Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Criminal Tax Fraud and Tax Controversy 2012 – December 6-7, 2012

The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Criminal Tax Fraud Conference:

When

December 06 – 07, 2012

Where

  • Wynn Las Vegas
  • 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S
  • Las Vegas, NV, 89109-1967
  • United States of America

As in past years, these institutes will offer the most knowledgeable panelists from the government, the judiciary and the private bar.  Attendees will include attorneys and accountants who are just beginning to practice in tax controversy and tax fraud defense, as well as those who are highly experienced practitioners.  The break-out sessions will encourage an open discussion of hot topics.  The program will provides valuable updates on new developments and strategies, along with the opportunity to meet colleagues, renew acquaintances and exchange ideas.

Michigan Zaps Zappers – Cash Business Owners Beware!

The National Law Review recently featured an article by Paul L.B. McKenney of Varnum LLP regarding Cash Business Owners in Michigan:

Varnum LLP

The proverbial “second set of books” cat and mouse game with taxing authorities now reflects the fact that most point-of-sale, or POS, bookkeeping is done electronically.  Michigan recently joined numerous other jurisdictions by enacting tax enforcement spawned legislation making the sale, purchase, installation, transfer or mere possession of any “zapper” software subject to a felony.   Zappers are also known as automated sales suppression devices.  Michigan’s statute contains a mandatory minimum of one year incarceration and severe monetary sanctions. See MCLA § 750.411w.  The statute defines a zapper as a software program, however accessed or possessed, that “falsifies the electronics records of electronic cash registers and other point-of-sale systems, including, but not limited to transaction data and transaction reports.”  MCLA § 750.411w(4)(a). In essence it creates a second set of books, albeit electronic. While the sole purpose of zappers is tax evasion, the prosecution does not have to prove intent, merely use, sale or possession. The zapper software is typically run off a USB thumb drive rather than residing on the computer’s hard drive to avoid leaving evidence of its use.  However, as noted below, there is a readily identifiable electronic trail.  Zappers have been quietly marketed by freelancing IT types and certain cash register sales people.

A not uncommon example illustrates what a zapper does.  Assume a restaurant or other cash receipts business grosses $250,000 per month and is highly profitable.  A zapper software “entrepreneur” visits the restaurant early in the month and is told precisely what recorded cash bank deposits are as well as credit card charges totals by day.  Alternately, the peddler may sell a USB drive and also provide needed technical support. Assume reported sales total $200,000 and there is $50,000 of unreported cash, or “skim.”  The zapper software will quickly and accurately modify the sales records a) by transaction b) by day c) to the penny resulting in the credit card charges and cash deposits equaling what is reported on the books.  Thus a traditional audit will find that everything appears to be in order, at least until someone finds evidence of the zapper.

Zappers represent significant lost sales tax and other tax dollars to states.  For example, three years ago California estimated zappers at restaurants cost that state $2,800,000,000 in receipts and the corresponding New York estimate was $1,700,000,000.  See “State governments target tax-cheating software,” Bloomberg Businessweek, April 3, 2012.  In an era of record state fiscal problems, this is real money.

The recent Michigan legislation is effective as of August 29, 2012.  It is patterned after  another enforcement problem the Michigan Department of Treasury encountered and overcame, false cigarette tax stamps.  The Michigan Treasury was hemorrhaging cash because of cigarettes that were brought in from out of state and counterfeit Michigan stamps were purchased on a flourishing underground market.  The Department of Treasury urged the legislature to adopt legislation that the mere possession of cigarettes with counterfeit stamps required a minimum prison term.  Legislation followed, the minimum mandatory jail time virtually ended the fake stamp problem overnight and Treasury receipts from  cigarette taxes swelled.

Economic Sanctions Too

The zapper legislation has teeth.  In addition to the one-year minimum mandatory term, there is a fine of up to $100,000.  However, from a monetary perspective, there is another more costly provision with which requires disgorgement of “all profits associated with the sale or use of …” a zapper.  In the above example, if the skim is $50,000 a month, then $600,000 a year is subject to forfeiture.  The offending party is also responsible for all Michigan sales, withholding and other taxes, penalties and interest.  These other levies include the corporate income tax and  individual income tax.  Typically cash businesses that use zappers, such as restaurants and retailers selling small dollar amount items, also pay employees all or some of their wages in cash “under the table” and/or purchase food or inventory.

Zapper programs originated in Europe and migrated first to Quebec in North America.  They came from jurisdictions where there were value added taxes.  The Internal Revenue Service has taken certain steps to target businesses that might employ zappers, and the State of Michigan has taken notice.  It should be pointed out that Michigan’s vigorous criminal and civil penalty regime is separate and distinct from the Internal Revenue Service, which is also free to pursue the same individual and business.  There is an exchange of information agreement between the Internal Revenue Service and the Michigan Department of Treasury.

Zapper’s Electronic Fingerprints and Enforcement

Those selling zappers to business owners tout that it leaves no electronic fingerprints, and thus is invisible to the IRS and other law enforcement agencies. That dog don’t hunt.  The reality is that zappers leave telltale electronic fingerprints, and the IRS and other agencies have sophisticated criminal techies who can readily check a computer system and flag evidence of a zapper.

How have the IRS and Michigan uncovered businesses running zappers?  A secret ceases to be secret when two or more people know about it.  When the owner, the manager of a restaurant or store, the zapper software peddler and others, such as the controller or bookkeeper, key employees at the restaurant, at least one or more people at each location, etc. know about the zapper, only one needs to talk.  Somebody may have reason to talk, such as a problem with the DEA, IRS, FBI or other law enforcement agency and will readily give up the business owner in exchange for no prosecution or a reduction in charges or sentencing.  For example, a metro Detroit freelance IT salesman peddling zappers to bars and restaurants was discovered when a party with law enforcement issues named him.  That salesman, in exchange for an extremely lenient sentence,  in turn identified and cooperated with Federal law enforcement in prosecuting numerous customers for tax evasion.  Some of his customers went to jail. The IRS and other federal and state agencies are seasoned veterans of how to play that game most effectively.

