Tax Preparer Penalties

California Tax Lawyer Enjoined From Providing Tax Advice or Preparing Tax Returns

October 10, 2012 | by Dennis N. Brager

San Diego tax attorney Scott Waage was enjoined from preparing tax returns or giving tax advice pursuant to an injunction entered by a federal district court. The injunction had been sought by the Department of Justice in a complaint filed in the Southern District of California pursuant to Internal Revenue Codes Sections 7401, 7402 and 7408.

In its complaint the Department of Justice alleged that tax lawyer Waage along with CPA Robert O. Jensen promoted tax fraud schemes to clients that illegally reduced the client’s reported income by, among other things, using sham consulting companies, and illegally structured employee benefit and pension plans. According to the complaint, Waage operated under the names of “The Tax Advisors Group, Inc.” and “Pensions by Design.” Apparently in his promotional materials tax lawyer Waage referred to himself as a “visionary tax attorney,” and a seasoned tax litigator. Currently if you try to click on Waage’s website at www.strategiclawgrouppc.com a message pops up that the site has been “disabled.”

According to the Department of Justice press release CPA Jensen had been enjoined in March from preparing tax returns that understate income. It makes one wonder why the Department of Justice needed an injunction to prevent CPA Jensen from preparing tax returns that understate income! I always assumed that CPAs (as well as tax lawyers and enrolled agents for that matter) were already not supposed to understate income. Still the IRS uses the injunction process as a convenient, and relatively quick method of putting a tax preparer out of business; and sometimes as an alternative to a criminal tax prosecution. However, in some cases the IRS uses an injunction as a stop gap measure while it puts together its criminal tax case.

Tax attorney Waage is apparently no stranger to IRS tax problems. According to a summons action filed against him in 2008, Waage’s law firm was under investigation for its federal income tax liabilities. U.S. v. Waage.

The injunction order against Waage also requires him to provide the IRS a list of his clients that have used his services since 2001. It is likely that those clients will be receiving tax audit notices from the IRS in the not too distant future. Even though the normal statute of limitations for income tax returns is only 3 years, in the case of tax fraud the statute of limitations is open indefinitely, and there is case law supporting the view that tax fraud includes tax fraud by the tax return preparer, nor merely the taxpayer.
Continue Reading ›

Preparers’ Tax Fraud Affirmed by the Fifth Circuit

August 6, 2012 | by Dennis N. Brager

The convictions of a couple that committed tax fraud were affirmed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The husband and wife were the owners and operators of a firm that prepared personal income tax returns in Texas. Donald Womack misrepresented himself as an accountant who has previously worked for the IRS. His wife, Tonya, helped Mr. Womack with the business. Her role progressed until she began filing clients’ returns with the IRS electronically. The couple used the same electronic filing identification number (EFIN).

The IRS first noticed the Womacks based on the unusual deductions that were claimed on their clients’ returns. Several of the Womack’s clients testified against the couple, including one man who testified that Mr. Womack offered to provide false mileage logs to substantiate vehicle mileage deductions. Other former clients stated that they had never given the Womacks any information that would support the deductions that the couple claimed, such as charitable or mortgage-interest deductions. These clients are probably lucky they didn’t get charged with tax evasion themselves!

The government also used an undercover IRS special agent, who brought in his tax information to the couple. Although he had calculated that he owed $300, the Womacks gave him a choice of three tax refund amounts, ranging from $3,200 to $4,200. Mrs. Womack claimed that, although she had taken a tax preparation course, all of her errors were accidental. Mr. Womack did not offer any theory as to the cause of his inaccuracies.

A jury indicted the couple on 26 counts of conspiracy and aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns. Mr. Womack was ordered to serve five years in prison, plus three years of supervised release. Mrs. Womack got off with three years of prison time, plus three years of supervised release. The court also ordered them to pay over $160,000 in restitution. This is over and above any civil tax preparer penalties that may be assessed against them under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 6694.The Fifth Circuit affirmed their convictions in an unpublished opinion.
Continue Reading ›

Internal Revenue Service’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) Censures Tax Attorney

July 19, 2012 | by Dennis N. Brager

The IRS’ tax lawyer, who failed to disclose multiple conflicts of interest.

While having an attorney-client relationship with the benefit plan’s promoter, the tax attorney wrote several opinions for prospective plan participants. These opinions pertained to a benefit plan’s qualification under Internal Revenue Code section 419A. The tax lawyer later became a co-trustee of the plan, and during his tenure, he represented individual participants before the IRS concerning their tax problems. The plan’s promoter was paying him throughout this time.

