Category Archives: criminal tax law

The IRS, following President Trump's Executive Order 14247, will
phase out paper checks for tax payments beginning September 30, 2025. 

In one of the most sweeping changes to IRS payment and processing in recent years, the Internal Revenue Service will no longer issue or accept paper checks for most federal payments, including tax payments and refunds,starting September 30, 2025. While this move has been in motion for several years, a new executive order has made it official and set a clear deadline for the change.

Why the IRS Is Moving Away from Paper Checks

This new policy is part of a push by the U.S. Department of the Treasury to modernize payments and reduce fraud, theft, and administrative inefficiency. Electronic payments are more secure and much less likely to be lost, stolen, or altered than traditional paper checks. In fact, paper checks are at least 16 times more likely to result in some sort of payment error or fraud. The cost savings are substantial as well, with each paper check costing about 50 cents to process, versus just a fraction of that for an electronic funds transfer.

How the Change Will Work

Electronic payments will become the default for all federal disbursements, including IRS tax refunds, starting after September 30, 2025. If a tax return includes banking information, the refund will be issued by direct deposit, giving taxpayers their money faster and with far less risk. 

For payments, individuals and businesses will use Direct Pay, EFTPS, debit or credit card, or digital wallets. The IRS assures taxpayers that these options will be widely available and secure.

What About Exceptions?

There will be a few, but only in special cases. Limited waivers or exceptions may be available to individuals who do not have access to electronic banking, face significant hardship, or encounter unique situations where electronic payments are not feasible. In these rare instances, taxpayers can work directly with the IRS or Treasury for alternative arrangements.

SEE SUBSEQUENT BLOG POST FOR IMPACT
ON FOREIGN TAXPAYERS & TRUSTS

What Taxpayers Should Do Now?

Taxpayers who still use checks, whether for refunds or sending payments, should begin preparing for this transition now. That means updating bank account information, learning how to use IRS electronic payment systems, and ensuring electronic deposit details are included with returns. Delays are possible for anyone who tries to use a paper check after the deadline, as the IRS will be unable to process them.

A New Era for IRS Payments

With electronic payments, taxpayers can expect quicker refunds, fewer delays, and enhanced security. This is a significant step in reducing government waste and the risks associated with traditional check payments. If not already familiar, now is the time to learn how to make IRS payments electronically and to ensure that the next tax return includes the necessary information for direct deposit.

Change is rarely easy, but in this case, the benefits are clear. The IRS’s move away from paper checks is designed to make the tax payment and refund process faster, safer, and more efficient for everyone.

 Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

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

Sources:

1.       https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-to-phase-out-paper-tax-refund-checks-starting-with-individual-taxpayers

2.      https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/modernizing-payments-to-and-from-americas-bank-account    

3.      https://www.claconnect.com/en/resources/articles/25/irs-electronic-payments   

4.      https://www.duanemorris.com/alerts/irs_shifts_electronic_methods_tax_refunds_payments_0925.html  

5.       https://www.grantthornton.com/insights/alerts/tax/2025/flash/irs-electronic-payment-requirements      

6.      https://www.meadenmoore.com/blog/tax/irs-payment-changes-coming-september-2025-act-now       

7.       https://www.irs.gov/payments/pay-your-taxes-by-debit-or-credit-card 

8.      https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc202  

9.      https://www.irs.gov/payments/direct-pay-help

10.   https://www.eftps.gov

11.    https://arbcpa.com/irs-moves-toward-mandatory-electronic-payments-what-you-need-to-know/

12.   https://www.irs.gov/payments

13.   https://www.reddit.com/r/tax/comments/1l7gfbc/what_are_your_plans_for_the_irs_no_longer/

14.   https://www.irs.gov/filing/get-an-extension-to-file-your-tax-return

15.    https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-time-guide-use-irs-electronic-payment-options-for-fast-safe-service-avoid-penalties-and-interest

16.   https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-to-phase-out-paper-tax-refund-checks-starting-with-individual-taxpayers

17.    https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2025/09/23/irs-confirms-that-it-will-make-the-switch-from-paper-refund-checks/

18.   https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/modernizing-payments-to-and-from-americas-bank-account

19.   https://www.nextgov.com/digital-government/2025/09/irs-announces-phased-end-paper-check-refunds/408314/

Read more at: Tax Times blog

A Texas federal judge has ruled that the IRS cannot assess more than $1 million in FBAR penalties against Sharnjeet Sagoo without first providing her an opportunity for a jury trial, marking a pivotal constitutional moment in tax enforcement lawsuits.

