U.S. v. GHADDAR, Cite as 109 AFTR 2d 2012-XXXX, 05/08/2012
United States Court
of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit,
Date Decided:
05/08/2012.
As we explained in
United States v. Kontny, 238 F.3d 815, 820 [87 AFTR 2d 2001-390]–21 (7th Cir.
2001), some degree of concealment “is inherent in criminal tax fraud,” and situations
where a shop-owner simply empties the cash register and hides the day's
receipts under his bed “must be distinguished from efforts over and above that
concealment to prevent detection.”See United States v. Tin Yat Chin , 371 F.3d
31, 42 [93 AFTR 2d 2004-2519] (2d Cir. 2004) (suggesting that requiring
customers to pay with currency is not sophisticated); United States v. Hart,
324 F.3d 575, 579 (8th Cir. 2003) (concluding that not recording personal
income is not sophisticated). For that reason, the adjustment for sophisticated
means is warranted only ““when the conduct shows a greater level of planning or
concealment than a typical fraud of its kind.””United States v. Green , 648
F.3d 569, 576 (7th Cir. 2011) (quoting United States v. Landwer, 640 F.3d 769,
771 (7th Cir. 2011)).
www.irstaxattorney.com (212) 588-1113 ab@irstaxattorney.com
No comments:
Post a Comment