Cryer's continuing tax problems

LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by LPC »

I got an inquiry about Tommy Cryer, decided to check on the status of some of his cases, and found that his Tax Court petition is still pending.

Meanwhile, the IRS is apparently investigating Cryer's tax liabilities for the years 2002 through 2007, and filed a petition to enforce an IRS administrative summons against Cryer. The district court ordered Cryer to comply with the summons, rejecting his claim of 5th Amendment privilege. United States v. Cryer, No. 5:09-cv-01144-TS-MLH (U.S.D.C. W.D. La. 6/16/2010).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
VERSUS
TOMMY K. CRYER

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-cv-1144

JUDGE STAGG
MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

ORDER

In written objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, Tommy Cryer ("Cryer") attempts to persuade this court that he is entitled to resist an IRS summons, asserting the Fifth Amendment right against selfincrimination. The Fifth Circuit has held that an individual who seeks to avoid compliance with an IRS summons on the basis of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination bears the burden of first showing that the IRS's purpose in issuing the summons is solely criminal, or that the inquiry is one with dominant criminal overtones. See United States v. Roundtree, 420 F.2d 845,852 (5th Cir. 1969); United States v. Pate, 105 F. App'x 597, 599 (5th Cir. 2004). The mere fact that the evidence obtained through the summons may later be used against the taxpayer in a criminal prosecution is no barrier to enforcement and is not sufficient to invite a Fifth Amendment claim. See Roundtree, 420 F .2d at 850-51. Cryer has failed to bear this threshold burden. Furthermore, the Fifth Circuit has made it abundantly clear that a blanket refusal to produce records or to testify, which Cryer has tendered in this case, is not allowed. See id. at 852; Pate, 105 F. App'x at 599; Steinbrecher v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 712 F.2d 195, 198 (5th Cir. 1983).

For these reasons and those assigned in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and having thoroughly reviewed the record, including the written objections filed, and concurring with the findings of the Magistrate Judge under the applicable law;

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summons
(Doc. 1)
is granted and Defendant, Tommy K. Cryer, is ordered to comply with the
summonses.

THUS DONE AND SIGNED at Shreveport, Louisiana, this the 16th day of June, 2010.

TOM STAGG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7580
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by wserra »

LPC wrote:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
...
a blanket refusal to produce records or to testify, which Cryer has tendered in this case
This guy was Order of the Coif?

A Fifth Amendment objection to a summons is tough enough. A first year PD knows enough to particularize one.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
Judge Roy Bean
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 6:04 pm
Location: West of the Pecos

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by Judge Roy Bean »

wserra wrote:...

A Fifth Amendment objection to a summons is tough enough. ...
I suspect Cryer will posit that there are dominant criminal overtones.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by Dr. Caligari »

The Fifth Circuit has held that an individual who seeks to avoid compliance with an IRS summons on the basis of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination bears the burden of first showing that the IRS's purpose in issuing the summons is solely criminal, or that the inquiry is one with dominant criminal overtones. See United States v. Roundtree, 420 F.2d 845,852 (5th Cir. 1969); United States v. Pate, 105 F. App'x 597, 599 (5th Cir. 2004). The mere fact that the evidence obtained through the summons may later be used against the taxpayer in a criminal prosecution is no barrier to enforcement and is not sufficient to invite a Fifth Amendment claim. See Roundtree, 420 F .2d at 850-51.
I do not believe this is a correct statement of the law. Cryer may not have made a proper showing of a possibility of incrimination, but the 5th Amendment may be invoked even when the inquiry is not dominantly criminal.
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 7580
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by wserra »

Good observation, Dr. C. I think the Court may be confusing the constitutional requirements of the Fifth Amendment with the statutory requirements of 26 USC 7605 as interpreted in United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48 (1964).

But a summons recipient who wishes to invoke the protection of the Fifth Amendment must still make particularized objections.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by LPC »

wserra wrote:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
...
a blanket refusal to produce records or to testify, which Cryer has tendered in this case
This guy was Order of the Coif?

A Fifth Amendment objection to a summons is tough enough. A first year PD knows enough to particularize one.
Another problem is that he has already been indicted for tax evasion and willful failure to file for two of the years at issue, and so double jeopardy should prevent further criminal liability for those years. (I'm not sure if the evasion charges were dropped before or after the jury was empaneled, so I'm not sure whether jeopardy attached, but being found not guilty of willfully failing to file tax returns would certainly complicate any criminal prosecution for those years.)
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Noah
Exalted Parter of the Great Sea of Insanity
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:48 pm

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by Noah »

LPC wrote:
wserra wrote:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
...
a blanket refusal to produce records or to testify, which Cryer has tendered in this case
This guy was Order of the Coif?

A Fifth Amendment objection to a summons is tough enough. A first year PD knows enough to particularize one.
Another problem is that he has already been indicted for tax evasion and willful failure to file for two of the years at issue, and so double jeopardy should prevent further criminal liability for those years. (I'm not sure if the evasion charges were dropped before or after the jury was empaneled, so I'm not sure whether jeopardy attached, but being found not guilty of willfully failing to file tax returns would certainly complicate any criminal prosecution for those years.)
The evasion charges were dismissed before the Jury was empaneled.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by Famspear »

The trial in Cryer's case in U.S. Tax Court (case no. 008118-09) has been set for January 10, 2011, in New Orleans.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Noah
Exalted Parter of the Great Sea of Insanity
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:48 pm

Re: Cryer's continuing tax problems

Post by Noah »

Famspear wrote:The trial in Cryer's case in U.S. Tax Court (case no. 008118-09) has been set for January 10, 2011, in New Orleans.
Is there any information on the Joint Report and Joint Motion filed? Trial was originally scheduled for May 10, 2010.