The tax attorney, who was not identified, never advised any of his clients of the conflicts and failed to obtain informed consents from any of the parties involved. The conflicts arose when the attorney agreed to represent multiple parties with opposing interests, to become the co-trustee of the plan and to receive compensation from the promoter. His obligations to other parties and his own self-interest limited his ability to represent each of his clients successfully. Because they were unaware of the conflicts, the clients were unable to seek alternative legal counsel.

The attorney has agreed to cooperate in the investigation, recognized his violations and will take additional continuing education ethics classes over the next two years. The IRS’ OPR Director Karen L. Hawkins reminded attorneys that informing clients of conflicts of interest “is not a mere nicety.” She continued, “Taxpayers who pay handsomely for tax advice and representation have a fundamental right to expect competent and diligent representation unfettered by a practitioner’s responsibilities or obligations to someone else, or by the practitioner’s self-interest.”

Those who violate Circular 230 are subject to monetary penalties, censure, suspension and disbarment. Not just tax attorneys, but also enrolled agents, and CPAs are subject to the provisions of Circular 230, and therefore must avoid representing conflicting interests, unless appropriate conflict waivers are obtained.
Continue Reading ›

Tax Attorneys , CPAs, IRS Officials Speaking at UCLA Tax Controversy Institute on Tuesday, Oct. 25, 2011

October 22, 2011 | by Dennis N. Brager

The UCLA Tax Controversy Institute is the preeminent conference in the United States dedicated to tax controversy and tax litigation. This year it will be held on Tuesday, Oct. 25th beginning at 8:30 AM. This year IRS speakers include:

• Sandra Brown, Chief, Tax Division, United States Attorney’s Office (C.D. Cal.)

• Deborah Butler, Associate Chief Counsel, Procedure and Administration, IRS, Washington, D.C.

OPR (Office of Professional Responsibility) Disbars a CPA, and an Enrolled Agent under Circular 230 for Failure to File Tax Returns

August 3, 2011 | by Dennis N. Brager

The IRS Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) alleged that Joseph Kozelsky did not file timely tax returns for 2001 through 2007 and did not timely pay his federal tax liability. As a result of his tax problems he was disbarred from practice before the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. Kozelsky didn’t help himself very much, since he failed to respond to the IRS’s complaint within 30 days. As a result the facts alleged by the IRS were deemed admitted, and the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued an order that Mr. Kozelsky engaged in disreputable conduct and should be disbarred.

The IRS publishes rules for professionals practicing before the IRS, and those rules are set forth in Circular 230. We have previously published an article on the procedures involved in an OPR disciplinary matter. Circular 230 includes rules for individuals preparing tax returns, providing tax advice, and representing individuals before the IRS. Failure to timely file tax returns constitutes disreputable conduct under Circular 230 and subjects the offender to sanctions. In the case of Mr. Kozelsky, the IRS proposed disbarment from practice before the IRS and the ALJ presiding over the case agreed and ordered disbarment on November 17, 2010 since Mr. Kozelsky failed to respond to the OPR’s complaint.

If no appeal is filed within 30 days of the ALJ’s default order, the default order becomes final. Since Mr. Kozelsky appealed the ALJ decision to the IRS’s Appellate Authority on December 23, 2010, 6 days after the 30 day deadline, his appeal was not considered, and his disbarment became final.

Enrolled Agents are subject to the same Circular 230 rules as CPAs, and in a separate case, an Enrolled Agent was also disbarred from practice before the IRS. OPR filed a complaint against Susan Tomsha-Miguel alleging her failure to file timely tax returns, she failed to respond within 30 days, and the ALJ presiding over the case entered a default judgment for the IRS. The ALJ determined that the appropriate sanction was disbarment from practice before the IRS. In addition to CPAs and Enrolled Agents, Circular 230 rules and sanctions regarding failure to file tax returns also apply to tax attorneys (see post titled “Attorney Disbarred under Circular 230 Rules for Failure to File Tax Returns”).
Continue Reading ›

IRS Files Summary Judgment in FBAR Case

October 29, 2010 | by Dennis N. Brager

In mid-October the IRS filed a summary judgment motion seeking FBAR (Foreign Bank Account Report, Form TDF 90-22.1) penalties of over $225,000 for a civil failure to file an FBAR. This is only the second civil FBAR case that I am aware of which didn’t involve an underlying non-tax crime. According to District Court documents Jon McBride held offshore accounts totaling in excess of $1,000,000. The case was filed in Utah in April of 2009, but the IRS had assessed the FBAR penalties about 18 months earlier. The facts, at least as recited by the IRS in its motion, are problematic for the defendant. Allegations include:

* Offshore Entities Set Up by a Firm which in its brochures specifically advised of the requirement to file an FBAR

