Fluent in English, Spanish & Italian | 888-882-9243

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: April 2019

Painter Who White Washes Tax Liability Pleads Guilty to Tax Evasion

According to DoJ, a Long Island, New York, business owner pleaded guilty today to tax evasion.
According to documents filed with the court, Warren J. Krotz, 62, of Huntington, New York, owned and operated W. Krotz Enterprises Inc. (WKEI), a professional painting business that provided services throughout Long Island. Krotz admitted to evading both his individual and employment tax liabilities.


From Around 2010 Through 2016, Krotz Cashed Approximately $6 Million In Checks At Various Check-Cashing Facilities.

  • These checks were gross receipts of WKEI, but Krotz did not report the amounts on WKEI’s corporate income tax returns.
  • He admitted to paying approximately $2 million in wages to employees in cash.
    • As a result, Krotz did not withhold and pay over to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) approximately $300,000 in employment taxes. 

Additionally, Krotz admitted to receiving approximately $3 million in income that he did not report on his personal tax returns.

In Total, Krotz Admitted to Causing a Tax Loss to the IRS of Approximately $1 Million.

The Honorable Joseph F. Bianco scheduled sentencing for Sept. 25, 2019. Krotz faces a statutory maximum sentence of 5 years in prison, as well as restitution and monetary penalties.

Have a IRS Tax Problem? 


 Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A.  

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243 


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Michael Avenatti Charged Stealing From Clients & Avenatti Charged With Tax Evasion -Pleads Not Guilty

Los Angeles federal prosecutors had already charged Avenatti in March with embezzling client funds and bank fraud. The 61-page indictment on Thursday includes those charges.

At a press conference in Los Angeles on Thursday morning, U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna said restitution for the alleged victims will be one of the highest priorities for prosecutors.

“As an attorney, holding a client’s money in a trust is one of your duties,” Hanna said. “This is ‘Lawyer 101’ — you don’t steal your client’s money.”

While he said they wouldn’t be specifically contacting the California State Bar, Hanna said he was sure the bar will see the public indictment and “act accordingly” regarding Avenatti’s law license status.

Avenatti’s attorney, Steven J. Katzman, said in a statement that the indictment proves nothing against his client.

“We intend to fully investigate the charges and provide Mr. Avenatti the robust defense he deserves,” Katzman said.

Los Angeles federal prosecutors claim Avenatti defrauded five of his former clients by lying to them about the details of settlements in their favor while using the money for his own ends.

The indictment alleges that:

  1. Avenatti appropriated a $4 million settlement he had negotiated in 2015 for a client who sued Los Angeles County over injuries that left the client a paraplegic.
  2. As to a second client who settled for $3 million over a personal relationship, prosecutors claim Avenatti used $2.5 million from the settlement to buy a private jet in 2017.
  3. A third client was allegedly duped out of money from a $1.9 million intellectual property settlement in 2017. Avenatti put some of those funds towards his Tully's Coffee business, prosecutors claim.
  4. Avenatti is further accused of stealing from two additional clients who were to be paid $35 million minus attorney fees in a corporate stock transaction. Prosecutors claim Avenatti improperly used some $4 million of the funds to pay bankruptcy creditors and other clients with settlements into which he had dipped.
  5. The government alleges Avenatti also used funds from his coffee business to make payments to clients whose settlement funds he had taken.

Meanwhile, Avenatti was stiffing the government on payroll taxes from his coffee business to the tune of $3.2 million between 2015 and 2017, according to the indictment.

When the IRS started inquiring about taxes the business owed in 2016, Avenatti allegedly lied and claimed he was not involved in the business’ finances and did not know it had failed to pay.

He also started having Tully’s employees deposit funds into an account associated with his car racing team to avoid an IRS levy on an account associated with the coffee chain, according to the indictment.

Avenatti is further charged with failing to file personal tax returns between 2014 and 2017, and failing to file returns for his law firms Eagan Avenatti LLP and Avenatti & Associates between 2015 and 2017.

The case is U.S. v. Avenatti, case number 8:19-cr-00061, in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Michael Avenatti pled not guilty in a California federal courtroom April 29, 2018 to a 36-count indictment that includes charges of embezzling millions from five clients and tax evasion, on top of separate charges in New York that he tried to extort $20 million from Nike.

Have a IRS Tax Problem? 


Contact the Tax Lawyers at Marini& Associates, P.A.  


for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243 


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Program requiring the IRS to hire private debt collection agencies is putting taxpayers at risk

The new program requiring the Internal Revenue Service to hire private debt collection agencies is falling far short of its goals and putting taxpayers at risk of falling prey to scammers, according to a new government report.

The report, from the Government Accountability Office, found that the IRS's private collectors recovered less than 2 percent of over $5 billion in debts. The GAO said the IRS's reports to Congress on the private debt collection program haven’t provided complete financial information either. For example, as of September 2018, the IRS reported program revenue collections of about $89 million and costs of $67 million, suggesting a positive balance of $22 million for the Treasury’s general fund. However, the GAO pointed out the IRS report didn’t clarify that approximately $51 million of the amount collected went to the Treasury and the remaining $38 million was retained by IRS in two special funds to pay for current and future program costs.

“Without this information, Congress has an incomplete picture of the program's true costs and revenues,” said the GAO.

The GAO said the IRS also hasn't fully assessed the potential taxpayer risks in the program. The IRS has documented six risks, including "imposter scams," in which scammers pose as private collectors, but the GAO has identified 10 additional risks.

The current program is the result of legislation passed by Congress in 2015 with a provision requiring the IRS to set up another private debt collection program. The IRS eventually hired three contractors, and began assigning them cases in April 2017.

