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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Blog

IRS To Open Criminal Cyber Data Center To Crack Down On Highly Technical And Cryptocurrency-Related Crimes

According to Law360The IRS Criminal Investigation division is close to unveiling a centralized hub that will provide additional resources to bolster the agency's efforts to crack down on highly technical and cryptocurrency-related crimes, division chief Jim Lee said on April 17, 2023.

The Advanced Collaboration and Data Center, or ACDC, will bring together expertise from data scientists, cybercrime special agents, and computer scientists and analysts, as well as experts from other federal agencies, Lee said at a tax conference at University of California, Irvine School of Law.

"Think about a center where we're equipped with the most up-to-date tools, training and resources to tackle the most notable cyber challenges that investigators around the country see daily," Lee said, noting that he hopes to open the ACDC in the "next couple of months."

The ACDC Is A Critical and Ongoing Investment To Stay In Front f The Rapidly Growing Arena of Cyber-related Crimes,

 Including The Tax Evasion And Money-Laundering Activities Involved In Cryptocurrency Transactions, Lee Said.

The Criminal Investigation division and other law enforcement agencies have to "invest appropriately in this fast-changing environment," he said.

Lee gave the example of agents encountering digital evidence found in an operating system in a laptop or smartphone. If the agents do not have the tools, training or resources to understand the evidence, they will be able to go to the ACDC to receive assistance from a team of investigators, analysts and other experts, he said. The center will have tools that can access obsolete, broken or encrypted devices, Lee said, noting that it will provide a wide range of support.

In the past few years, the Criminal Investigation division has pursued more digital asset investigations, with half of cases involving attempts to circumvent U.S. tax laws. 


The Division Has Seized Cryptocurrency Assets Valued At Approximately $7.1 Billion And Has Forfeited Approximately $1.1 Billion In Ill-Gotten Proceeds, According To The Division's Annual Report Released In November.

The ACDC will add to the Criminal Investigation division's work to bolster its cryptocurrency expertise. In 2021, the division created the Office of Cyber and Forensic Services to bring its digital asset and cybercrime specialists under one roof. The office also supports agencywide investigations into the illicit use of digital assets to exploit the U.S. tax and financial system, according to the report.


Have a Virtual Currency Tax Problem?

Value Your Freedom?
Contact the Tax Lawyers at
Marini & Associates, P.A. 
 
 for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact us at
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243). 

 

 





 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Smelled Something Fishy and Charged 7 Fishermen with Tax Evasion and Failing to File Returns

According to the DoJ, a federal grand juries in Providence, Rhode Island, and Boston returned separate indictments charging seven commercial fishermen with tax evasion and failing to file returns.

According to the indictments, the commercial fishermen each worked for fishing companies operating primarily out of New Bedford, Massachusetts, or Point Judith, Rhode Island, and received substantial compensation. 

The companies allegedly paid the fishermen as independent contractors and documented that income by, among other things, filing Forms 1099 with the IRS that reported the funds paid to the fishermen. 

It is alleged that notwithstanding the receipt of this income, each fisherman did not file individual tax returns or pay all the taxes owed on that income, for some defendants, they allegedly failed to file and/or pay taxes for a decade or more. 

To conceal the source and disposition of their income, the fishermen allegedly cashed paychecks and then used the cash to fund their lifestyles. One of the defendants allegedly also used the name and Social Security number of another individual to conduct business as a further effort to hide income. In some instances, the fishermen allegedly filed false tax returns for certain years by either not reporting their fishing income or by reporting false business expense deductions to reduce the amount of taxes they owed. 

Each Allegedly Evaded Tax On Between
$900,000 and $1.9 Million In Income.

The seven fishermen indicted are:

Jorge Cazarin of New Bedford, Massachusetts, was charged with five counts of tax evasion and five counts of willful failure to file tax returns for 2016 through 2020.

Christopher Garraty of Newport and East Greenwich, Rhode Island, was charged with three counts of tax evasion and three counts of willful failure to file for 2016 through 2018, and a fourth count of tax evasion related to taxes he allegedly owed for 2007 through 2011.

Wojciech Kaminski of West Warwick, Rhode Island, was charged with five counts of tax evasion for 2014 and 2016 through 2019 and four counts of willful failure to file tax returns for 2016 through 2019.

