Comments for Tax Whistleblower Blog http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com News and Discussion about Federal Tax Whistleblowing Law from the Attorneys at RewardTax.com Sun, 14 Mar 2010 05:36:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 Comment on How Do Tax Whistleblowers Reconcile the Diebold Case? by Rob http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case/comment-page-1#comment-126 Rob Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:05:00 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case#comment-126 Mr. Heller, Thank you so much for visiting our blog and for adding your additional facts. Your input is so valuable to us. Make no mistake about it, we are on your side! We thank you for what you did, and we sincerely regret that the LA district attorney's office prosecuted you for what we describe as minor crimes of necessity to prevent a much greater crime. Mr. Heller,
Thank you so much for visiting our blog and for adding your additional facts. Your input is so valuable to us. Make no mistake about it, we are on your side! We thank you for what you did, and we sincerely regret that the LA district attorney’s office prosecuted you for what we describe as minor crimes of necessity to prevent a much greater crime.

]]> Comment on Obama Administration Increases Efforts to Pursue International Tax Enforcement by Kelli Garner http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/obama-administration-continues-to-pursue-international-tax-enforcement/comment-page-1#comment-125 Kelli Garner Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:05:24 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/obama-administration-continues-to-pursue-international-tax-enforcement#comment-125 Really nice posts. I will be checking back here regularly. Really nice posts. I will be checking back here regularly.

]]> Comment on Courts Confirm that Whistleblower Rewards are Taxable by Bill Bartmann http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/courts-confirm-that-whistleblower-rewards-are-taxable/comment-page-1#comment-120 Bill Bartmann Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:16:22 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=79#comment-120 Excellent site, keep up the good work Excellent site, keep up the good work

]]> Comment on How Do Tax Whistleblowers Reconcile the Diebold Case? by Steve Heller http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case/comment-page-1#comment-109 Steve Heller Tue, 11 Aug 2009 02:41:54 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case#comment-109 If you don't want to post the comment I submitted, that's fine, it's your blog and you can post/not post whatever you want. But I'm asking you to please correct the inaccurate information about my case that's in the post. The DA's office did not give me a break or a slap on the wrist, they charged me with three felonies and I plead guilty to one felony. Having a felony conviction is not a slap on the wrist, and the felony has continued to prevent me from getting any job at all. I was given 3 years probation, not six months (and I am on probation still). It's true there was no jail time. And there was no fine, but I was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution to the law firm. Thank you in advance for correcting the record. If you don’t want to post the comment I submitted, that’s fine, it’s your blog and you can post/not post whatever you want. But I’m asking you to please correct the inaccurate information about my case that’s in the post. The DA’s office did not give me a break or a slap on the wrist, they charged me with three felonies and I plead guilty to one felony. Having a felony conviction is not a slap on the wrist, and the felony has continued to prevent me from getting any job at all. I was given 3 years probation, not six months (and I am on probation still). It’s true there was no jail time. And there was no fine, but I was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution to the law firm. Thank you in advance for correcting the record.