The GAO found that the IRS hasn’t analyzed the results of the program to identify the types of cases that should not be assigned to collection agencies because they do not result in collections.

The GAO's analysis of IRS data found that between April 2017 and September 2018 about 73,000 of 111,000 cases closed by collection agencies had little or no revenue collected because the collection agencies weren’t able to contact the taxpayer or collect the debt, among other reasons.

“Given the costs associated with managing these cases, without such analyses, the IRS may continue to use resources inefficiently and assign cases with little or no potential for revenue collection, or miss opportunities to assign other cases that could produce more revenue,” said the GAO.

The IRS has identified and taken steps to mitigate some of the program risks that could harm taxpayers, the GAO acknowledged. However, the service hasn’t yet completed the process of identifying and documenting all the risks, and has not fully assessed the risks to taxpayers from the program or its response to these risks.

An IRS official contended that the program has brought in significant revenue since the IRS began assigning cases in April 2017 to private collection agencies.

 “Since that time (through the end of FY 2018) we have assigned over 730,000 cases to PCAs and recovered over $88 million in overdue tax debts for the government,” wrote Kirsten Wielobob, deputy commissioner for services and enforcement at the IRS.
 “The current PDC program has already proven itself to be significantly more effective in the first two years, as compared to its prior iterations.”

She also disagreed with the GAO’s contention that the IRS’s reports to Congress on the program had not provided complete financial information.

A group representing the private tax debt collectors also responded to the report. “The PCA’s welcome effective program oversight, have a strong compliance record, and are always looking for opportunities to improve as the IRS expands the successful Private Debt Collection Program,” said a statement from the Partnership for Tax Compliance. We would look forward to sitting down with GAO staff sometime soon to discuss the program’s proven success.”


Have a IRS Tax Problem? 
Contact the Tax Lawyers at 



Marini& Associates, P.A. 


for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:
orToll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243




Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Issued Guidance on Disclosure to Spouses Who Filed Joint Returns & Then Divorce or Separate

IRS's Small Business/Self-Employed Division has issued guidance to its employees IRS Memo SBSE-05-0419-0010 regarding what collection activity information can and cannot be disclosed with respect to a couple's joint return, where the couple has subsequently divorced or are separated and no longer reside in the same household.

If any tax deficiency with respect to a joint return is assessed, the couple are no longer married or no longer reside in the same household, and either joint filer makes a request in writing, IRS must disclose in writing to the individual making the request whether it has tried to collect the deficiency from the other filer, the general nature of those collection activities, and the amount collected. (Code Sec. 6103(e)(8))

Upon receipt of either a verbal or written request from a taxpayer or his authorized representative, IRS may disclose limited information related to the collection of the tax from the other individual with whom the taxpayer filed a joint return when the taxpayer and the other individual are no longer married or are separated and no longer reside in the same household. Verbal requests will be honored if received from either spouse or his/her authorized representative, after verifying the identity of the person making the request to determine his/her right to the information. Disclosures made pursuant to Code Sec. 6103(e)(8) are limited to the specific tax period associated with the requester's joint deficiency, and the information should not be disclosed if its release will seriously impair federal tax administration.

Information that may be disclosed verbally upon receipt of a verbal or written request from a spouse who has been assessed the joint tax include:

  1. Whether IRS has attempted to collect the deficiency from the other spouse,
  2. The amount collected, if any, and the current collection status (e.g., notice, taxpayer delinquent account (TDA), installment agreement, offer in compromise, suspended), and 
  3. If suspended, the reason for suspension. (e.g., unable to locate, hardship, etc.)

Information which IRS employees cannot disclose includes:

  1. The other spouse's location or telephone number,
  2. Any information about the other spouse’s employment, income, or assets, and/or
  3. The income level at which a currently not collectible account will be reactivated.

The guidance provides several examples, including the following:

Illustration 1: Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer filed a joint return for tax year 2016. They are now divorced and have mirrored assessments under MFT 31 for the year 2016. "Mirrored assessments" is the process of duplicating a joint account into two "MFT 31" accounts, one for each spouse. Mr. Taxpayer recently submitted an accepted offer in compromise (OIC). Mrs. Taxpayer calls in and asks if IRS has tried contacting her husband as he has told her that he owes no more monies for the 2016 tax year. An IRS employee determines that there IRS records show a TC 480, Offer in Compromise Pending and TC 780, Master File Account Compromised posted to her MFT 31 module. While speaking with Mrs. Taxpayer, the employee can tell her that the account does reflect an OIC submission (TC 480) and acceptance (TC 780). He can relay what payments/refund offsets have credited to her MFT 31 and her current outstanding balance.

Illustration 2. Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer filed a joint return for tax year 2016. They are now divorced and have mirrored assessments under MFT 31 for tax year 2016. Mrs. Taxpayer has a continuous wage levy, and the payments have credited to Mr. Taxpayer’s MFT 31 module. Mr. Taxpayer calls in to ask if IRS is receiving regular payments from his ex-spouse. While speaking with Mr. Taxpayer, an IRS employee can tell him that IRS is collecting monies from Mrs. Taxpayer; each month IRS is receiving $475.00 that is being credited to his 2016 module. The source of payment however, is not shareable. The employee also can relay what payments have credited to his MFT 31 module. The employee can relay his current outstanding balance. He cannot disclose any information about the other spouse's employment, income, or assets.

IRS noted that this guidance supersedes the current instructions found in IRM

Have an IRS Tax Problem

With a Former Spouse? 

Contact the Tax Lawyers at 

Marini& Associates, P.A. 

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact Us at:
Call Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243 


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help