Brian Kobus of Durham, Connecticut, was charged with five counts of tax evasion for 2017 through 2021.

Rodolfo Membreno of Fall River, Massachusetts, was charged with six counts of tax evasion for 2012 and 2017 through 2021 and four counts of willful failure to file tax returns for 2017 through 2019 and 2021.

John Doe of New Bedford, Massachusetts, was charged with six counts of tax evasion for 2016 through 2021 and three counts of willful failure to file tax returns for 2016 through 2018.

Miguel Cruz Rubio of New Bedford, Massachusetts, and Elizabethtown, North Carolina, was charged with four counts of tax evasion for 2016 through 2019.

If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum sentence of five (5) years in prison for each evasion count and one (1) year in prison for each failure to file a tax return charge. 

A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

  Have an IRS Tax Problem?


Like Your Freedom?

 Contact the Tax Lawyers at

Marini & Associates, P.A. 


for a FREE Tax HELP Contact us at:
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or 
Toll Free at 888 8TAXAID (888-882-9243)



Read more at: Tax Times blog

Some Nonresidents with U.S. Assets Must File Estate Tax Returns

Deceased nonresidents who were not American citizens are subject to U.S. estate taxation with respect to their U.S.-situated assets.

U.S.-situated assets include American real estate, tangible personal property, and securities of U.S. companies. A nonresident’s stock holdings in American companies are subject to estate taxation even though the nonresident held the certificates abroad or registered the certificates in the name of a nominee.

Exceptions: Assets that are exempt from U.S. estate tax include securities that generate portfolio interest, bank accounts not used in connection with a trade or business in the U.S., and insurance proceeds.

Having worked for the Internal Revenue Service for 32 years as a senior attorney in international estate tax, and having subsequently prepared several hundred nonresident alien estate tax returns (form 706NA) for aliens who died owning property in the US with a value in excess of $60,000, I am aware that many attorneys/accountants who prepare tax returns in this somewhat limited area (perhaps 1,200 to 1,500 filings per year) are not familiar with a number of tax savings devices which are not intuitively obvious. 


The most obvious device for reducing tax, is a tax treaty or convention between the United States and the country from which the decedent originated or was domiciled. Estate tax treaties between the U.S. and other countries often provide more favorable tax treatment to nonresidents by limiting the type of asset considered situated in the U.S. and subject to U.S. estate taxation. Executors for nonresident estates should consult such treaties where applicable.

However, this will not cover most countries since there are approximately 193 countries in the world and the treaties encompass about 20 of these countries. The bulk of the countries covered by treaty are in Europe, England, and Canada. The treaties themselves are very poorly written and difficult to understand so I would recommend that when you do use such a treaty, you also look at the interpretation of the treaty created by the Treasury Department so that mere humans can understand the incomprehensible.


Beyond treaties, there were a number of devices which exist, the purpose of which is to reduce the federal estate tax. The most prevalent of these is offered in section 2106, IRC, where one is invited to, by verifying the value of the gross estate outside the United States, take apportioned deductions for debts and expenses incurred worldwide by the decedent or his estate. Very critical to remember is the fact that the IRS must believe your depiction of the non-US assets and their fair market value. Many people come to me and said that they want to use a zero figure for the gross estate outside the United States and that the IRS will have to live with it. Wrong! If the IRS has even a scintilla of suspicion about the purported foreign assets or their value, the IRS will simply disallow all the debts and expenses.   


At that point, if you wish to continue to pursue the deductibility of the debts and expenses, you are required to prove both the expenses themselves and the fair market value of the assets which means, words that you don't like to hear, an IRS audit!  It is much easier to try to verify the value of the foreign assets as part of your due diligence and avoid a confrontation with an estate tax attorney. 


Community property is an area with rich rewards for the tax preparer; it is also very poorly understood. If the decedent lived in a country in which the presumption of marriage is community property of assets, all assets (except gifts and inheritances) obtained by the wedded couple become community property. When one of them dies, irrespective of title, one half of the assets are excluded from the estate since they are legally the property of the other person. Generally the IRS is somewhat skeptical about this claim so if I have an estate from which I wish to exclude a portion based on community property, I generally get an opinion of law from counsel in the country where the marriage occurred. 