]]> Comment on How Do Tax Whistleblowers Reconcile the Diebold Case? by Steve Heller http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case/comment-page-1#comment-108 Steve Heller Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:19:29 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/how-do-tax-whistleblowers-reconcile-the-diebold-case#comment-108 I'm Steve Heller, formerly known as "the Diebold Whistle-blower." Just a clarification of facts: I was given three years probation, not six months. I had to pay restitution of $10,000 to the law firm, so while technically that was not a fine, it was still a significant financial punishment. It's true that I did not have to go to jail, but for a first time offender who had never been in trouble with the law before, that's not at all unusual, especially since I never tried to profit from my crime. I would also suggest that the L.A. D.A.'s office did not "give me a break." They charged me with three felonies. They also let me know in very clear terms that if I did not plead guilty to at least one felony (which is what I eventually did) they would push for a state prison sentence of at least three years. To be clear, I have repeatedly acknowledged in all the public speaking and all the writing that I did regarding my case that I committed a serious crime in stealing and exposing attorney-client privileged information. I also stated that I had to be held accountable for my crime in order to protect the attorney-client privilege provision. I do think a misdemeanor charge would have sufficed for accountability, but the DA's office, under tremendous pressure from a very powerful and politically connected law firm (the firm's managing partner was a "Bush Pioneer" which meant he raised more than $250,000 for W. Bush's presidential campaigns), charged me with three felonies. One more point: I make no comment on the behavior of Diebold's law firm, but at the time there were legal experts who suggested that the firm was not without legal jeopardy in the way they responded to a client (Diebold) that had been and was continuing to break the law by using illegal, uncertified software in their California voting machines (Diebold was probably committing the same or similar crimes in other states, but the docs. I stole were only related to California). I’m Steve Heller, formerly known as “the Diebold Whistle-blower.” Just a clarification of facts: I was given three years probation, not six months. I had to pay restitution of $10,000 to the law firm, so while technically that was not a fine, it was still a significant financial punishment. It’s true that I did not have to go to jail, but for a first time offender who had never been in trouble with the law before, that’s not at all unusual, especially since I never tried to profit from my crime.

I would also suggest that the L.A. D.A.’s office did not “give me a break.” They charged me with three felonies. They also let me know in very clear terms that if I did not plead guilty to at least one felony (which is what I eventually did) they would push for a state prison sentence of at least three years.

To be clear, I have repeatedly acknowledged in all the public speaking and all the writing that I did regarding my case that I committed a serious crime in stealing and exposing attorney-client privileged information. I also stated that I had to be held accountable for my crime in order to protect the attorney-client privilege provision. I do think a misdemeanor charge would have sufficed for accountability, but the DA’s office, under tremendous pressure from a very powerful and politically connected law firm (the firm’s managing partner was a “Bush Pioneer” which meant he raised more than $250,000 for W. Bush’s presidential campaigns), charged me with three felonies.

One more point: I make no comment on the behavior of Diebold’s law firm, but at the time there were legal experts who suggested that the firm was not without legal jeopardy in the way they responded to a client (Diebold) that had been and was continuing to break the law by using illegal, uncertified software in their California voting machines (Diebold was probably committing the same or similar crimes in other states, but the docs. I stole were only related to California).

]]> Comment on Two of the Most Asked Tax Whistleblower Questions by Mark http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/faq/two-of-the-most-asked-tax-whistleblower-questions/comment-page-1#comment-96 Mark Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:24:54 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=48#comment-96 How do I compel the IRS to pay the award when the IRS refuses to make a determination of amount of award due? How do I compel the IRS to pay the award when the IRS refuses to make a determination of amount of award due?

]]> Comment on Bureaucratic “RED TAPE” Endangers Cases by Rob http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/bureaucratic-red-tape-endangers-cases/comment-page-1#comment-8 Rob Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:06:59 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=36#comment-8 I recently spoke to Al Gibson, a representative of the <a href="http://www.rewardtax.com" rel="nofollow">Tax Whistleblower Reward Program</a>. Al tells me that the IRS is cognizant of the delays, and the jeopardy which it causes to claims. However, Al says the IRS has decided that the potential damage from speeding-up a claim outweighs the harm in moving slowly. Specifically, the IRS is very worried about receiving tainted materials--for example, information that is subject to the attorney-client priviledge. The IRS spends an enourmous amount of time and resources having claims reviewed by its taint cadre. As Al explained to me, the IRS feels that the jeopardy caused by tainted examinations and audits outweighs the delays in processing a case. I greatly appreciate the explanation provided by Al, and I certainly see the viewpoint of the IRS. In fact, I am glad that the IRS places fairness and constitutional privilege above the collection of tax. I recently spoke to Al Gibson, a representative of the Tax Whistleblower Reward Program. Al tells me that the IRS is cognizant of the delays, and the jeopardy which it causes to claims. However, Al says the IRS has decided that the potential damage from speeding-up a claim outweighs the harm in moving slowly. Specifically, the IRS is very worried about receiving tainted materials–for example, information that is subject to the attorney-client priviledge. The IRS spends an enourmous amount of time and resources having claims reviewed by its taint cadre. As Al explained to me, the IRS feels that the jeopardy caused by tainted examinations and audits outweighs the delays in processing a case. I greatly appreciate the explanation provided by Al, and I certainly see the viewpoint of the IRS. In fact, I am glad that the IRS places fairness and constitutional privilege above the collection of tax.