What Happened in U.S. v. Sagoo

Sharnjeet Sagoo, a U.S. citizen, allegedly failed to report foreign financial accounts in Kenya, India, and England from 2011 to 2013, with balances ranging between $1.4 million and $1.7 million. The IRS administratively assessed willful FBAR penalties totaling over $1,020,922.50 after an examination. After Sagoo did not pay, the government sued to convert these penalties into a federal court judgment. Sagoo moved to dismiss, arguing her right to a jury trial was violated when penalties were assessed administratively, without jury involvement.

The Legal Issue

The government maintained that Sagoo could still have a jury trial in district court, but the judge disagreed. 

Citing The Supreme Court’s Decision In SEC V. Jarkesy, 
Which Established That Government Agencies Imposing Civil Penalties Must Offer Jury Trials, The Court Found That IRS FBAR Assessments Made The IRS Both Prosecutor And Judge, Violating Sagoo’s Seventh Amendment Rights. 

The judge held that the constitutional guarantee of a jury trial is not satisfied after the agency has already determined facts, interpreted the law, and imposed penalties.

Why It Matters

The Sagoo decision marks a significant development for taxpayers facing willful FBAR penalties. While the government is likely to appeal, this ruling creates uncertainty for the IRS and sets a precedent for future FBAR enforcement, suggesting that district courts cannot rubber-stamp massive penalties without first offering taxpayers a jury trial.

Tax professionals should track this litigation closely, as its implications may ripple through both current and future IRS enforcement actions. 

For taxpayers considering streamlined or voluntary disclosure programs, the Sagoo case underscores the need to robustly document non-willful status and consult expert counsel given the IRS’s shifting, more aggressive posture. Stay tuned as this landmark ruling may reshape how FBAR penalties are imposed and challenged for years to come.

 Do You Have Undeclared Offshore Income?

Sources:

1.      https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/federal/articles/2390362/-1m-fbar-penalty-without-jury-unconstitutional-judge-says  

2.      https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewroberts/2025/09/19/federal-court-strikes-down-fbar-penalty--violates-seventh-amendment/    

3.      https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/irs-loses-bid-for-1-million-fbar-penalty-for-lack-of-jury-trial 

4.      https://news.bloomberglaw.com/banking-law/irs-loses-bid-for-1-million-fbar-penalty-for-lack-of-jury-trial  

5.      https://www.pstein.com/blog/top-2024-u-s-court-cases-affecting-u-s-citizens-living-abroad/ 

6.      https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/articles/2390362/1m-fbar-penalty-without-jury-unconstitutional-judge-says

7.      https://www.law360.com/articles/2390362/-1m-fbar-penalty-without-jury-unconstitutional-judge-says

8.      https://www.thefdalawblog.com/2025/08/federal-court-declares-fdas-civil-monetary-penalty-provisions-for-tobacco-products-unconstitutional/

9.      https://www.massbar.org/publications/ejournal/ejournal-article/section-review-2024-november-december-2024/shifting-currents-in-fbar-penalties-a-review-of-the-most-recent-fbar-decisions

10.  https://www.massbar.org/publications/ejournal/ejournal-article/section-review-2023-may-june-2023/supreme-court-curbs-penalties-in-latest-fbar-ruling

11.  https://freemanlaw.com/challenging-fbar-penalties-in-federal-court-fbar-litigation/

12.  https://www.coleschotz.com/important-supreme-court-decision-will-decide-how-non-willful-fbar-penalties-are-calculated/

