The statute of limitations for crimes in violation of the income tax laws is generally six years. However, the taxpayer cannot rely upon the statute of limitations as a defense if the taxpayer's counsel is asserting the statute of limitations defense for the first time on appeal. The taxpayer must press the statute of limitations defense during the trial.
Tag archives: false-tax-return
The owner of multiple U.S.-based energy companies pleaded guilty to foreign bribery and tax charges for his role in a scheme to corruptly secure energy contracts from Venezuela’s state-owned and state-controlled energy company, Petroleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA).
Veronica Fairchild was convicted on four counts of filing false tax returns pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7206 for failing to accurately report the amount of funds she received for sex. The taxpayer appealed the verdict in part because the Court refused her request that the jury be instructed that they must unanimously agree as to person who paid her the funds. The verdict was affirmed.
Taxpayer was convicted of filing false claims for refunds. Taxpayer entered an agreement with others to file false tax returns claimimg refunds and deposited the refund anticipation loan checks in her bank account.
Defendants appealed their convictions on tax violations on several grounds including their Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.
Taxpayer was convicted following trial. He appealed alleging that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions.
A certified public accountant was charged with conspiracy to defraud the IRS, preparing and filing false tax returns and obstructing a CFTC and an IRS investigation. The jury found him not guilty on all counts.
Enhancement for criminally derived income was not applicable to tax returns that did not fail to identify income but overstated expenses.
Defendants and one co-defendant were convicted by a jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas of charges stemming from their tax-fraud conspiracy. Defendants appealed and claimed that their Rule 29 motion due to insufficient evidence should have been granted.
Tax Return Preparer Found Guilty of Preparing False Returns and Government Was Permitted to Call Witnesses Not Charged in the Indictment Who Defendant Prepared False Returns For.