The marital deduction-since the 1990s, the IRS is not allowed a marital deduction for property passing to a nonresident alien spouse. The criteria for this was that in virtually every instance, the nonresident alien would receive the assets, tax free, and leave the US, paying no tax on assets which had been sitused in the United States. Ergo, no more marital deduction. To try to soften this blow, Congress, in section 2056A, created the qualified domestic trust. The qualified domestic trust basically allows assets passing through a special trust to a nonresident alien spouse to qualify for a marital deferral. Each time the spouse removes assets from the trust, he/she, is required to file a form 706QDT. 


Executors for nonresidents must file an estate tax return, Form 706NA, United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping) Tax Return, Estate of a nonresident not a citizen of the United States, if the fair market value at death of the decedent's U.S.-situated assets exceeds $60,000. 

However, if the decedent made substantial lifetime gifts of U.S. property, and used the applicable $13,000 “unified credit exemption” amount to eliminate or reduce any gift tax on the lifetime gifts, a U.S. estate tax return may still be required even if the value of the decedent’s U.S. situated assets is less than $60,000 at the date of death (due to the decrease in the “unified credit exemption” for the lifetime gifts). See Unified Credit (Applicable Credit Amount) Section in Publication 559, Survivors, Executors, and Administrators, and the Form 706NA Instructions for more information.

Have a US Estate Tax Problem?
 



Estate Tax Problems Require
an Experienced Estate Tax Attorney

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

 for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact US at
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).





Robert S. Blumenfeld  - 
 Estate Tax Counsel

Mr. Blumenfeld concentrates his practice in the areas of International Tax and Estate Planning, Probate Law, and Representation of Resident and Non-Resident Aliens before the IRS.

Prior to joining Marini & Associates, P.A., he spent 32 years as the Senior Attorney with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Office of Deputy Commissioner, International.

While with the IRS, he examined approximately 2,000 Estate Tax Returns and litigated various international and tax issues associated with these returns.As a result of his experience, he has extensive knowledge of the issues associated with and the preparation of U.S. Estate Tax Returns for Resident and Non-Resident Aliens, Gift Tax Returns, Form 706QDT and Qualified Domestic Trusts.



Read more at: Tax Times blog

Another Taxpayer’s FBAR Penalty Reduced To $40K Following Bittner

On February 28, 2023 we posted SCOTUS Ruled That Non-willful Failure To File A FBAR Report Warrants a $10,000 Penalty Per Form Not Per Account!, where we discussed The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 28, 2023, in Alexandru Bittner v. U.S., case number 21-1195, that the Bank Secrecy Act's $10,000 maximum penalty for the nonwillful failure to report foreign bank accounts applies on a per-form basis and not per account.

Now According to Law360, the A woman's liability for foreign bank account reporting penalties was reduced to $40,000 from roughly $170,000, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision Bittner v. U.S. finding the penalties are assessed on a per-form, rather than per-account, basis, according to a judgment  in U.S. v. Pauline Kaufman et al., case number 4:20-cv-00514, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division on April 12, 2023.

Pauline Kaufman owes the penalties assessed against her for unintentionally failing to disclose the overseas bank accounts on Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts to the Internal Revenue Service for 2007 through 2010.

Kaufman and the federal government agreed to the $40,000 amount following the Supreme Court's decision in Bittner v. U.S., in which ruled that the penalties for nonwillful failures to correctly file FBARs are applied on a per-form basis, rather than for each account unreported. The government had filed its suit against Kaufman, seeking to collect the $170,000 in assessed penalties against her as well as around $755,000 assessed against her deceased husband for his willful failure to fail to file FBARs. 

The court entered a judgment in October holding Kaufman liable for her husband's willful penalties, as executor of his estate. But the court paused the case, and deliberations over her liability for the $170,000 in nonwillful penalties, while the Supreme Court's decision in Bittner was pending, as both the government and Kaufman told the court that the high court's conclusion on the matter would determine her liability for the penalties. 

Have an FBAR Penalty Problem?  
 


 Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A. 
 
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation at: 
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com 
or 
Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help