26 U.S.C. § 7201 defines what is tax evasion.  It states in relevant part that any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.

Federal prosecutors might also add additional charges beyond tax evasion. Those charges could include conspiracy charges, under 18 U.S.C. § 371, or tax fraud under 26 U.S.C. § 7206.  The United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) recently released its Tax Fraud Report for fiscal year 2023. It states that off the 64,124 cases reported to the Commission in fiscal year 2023, 363 involved tax fraud (down 27% since FY 2019).  It is unclear if this downward trend will continue.

Recently, a man in New Jersey plead guilty to tax evasion. According to the Department of Justice, “for tax years 2015 and 2016, Matthew Tucci, of West Long Branch, NJ, filed tax returns that stated he owed more than $2 million in taxes for both years. Despite admitting that he owed those taxes, Tucci did not fully pay them when they were due. Instead, Tucci purchased real estate and engaged in a series of transactions designed to conceal his interest in those properties.

In 2017, the IRS sent notices to Tucci that he owed taxes, interest, and penalties for 2015 and 2016. After receiving these notices, Tucci transferred multiple properties to an entity owned by another individual, but he continued to exert control over at least two of them. Of the two properties Tucci continued to control, he sold one and refinanced the other. Tucci used the proceeds from these transactions to pay his personal expenses rather than his tax debts. In 2019, Tucci submitted documents to the IRS that falsely claimed that he had no connection to the entity that owned the 12 properties.

He faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison as well as a period of supervised release, restitution, and monetary penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.”

In another case, a Florida businessman was sentenced to prison for tax evasion.  According to the  Department of Justice, “David Albert Fletcher, of Deltona, Florida owned and operated furniture liquidations businesses, including Century Liquidators. For tax years 2004 through 2013, Fletcher did not timely file his federal income tax returns or pay the taxes he owed. After an audit, the IRS assessed a total of $1.7 million in taxes, interest, and penalties against him.

To evade collection of these taxes, Fletcher concealed his income and assets from the IRS. For example, Fletcher used nominees to hide his purchases of luxury vehicles, including Rolls Royces. Fletcher also filed false income tax returns that understated his income by several million dollars, and when an IRS special agent interviewed him, Fletcher falsely represented the amount of income he earned.

In addition to his prison sentence, U.S. District Judge Wendy Berger for the Middle District of Florida ordered Fletcher to serve three years of supervised release and to pay approximately $7,112,689 in restitution to the United States.”

Recently, Meg Strickler was able to ensure that no tax evasion charges were filed against her client.  Contact us if you think you might be facing tax evasion or tax fraud charges.  We are here to help.

What reports are generated from my devices?

Cellebrite reports provide information about phone calls and text messages; but now it also provides a report on the data stored on these devices such as voicemails, images, and browsing history. From GPS location data to social media activity, cell phones can provide a treasure trove for law enforcement agencies to use to build their cases.

What protections do I have to prevent law enforcement from searching my devices?

Laws on the admission and use of this evidence in court are still evolving. In the Georgia Supreme Court case State v. Wilson, the court ruled search warrants for cell phone contents must specify the items being sought. This is to prevent a general search of a person’s belongings, which is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.

Do I have the same legal rights at the border that I would elsewhere in the United States?

The Supreme Court ruled that the police must get a warrant before searching someone’s cell phone in Riley v. California. The Supreme Court held that a warrant is generally required before a search of a cell phone seized incident to arrest. BUT, at the border, there is less protection. According to US Customs and Border Protection a person may be chosen for inspection for many different random reasons and thus there is less protections when crossing the border in or out of the US. What this means – you can be pulled for a secondary inspection and all of your devices can be searched without a warrant. They can also get an image from the hard drive of these devices and / or seize the devices at the border.

What do I do if I am asked to give my cell phone to law enforcement?

If you know your rights, you can comply when necessary. So, for example, if you are traveling internationally – do not travel with devices that you would not want searched. Furthermore, if you are driving and pulled over with drugs or a high amount of currency in your car, etc, your cell phone and / or other devices WILL be seized and analyzed.

And, please remember anything uploaded to the cloud is fair game for law enforcement. That’s a broad statement – but when you signed up for Instagram, Whats App, Google, TikTok, Facebook, Signal, Twitter/X, etc, you signed away any privacy rights. Those companies are fast to comply with law enforcement subpoenas giving whatever you posted/uploaded immediately to them.

It’s a Federal crime to commit aggravated identity theft.

The Defendant can be found guilty of aggravated identity theft only if all the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) the Defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used another person’s [means of identification] [identification documents];

(2) without lawful authority; and

(3) during and in relation to [the eligible felony alleged in the indictment].

[A “means of identification” is any name or number used, alone or together with any other information, to identify a specific person, including a name, social security number, date of birth, officially issued driver’s license or identification number, alien registration number, passport number, employer or taxpayer identification number, or electronic identification number or routing code. It can also include a fingerprint, voice print or other biometric data.]

[An “identification document” is a document made or issued by or for the United States Government, a state or foreign government or political subdivision.]

The Government must prove that the Defendant knew that the [means of identification] [identification documents], in fact, belonged to another actual person, [living or dead,] and not a fictitious person.

The Government must prove that the Defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used another person’s identity “without lawful authority.” The Government does not have to prove that the Defendant stole the [means of identification] [identification documents]. The Government is required to prove the Defendant transferred, possessed, or used the other person’s [means of identification] [identification documents] for an unlawful or illegitimate purpose.

The Government also must prove that the [means of identification] [identification document] was possessed “during and in relation to” the crime alleged in the indictment. The phrase “during and in relation to” means that there must be a firm connection between the Defendant, the [means of identification] [identification documents], and the crime alleged in the indictment. The [means of identification] [identification documents] must have helped with some important function or purpose of the crime, and not simply have been there accidentally or coincidentally. The [means of identification] [identification documents] at least must facilitate, or have the potential of facilitating, the crime alleged in the indictment.

We at Conaway & Strickler, PC know how to combat these type of charges. Please feel free to access our blog for other entries here

Please contact us to learn more should you be facing criminal charges.