]]> Comment on Bureaucratic “RED TAPE” Endangers Cases by Clayton Simmons, CPA http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/bureaucratic-red-tape-endangers-cases/comment-page-1#comment-7 Clayton Simmons, CPA Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:29:04 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=36#comment-7 In December 2007 I sent in some 211's on a tax shelter for 2004. Statute has now expired or soon will. I was called yesterday by a doctor client with a tax question. During the conversation we got into how incompetent the people at the IRS are; my client told me about one of his patients, who is in his 80's and works part time for the IRS in the service center in Chamblee, Ga. His patient said that his IRS supervisor told him not to work so fast, that he was making the other IRS employees look bad. Again, this man is in his 80's. On Monday, I called the GSU Law School low income tax assistance program, for one of my clients who may have to go to US Tax Court. I talked to a woman that works for that program; we got into problems dealing with the IRS. She said that they had had many forms and letters lost by the IRS, sometimes more than once on a single case. I have also had the IRS lose an amended return, and admit it. My client may have to go to Tax Court because of a very simple issue that we can not get anyone at the IRS to look at. So, I can understand your frustration. In December 2007 I sent in some 211’s on a tax shelter for 2004. Statute has now expired or soon will.

I was called yesterday by a doctor client with a tax question. During the conversation we got into how incompetent the people at the IRS are; my client told me about one of his patients, who is in his 80’s and works part time for the IRS in the service center in Chamblee, Ga. His patient said that his IRS supervisor told him not to work so fast, that he was making the other IRS employees look bad. Again, this man is in his 80’s.

On Monday, I called the GSU Law School low income tax assistance program, for one of my clients who may have to go to US Tax Court. I talked to a woman that works for that program; we got into problems dealing with the IRS. She said that they had had many forms and letters lost by the IRS, sometimes more than once on a single case. I have also had the IRS lose an amended return, and admit it. My client may have to go to Tax Court because of a very simple issue that we can not get anyone at the IRS to look at.

So, I can understand your frustration.

]]> Comment on Will the IRS be true? by Rob http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/will-the-irs-be-true/comment-page-1#comment-4 Rob Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:52:33 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=20#comment-4 An IRS employee who violates IRC section 6103 can lose his/her job and could be criminally prosecuted. IRC section 6103 doesn't specifically apply to the Tax Whistleblower Reward Program, but it remains to be seen whether the IRS will adopt some of the same policies to avoid disclosure in the Whistleblower arena. My guess is that since they have a procedure in place for avoiding disclosure, those same procedures will be used in the Whistleblower Office. An IRS employee who violates IRC section 6103 can lose his/her job and could be criminally prosecuted. IRC section 6103 doesn’t specifically apply to the Tax Whistleblower Reward Program, but it remains to be seen whether the IRS will adopt some of the same policies to avoid disclosure in the Whistleblower arena. My guess is that since they have a procedure in place for avoiding disclosure, those same procedures will be used in the Whistleblower Office.

]]> Comment on Will the IRS be true? by Chamiqua Friendly http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/news/will-the-irs-be-true/comment-page-1#comment-3 Chamiqua Friendly Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:48:22 +0000 http://taxwhistleblowerblog.com/?p=20#comment-3 What happens to IRS employees who intentionally or unintentionally commit an unauthorized act of disclosure? What happens to IRS employees who intentionally or unintentionally commit an unauthorized act of disclosure?

]]>