13.  https://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/rules-and-orders

14.  https://kpmg.com/xx/en/our-insights/gms-flash-alert/flash-alert-2023-048.html

15.  https://law.utexas.edu/faculty/publications/1987-A-Tull-Tale-of-More-Right-Versus-Less-Filling-The-Right-to-Trial-by-Jury-in-Federal-Civil-/

16.  https://www.lataxattorney.com/practice-areas/offshore-assets/fbar-case-summaries/

17.  https://www.txnd.uscourts.gov

18.  https://www.michbar.org/journal/Details/ArticleID=4738

19.  https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/cases/67473a7c7eb94b036442ac39

20.  https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/articles/2310252/texan-calls-1-7m-in-fbar-penalties-unconstitutional

21.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewroberts/2025/09/19/federal-court-strikes-down-fbar-penalty--violates-seventh-amendment/

22.  https://www.law360.com/articles/2390362/-1m-fbar-penalty-without-jury-unconstitutional-judge-says

23.  https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/irs-loses-bid-for-1-million-fbar-penalty-for-lack-of-jury-trial

24.  https://www.pstein.com/blog/top-2024-u-s-court-cases-affecting-u-s-citizens-living-abroad/

25.  https://www.massbar.org/publications/ejournal/ejournal-article/section-review-2024-november-december-2024/shifting-currents-in-fbar-penalties-a-review-of-the-most-recent-fbar-decisions

26.  https://www.taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov/news/nta-blog/nta-blog-chapter-61-foreign-information-penalties-part-three/2023/05/

27.  https://freemanlaw.com/challenging-fbar-penalties-in-federal-court-fbar-litigation/

28.  https://www.lataxattorney.com/practice-areas/offshore-assets/penalties-for-failure-to-file-an-fbar/

29.  https://www.twrblog.com/2023/03/supreme-court-limits-penalties-for-nonwillful-fbar-failures-in-bittner-decision/

30.  https://patellawoffices.com/blog/planning-for-tax-minimization/irs-announces-new-rules-for-fbar-penalties/

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Baker McKenzie, the global law firm, has been drawn into a sweeping federal probe focusing on the use and potential abuse of Puerto Rico’s tax incentives by U.S. taxpayers. Federal investigators recently issued a subpoena to the firm, seeking records related to its work on Puerto Rican tax planning structures. The investigation is targeting arrangements where wealthy individuals claim residency in Puerto Rico under Act 60, benefiting from significant or even total exemptions on income, dividends, and capital gains.

In response, Baker McKenzie has notified affected clients and advised them to seek independent legal counsel. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami is leading the effort, part of a larger campaign to address what authorities see as billions of dollars sheltered from U.S. taxation through aggressive or potentially improper interpretation of Puerto Rico’s residency rules.

The spotlight is on advice rendered by former Baker McKenzie partners who have a history of publishing and presenting on the tax advantages for Americans relocating to Puerto Rico. These incentives, created under Act 22 and now expanded into Act 60, have drawn thousands of wealthy applicants since enactment, prompting growing calls from lawmakers for more stringent oversight.

The law firm has sent waves of letters since last fall to Baker clients acknowledging the grand jury subpoena and its duty to turn over certain client documents to the government. 

The letter said the government subpoena sought all records “pertaining to” work by two Baker partners, Jeffrey Rubinger and Summer LePree, as well as a firm paralegal. The term “records” is defined as “books, papers, documents, data, or other objects relating to Puerto Rican Tax Planning Structures.”

Rubinger and Lepree have since left Baker for the Miami office of Winston & Strawn LLP. Jed Dwyer, a defense lawyer representing Rubinger, said his client had done “nothing wrong.”

While authorities have not announced allegations against Baker McKenzie itself, the firm’s cooperation highlights mounting scrutiny on legal and financial professionals advising on these structures. At the heart of the issue is the complex and subjective determination of bona fide residency in Puerto Rico, a matter complicated by evolving IRS enforcement and ongoing debate in Congress about the future of these tax incentive programs.

