Donald Trump
Does the new report on Donald Trump’s tax returns describe potential criminality? A former federal prosecutor says there’s enough to justify an investigation, and that the possible appointment of another special counsel “should be in play.”
This article contains what federal agents and prosecutors call “predication,” which is the bare amount you need to open a criminal investigation. But who would investigate? The President himself oversees @IRS_CI and @FBI and @TheJusticeDept. /2
— Daniel R. Alonso (@DanielRAlonso) September 27, 2020
“Luckily, regulations from 20 years ago provide for what happens when such a conflict of interest exists: the Attorney General ‘will appoint a Special Counsel,'” wrote Buckley LLP partner Daniel R. Alonso, a former federal prosecutor who worked in the Eastern District of New York. “Now, we’ve been down this path before, and it didn’t turn out well for the Attorney General who recused, and the Acting AG got a world of hell rained down on him for appointing a Special Counsel.”
That’s a reference to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who recused himself from the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged links to Russian interference in the 2016 election. Sessions became one of the president’s regular punching bags due to this decision.
As for that “Acting AG,” that’s former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who picked former FBI Director Robert Mueller to run the Russia probe.
“Nevertheless, if you or I had, say, deducted expenses that should have been personal, we’d be investigated,” Alonso said. “Not saying there is necessarily a crime here; just that there’s enough to investigate. But those kinds of deductions are routinely prosecuted in federal court.”
As an example, Alonso cited a case in which Albert J. Pirro Jr., the now-former husband of Fox News host Jeanine Pirro, was found guilty in a 2000 tax fraud case.
Pirro deducted personal expenses as business, and therefore “had brazenly violated a fundamental tenet of the American tax system: that every taxpayer must pay his or her fair share, regardless of wealth or influence.” He got 29 months in prison. /7https://t.co/2fuJwS83cN
— Daniel R. Alonso (@DanielRAlonso) September 27, 2020
“If I were a prosecutor, I’d want to know whether the IRS civil auditors had found what are called ‘badges of fraud’ – indicators that incorrect deductions had been done intentionally through some sort of deceptive act – & I’d want to see the audit results,” Alonso said. “But it seems that the Special Counsel possibility should be in play. Too close to the election, perhaps? Um, is anything too close anymore?”
Trump has denied a key detail of the Times report. He said it was “fake news” that he paid just $750 on his federal income taxes in 2016.
“Actually I pay tax,” Trump said. “You will see that as soon as my tax returns. It’s under audit. It’s been under audit for a long time. The IRS does not treat me well, they treat me like the Tea Party and they never treat me well, they treat me very badly.”
Trump Organization Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer Alan Garten also sparred with the Times in the article over the newspaper’s interpretation of the financial information.
The president took the unusual step of refusing to release his tax returns during the 2016 presidential campaign. He has long maintained that he could not do so because he was under audit, but IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig has said that there’s no rule that stops the release of tax returns just because they are under audit. At the same time, Rettig said the following: “Would any experienced tax lawyer representing Trump in an I.R.S. audit advise him to publicly release his tax returns during the audit? Absolutely not.”
In any case, details from the Times certainly raised eyebrows, but it’s unclear if any of that will lead to credible allegations of criminal wrongdoing.
Senior WH adviser Ivanka Trump was in on the tax avoidance too pic.twitter.com/Rmx1iKzzkU
— Sam Stein (@samstein) September 27, 2020
Trump wrote off the cost of haircuts, including more than $70,000 paid to style his hair during “The Apprentice.” Together, nine Trump entities have written off at least $95,464 paid to a favorite hair and makeup artist of Ivanka Trump. https://t.co/G38udwaw7w
— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) September 27, 2020
If this story does not illustrate the need to provide a gutted IRS the resources it needs to pursue ultra-wealthy tax evaders, I do not know what will. https://t.co/dx7thfPwaU
— Natasha Sarin (@NatashaRSarin) September 27, 2020
Tax law expert Professor Andy Grewal, who teaches at the University of Iowa School of Law, did not seem to immediately see “bombshells.”
Okay, I finished reading, though I skimmed many paragraphs. Seems like there a variety of potentially debatable deductions, as I would expect from any large return. I don’t think I saw any “bombshells.” #TaxTwitter, please correct me if I’m wrong.
— Andy Grewal (@AndyGrewal) September 27, 2020
That the IRS continues to do its job, despite various left-wing conspiracy theories, should get more attention and should provide comfort. https://t.co/ZQuSKV6YFt
— Andy Grewal (@AndyGrewal) September 28, 2020
“I haven’t seen this level of hysteria since yesterday,” he wrote.
[Image via Joshua Roberts/Getty Images]
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