Reality

Those who raid businesses with search warrants typically take away computers, hard drives, USB thumb drives, and other hardware for inspection by highly sophisticated technicians.  What does a cash business owner face if his or her business is raided by the State Police or other tax or  law enforcement personnel and evidence that a zapper has been applied to the electronic books is uncovered?  A plethora of problems.  A short, non-inclusive list includes:

  1. The new Michigan legislation and its mandatory jail time and economic sanctions;
  2. Michigan criminal sanctions for various false returns as well as associated civil tax liabilities, fraud penalties and other penalties and interest;
  3. IRS criminal issues including, a five year evasion felony per year and a three year max for false statements on a tax return,
  4. Myriad IRS civil liabilities for income tax and payroll taxes and associated penalties as well as interest, compounded daily, and
  5. If there is fraud, then there is no civil statute of limitations in tax.  The IRS and Michigan can and do go back many, many years.

In a well-publicized local zapper case,  the owner of the LaShish chain of thirteen suburban Detroit restaurants  and his wife were found by the IRS with zapper software that underreported over $16,000,000 in skimmed revenues.  The owner was indicted on tax and other charges, is currently a fugitive living in Lebanon, his wife went to jail, and the government seized and sold the formerly prosperous restaurants.

Passive Business Owners & Entities With Multiple Locations

Owners are not the only ones who might want to skim, and use a zapper to hide it. A absentee owner as well as owners of multiple locations have two problems if managers or key employees use zappers to hide embezzlement.  In addition to being the victim of the skim, the larcenous employee will tell the IRS and Michigan Treasury that the owner must have done it, and the owner has criminal and civil exposure.  Such owners can protect themselves by unannounced electronic audits to determine if any zappers have been used.  A telltale sign is that servers, per managers, need to be replaced with unusual frequency.  That can well be  an attempt to hide evidence of electronic tampering..

What To Tell Clients

Smaller business clients that have zappers are not going to boast about it to their counsel. You might pass along a proverbial word to the wise to cash business owners.  This new zapper law is out there, it has teeth, and those who ignore it do so at their peril to both personal liberty and treasure.  Also, as noted just above, beware of skimming employees.

© 2012 Varnum LLP

In Effort to Extradite UK Man in Piracy Case, DOJ Is Overreaching

The National Law Review recently published an article by Sarah Coffey of Ifrah Law regarding Copyright Piracy:

 

 

A current anti-piracy case demonstrates the U.S. government’s intent to enforce its copyright laws not just beyond national borders, but beyond the extent of logic. The U.S. Department of Justice has issued an arrest warrant and extradition order for a 24-year-old college student in England who ran a website that contained links to independent websites that hosted pirated television shows and movies. By holding a mere intermediary accountable for allegedly pirated content offered on other websites, the department has set an alarming precedent with major free speech implications.

Richard O’Dwyer, who has never left the United Kingdom, is at the center of a heated debate regarding U.S. laws related to copyright, free speech, and jurisdiction. O’Dwyer ‘s website, TvShack.net, is registered in the United States, thereby giving the U.S. government a claim to exert jurisdiction over it and its owner even though the servers hosting the website are not U.S.-based. The website allowed users to search for and link to other websites; the government alleges that some of those links led to pirated movies and television shows. The government seized the domain on June 30, 2010, for “violations of federal criminal copyright infringement laws.” O’Dwyer has been charged with conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and criminal infringement of copyright.

The government’s case against O’Dwyer raises a number of important issues. First, O’Dwyer himself did not host the allegedly infringing material. His website allowed users to run searches that returned links to both legal and allegedly illegal content on external websites. If O’Dwyer can be criminally prosecuted for the dissemination of copyrighted content that he did not host, where would the chain of liability for such content end? Would search engines linking to such websites bear responsibility for their content? Would anyone sending a link to that website face criminal prosecution, even someone who actually download or view the content? There is no telling how far the DOJ intends to push this issue, but O’Dwyer’s case is a good indication that the DOJ seeks to extend the limits as far as the courts will allow.

O’Dwyer’s status as a British subject raises less novel but no less compelling questions about the United States’ jurisdiction to extradite and prosecute individuals on copyright infringement charges. O’Dwyer’s extradition has been approved by the British courts as well as the British home secretary, but many still believe that any trial should take place in Britain since O’Dwyer has never set foot in the United States and the servers hosting the website were also not on our shores.

O’Dwyer is currently appealing the extradition. Last month, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, in a rare political intervention, called upon British Home Secretary Theresa May to stop the extradition efforts.

The circumstances of this case are reminiscent of the high-profile Megaupload case, in which the U.S. government issued an extradition order for Kim Dotcom in New Zealand. Dotcom ran an internet “lockbox,” in which users could upload content, including video and music, to a website and then share access with other users. Factually, these cases differ in that Megaupload hosted the content that was uploaded by users, whereas O’Dwyer only provided links to other websites. New Zealand also appears less willing to approve extradition, having pushed a hearing on the matter to March 2013, while Dotcom remains free on bail.

In instances of intermediary liability, the need to protect copyrighted works is outweighed by an individual’s interest in remaining free from criminal prosecution for the acts of another. The remedy, if one is justified, is better addressed through civil penalties rather than criminal prosecution.

© 2012 Ifrah PLLC