This new federal attention sends a strong signal to advisers and taxpayers alike that government agencies are watching closely and that tax planning around Puerto Rico’s unique incentives comes with heightened risk in today’s enforcement environment.

 Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

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

Sources:

1.       https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/baker-mckenzie-pulled-into-us-probe-of-puerto-rico-tax-abuses    

2.      https://news.bloombergtax.com/financial-accounting/oecd-working-to-resolve-global-minimum-tax-issues-by-year-end  

3.      https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report-state/austria-mof-clarifies-tax-liability-of-managing-director-for-unpaid-company-tax-debts 

4.      https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/business/irs-puerto-rico-tax.html 

5.       https://christiesrealestatepr.com/blog/act-60-2025-reforms-puerto-rico

6.      https://tiempocapital.com/insights/articles/puerto-ricos-act-60-update-2025/

7.       https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/law-firm-baker-mckenzie-drops-lawsuit-against-irs-over-partnership-tax-crackdown-2024-05-20/

8.      https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report-state/canada-gazettes-consolidated-text-of-income-tax-act-72

9.      https://christiankleinerluxuryrealestate.com/blog/how-puerto-ricos-2025-act-60-update-impacts-luxury-home-buyers

10.   https://gordonlaw.com/learn/puerto-rico-crypto-tax-haven/

11.    https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/irs-enforcement-efforts-in-puerto-rico-gaining-steam-wave-of-cases-expected/

12.   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/democrats-press-irs-probe-puerto-rico-tax-breaks-rcna126182

13.   https://www.pillsburylaw.com/a/web/fq5mCan7swd5uos4Fbmg61/05-2025-puerto-rico-tax-audits-strafford.pdf

14.   https://www.icij.org/news/2024/08/under-industry-pressure-irs-division-blocked-agents-from-using-new-law-to-stop-wealthy-tax-dodgers/

15.    https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/news/renewed-calls-to-close-puerto-rico-tax-loophole/

16.   https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/people/l/lipton-richard-m

17.    https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/irs-heeds-call-to-investigate-misuse-of-puerto-rican-residency-tax-benefits/

18.   https://www.propublica.org/article/the-irs-decided-to-get-tough-against-microsoft-microsoft-got-tougher

19.   https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/baker-mckenzie-pulled-into-us-probe-of-puerto-rico-tax-abuses

20.  https://news.bloombergtax.com/financial-accounting/oecd-working-to-resolve-global-minimum-tax-issues-by-year-end

21.   https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/people/l/lipton-richard-m

22.   https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/irs-heeds-call-to-investigate-misuse-of-puerto-rican-residency-tax-benefits/

23.   https://www.propublica.org/article/the-irs-decided-to-get-tough-against-microsoft-microsoft-got-tougher

24.  https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report-state/canada-gazettes-consolidated-text-of-income-tax-act-72

Read more at: Tax Times blog

The Eleventh Circuit’s recent opinion in Battat v. Commissioner offers important lessons for tax practitioners facing IRS penalties and constitutional challenges to the Tax Court structure. This case stands at the intersection of two hotly litigated issues: supervisory approval of penalties under IRC § 6751(b), and the ongoing attack on the constitutionality of Tax Court judges’ job protections.

Background

Stanley and Zmira Battat petitioned the Tax Court to contest a determination that they owed approximately $2 million in back taxes and penalties for tax year 2008. The IRS had assessed over $1.7 million in unpaid taxes, $82,000 in late-filing penalties, and more than $344,000 in accuracy-related penalties.

The Battats challenged both the process and the authority under which these penalties were imposed. They argued that the IRS examiner’s supervisor had not approved the initial penalty determination in accordance with IRC § 6751(b), and pressed a constitutional claim that the statutory protections against at-will removal for Tax Court judges violate the separation of powers.

Supervisory Approval of Penalties: The § 6751(b) Dispute

A central issue was whether the IRS satisfied the requirement that a supervisor approve the “initial determination” of penalty assessment. The examiner’s supervisor did not sign the first formal letter issued to the Battats. However, before issuing the notice of deficiency, a different IRS manager signed both a civil penalty approval form and a related letter.