* Funneling of Corporate Earnings Back to McBride and Others through the Use of Loans and Other Devices

IRS Says it Will Subpoena CPAs

May 21, 2010 | by Dennis N. Brager

A couple of weeks ago I was at the ABA Tax Section Meeting which as I mentioned previously gathered tax lawyers from around the country. Since I spent most of my time at meetings involving FBARs (Foreign Bank Account Report TD F90-22.1), I missed another meeting. It turns out that (according to published reports) Janet Johnson, the Internal Revenue Service deputy division counsel for criminal tax stated that that the IRS Criminal Investigation (CI) unit would subpoena accountants in criminal tax cases. By itself that’s hardly surprising since criminal tax attorneys have known for many years that IRS special agents routinely interview the tax preparer, and the accountant can wind up as the lead witness against his own client.

The part that was surprising was that she stated the government would issue a grand jury subpoena even to a Kovel accountant, i.e. one that was retained by a tax attorney for the purpose of assisting the tax attorney in advising the client.

In an ominous note Johnson stated , “Whether or not that accountant comes to testify can be very serious for the accountant. The grand jury may decide he is part of the problem.”

FBARs and More FBARs

May 11, 2010 | by Dennis N. Brager

I just returned from an ABA meeting of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. It seemed like all of the tax attorneys (or at least the tax litigation attorneys) could find nothing to talk about, but Foreign Bank Account Reports, i.e. TDF 90-22.1 (FBARs),voluntary disclosures, and offshore bank accounts. Over a period of two days I spend at least 8 hours in formal meetings with other tax lawyers talking about FBARs, and more hours over drinks and food talking about FBARs. The main theme was that the rules surrounding tax amnesty are being enforced more harshly than many tax attorneys had hoped would be the case. A few highlights of what I heard, the good, the bad, and the ugly:

• 225 revenue agents have been assigned to conduct civil tax audits in voluntary disclosure of offshore bank account cases

• IDRs (Information Document Requests) can be expected in most offshore bank account cases within the next few weeks

UBS FBAR Indictment Illustrates Tax Problems Exacerbated by Lack of Attorney Client Privilege

May 3, 2010 | by Dennis N. Brager

Disbarred New York attorney Kenneth Heller was among 7 UBS clients charged a few weeks ago with failing to file Foreign Bank Account Reports, TDF 90.22-1 (FBARs), and tax evasion as a result of failing to report his Swiss bank accounts to the IRS. The case would be just one more in a string of FBAR and tax fraud criminal tax cases, but something in the complaint caught my eye. Some of the records that the IRS Criminal Investigation Division used to prepare its tax fraud case against Heller were obtained from Heller’s tax preparer-both documents and through an interview of the tax preparer. The records included instructions to the tax preparer to go to Switzerland to review the offshore bank account records. There was also a letter from the tax preparer to Heller reminding him that he had to report the income from the Swiss bank accounts.

This illustrates a vital point that as a tax controversy lawyer I remind clients about all the time. In a criminal tax case many times the first witness is the client’s tax preparer. There is no accountant client privilege in a criminal tax fraud case! Had these communications been between Heller and his tax attorney it is likely that the attorney-client privilege would have shielded them from IRS . While the IRS might have been able to bring a tax evasion case without the tax preparer the statements by the tax preparer will no doubt be extremely damaging.

If you have a tax problem including unreported offshore financial accounts contact the tax controversy lawyers at Brager Tax Law Group, A P.C.

IRS Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) Issues Penalty Guidelines

June 11, 2009 | by Dennis N. Brager

In May, the IRS Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) issued penalty guidelines, sometimes referred to as a “penalty grid” for imposing penalties on tax preparers, and others who are tax attorneys, CPAs, or enrolled agents who fail to file timely income tax returns. The late filing of an income or employment tax return by a CPA, tax attorneys, or enrolled agent is considered a violation of IRS Circular 230, punishable by suspension from practice before the IRS. The guidelines issued by OPR first point out that sanctions are determined on a fact specific basis, and the penalty grid is not intended to establish a rigid standard. The guidelines including the actual penalty grid made be found at the OPR website.

The penalty grid imposes a guideline penalty of two to four months for each late filed tax return, even though no tax was due. If the tax return is still not filed at the time OPR contacts the tax preparer then the guideline is four to six months for each non-filed tax return. If the late filings continue for four or more years than the baseline can be doubled! Thus a simple late filing of tax returns for four years can result in a suspension from practice for 32 months even though no tax is due.

If you are CPA, tax lawyer, or enrolled agent who has not filed his tax returns you have a serious tax problem, and you may wish to contact the tax controversy attorneys at Brager Tax Law Group, A P.C.