as a favor. Though the domestic partner claimed that he did not receive notice of the hearing on the motion to dismiss, multiple court staff had spoken with him about it. The trial court was free to disbelieve the assertions regarding notice. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Golemon , Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 09-22-00368-CV, Categories: fraud, tax, Due Process
J. Hamilton finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of failing to disclose his foreign bank account on his income tax returns. The evidence supported the jury's finding that defendant willfully chose not to disclose his foreign bank account. The key question on the tax return form was not ambiguous as applied to defendant's situation, and he cannot show the foreign-account reporting regulation is invalid. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Hamilton, Filed On: August 8, 2023, Case #: 22-2758, Categories: fraud, tax
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the district court properly convicted defendants for mail and wire fraud by their submitting claims for tax credits by creating false invoices for construction work and film equipment related to their project to convert a dilapidated mansion to a film postproduction facility. The mandate rule prevented the court from reconsidering defendant’s guidelines range. Because the rule barred the court from reconsidering the sentencing range on remand, there was no abuse of discretion in the court’s denying an evidentiary hearing on an issue it could not consider. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 20-30323, Categories: fraud, Sentencing, tax