The Tax Court initially sided with the taxpayers, finding that § 6751(b) required the supervisor’s signature on the original penalty communication. But, the Eleventh Circuit relied on its earlier opinion in Kroner and concluded that the statute only requires written supervisory approval any time before the penalty is assessed, not specifically before the first notice is sent to the taxpayer. Since the IRS obtained that approval before assessment, the court affirmed the penalty.

Constitutional Challenge to Tax Court Judges' Protections

The Battats also launched a broad attack on the constitutionality of Tax Court judges’ removal protections, arguing these violate the President’s Article II executive authority and separation of powers principles. Here, too, they met a dead end. The Eleventh Circuit declined to upend longstanding precedent, holding that the statutory protections are constitutional and the Battats had not demonstrated any harm arising from the judge protections in their case.

Practical Implications

Battat reinforces the Eleventh Circuit’s taxpayer-adverse approach on two key fronts:

·         Supervisory approval of IRS penalties is valid so long as it occurs before assessment, even if not in the initial penalty determination letter.

·         Attacks on Tax Court judicial independence under separation of powers and Article II face a formidable barrier in current Eleventh Circuit precedent.

Tax professionals should take note that the procedural timing of managerial signatures is not enough to invalidate IRS penalties—substantive compliance before assessment remains the rule. Likewise, constitutional challenges to the Tax Court judiciary are unlikely to succeed without a different approach or new precedent.

 Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

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

Sources: 

Sources:

1.       https://www.law360.com/articles/2389129/11th-circ-finds-couple-on-hook-for-penalty-on-back-taxes    

2.      https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/taxpayers-challenge-to-irs-procedure-tax-court-judges-fails  

3.      https://www.taxcontroversy360.com/2022/09/courts-split-on-supervisory-approval-requirement-for-tax-penalties/  

4.      https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/articles/2295919/tax-court-judge-protections-challenged-in-11th-circ  

5.       https://www.taxcontroversy360.com/2017/02/battat-v-commissioner-a-primer-on-the-history-of-the-us-tax-court/ 

6.      https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2682&context=jour_mlr  

7.       https://www.abi.org/feed-item/11th-circuit-issues-important-opinion-on-what-constitutes-a-“return”-for-purposes-of

8.      https://brieflytaxing.com/battat-v-commissioner-t-c-memo-2021-57/

9.      https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/2025/

10.   https://www.taxcontroversy360.com/tag/battat-v-commissioner/

11.    https://ustaxcourt.gov/files/documents/appellate_report_october_2024.pdf

12.   https://www.taxcontroversy.com/battat-v-commissioner-tax-penalties-called-into-question/

13.   https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions

14.   https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/654b0ecbc2e6e0006eb45906/amp

15.    https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/articles/2276360/biz-owners-ask-11th-circ-to-revive-tax-penalty-challenge

16.   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/23/2024-29074/rules-for-supervisory-approval-of-penalties

17.    https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/cases/6717edaa4184dfa8a50859ce

18.   https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/202413401.pdf

19.   https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/unpublished-opinions-log

20.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Eleventh_Circuit

21.   https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/202413401.pdf

22.   https://www.law360.com/tax-authority/articles/2295919/tax-court-judge-protections-challenged-in-11th-circ

23.   https://www.taxcontroversy360.com/2017/02/battat-v-commissioner-a-primer-on-the-history-of-the-us-tax-court/

24.  https://rsmus.com/insights/tax-alerts/2022/eleventh-circuit-reverses-tax-courts-penalty-approval-analysis.html

25.   https://www.troutman.com/insights/eleventh-circuit-re-opens-tcpa-lead-generator-loophole-and-signals-further-erosion-of-judicial-deference-to-administrative-rules/

26.  https://www.law360.com/articles/2286099/11th-circ-urged-to-reject-biz-owners-tax-penalty-challenge

27.   https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/2025/

https://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/unpublished-opinions-log

Read more at: Tax Times blog