Boisseau District Court Case
ARE YOU LOOKING FOR RELIABLE BOISSEAU DISTRICT COURT CASE ASSIGNMENT HELP SERVICES? EXPERTSMINDS.COM IS RIGHT CHOICE AS YOUR STUDY PARTNER!
Question: Prepare Memorandum about given case - Boisseau (District Court) case.
Re: The United States of America, V. Eldon l. Boisseau,
Answer: The main issues were-
1. Whether Eldon Boisseau should be liable for the payment of the unpaid taxes of Turner & Boisseau as Eldon Boisseau had sixty percent ownership of the firm and not allowing reducing his payment from Turner & Boisseau.
2. Whether Eldon Boisseau should be guilty of tax evasion due to the filing income tax returns and amended tax returns for 1998 to 2008 without paying the tax dues and interest on tax dues.
3. Whether Boisseau should be guilty of evasion of tax willfully by creating the Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau, LLC and changing his payment arrangement by directly making payment of his personal expenses from the firm.
Answer: Mauden, as a comptroller of Turner & Boisseau, informed Boisseau that the firm had not sufficient fund to pay its withheld payroll taxes for reducing Boisseau's payment for increasing cash inflows to pay the withheld payroll tax liabilities, but Boisseau denied reducing his pay from the firm. The intention of Boisseau was clear not to pay tax dues to the IRS. Mauden had arranged all the payment of withheld payroll taxes dues, except $1,000 paid by Boisseau, from his military retirement and social security that supported the intention of Boisseau was not genuine regarding payment of the taxes to the IRS.
Filing an amended tax return for the tax year 1998 in 2000 with reported owing of $141,515 without paying tax liability thereon showing the willful intention of Boisseau not to make payment of the tax dues. Another filling amended a tax return for the tax year 1999 in 2004 with reported owing of $78,662 without paying tax dues liability. On April 2015, Boisseau had total dues of taxes and interest of $254,947.11 which was a significant amount and that needed to be paid by making a significant arrangement. Further, the assessed trust recovery penalty of $250,929.02 on Boisseau also supported the wrong intention for not making a significant arrangement of paying the same to the IRS.
While creating Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau firm, Boisseau has disclosed his intention of tax liabilities burden to design the firm for protecting the firm's assets from his tax dues collection through attachment of his properties and assets by the IRS. Boisseau requested to Richard Johnson becoming and remaining the sole owner of the Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau to protect his assets from the IRS for the purpose of tax dues recovery from the attachments of his assets.
Richard Johnson did not receive payments from the created firm rather occasionally received minimal compensation between $1,000 and $3,000. Before the creation of this firm, Boisseau already had been assessed and he failed to make the tax dues payment for the tax year 1998-2000 and 2002 along with the trust fund recovery penalty. Boisseau alters his pay arrangement of salary and or bonus by directly paying his personal expenses by the firm, Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau.
HIRE PROFESSIONAL WRITER FROM EXPERTSMINDS.COM AND GET BEST QUALITY BOISSEAU DISTRICT COURT CASE ASSIGNMENT HELP AND HOMEWORK WRITING SERVICES!
Answer: United States District Court held that Boisseau was guilty of tax evasion for violating 26 U. S. C. §7201 because of not paying taxes and interest thereon more than $1 million for assessment of income earned between 1998 and 2008. Boisseau was guilty obviously on the basis of at least one affirmative act which was intended to evade tax dues payment so Boisseau was charged for tax evasion under 26 U. S. C. §7201.
Filing of returns and amendments of returns confirmed the willful defaulter of Boisseau not to make the tax dues payments and no intention to make sufficient arrangement for clearing the tax dues with the IRS of Boisseau. The creation of the firms for protecting the personal assets attachment for tax dues payments by the IRS also a clear indication of tax evasion is affirmative evidence for the guilty. Change in Boisseau for the firm by direct paying for personal expenses from the firm was also indicative of the wrongful intention of Boisseau to evade the payment of the tax dues. Further, the sufficient statement of witnesses and supporting documents produced by the IRS were sufficient to deny Boisseau's Motion for Judgment of Acquittal.
Answer: 26 U. S. C. §7201 states that Willfulness is closely connected with the affirmative act as once the affirmative act is satisfied; no question about the willfulness exists. Therefore, Boisseau had acted willfully to evade the tax dues payments. Boisseau had committed each affirmative act with the particular intent of evasion of the tax payments.
Willfulness describes that the intentional, voluntary violation of a knowing legal duty. There is no need for involvement of evil motive and or bad purpose. Evidence for proving willfulness is purely based on circumstances and the willfulness can be estimated on the basis of the defaulter's conduct. The argument of defense was not guilty as he had not committed a "constellation of acts" was not tenable because the law specifically stated that "One cat will suffice. Therefore, only one time willful misleading the IRS or concealing of the assets by Boisseau was sufficient to prove him guilty of tax evasion.
Boisseau had admitted his tax dues knowingly by filling returns and amended returns so the argument of the defense regarding no willful act of Boisseau because of allegedly abandonment of alleged affirmative acts by the United States was not tenable for the purpose.
Boisseau was involved in misleading or concealing from the imposition and tax collection by the IRS because changing the payment arrangements from the firm by making direct payment of his personal expenses instead of taking salary and or bonus. The United States Supreme Court has concluded that evasion of tax dues do not necessary involved fraud or deceit if misleading the IRS or concealing of assets is adequate to prove evasion of tax payments to the IRS. Boisseau had done the same thing by misleading the IRS by changing the payment arrangement from the firm, Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau.
Answer: The basis of Appeals Court affirming the District Court decision of Boisseau for guilty of tax evasion is Willful attempts to evade or defeat any tax imposition by or payment thereof to the IRS because under 26 U. S. C. §7201, it is clearly stated that the willful attempt for evasion of tax dues is an affirmative act to be guilty of a felony. There is a need to prove three elements before Appeals Court, getting its affirmative decision to support the District Court's Decision, first is the existence of significant tax liability, second is affirmative act creating evasion of tax dues or attempt of evasion of tax dues, and third is willfulness.
Tax dues in the hands of Boisseau are substantial because of more than $1 million so the first condition of the significant tax liability is met. Creation of the firm, Law Offices of Eldon L. Boisseau, by changing the compensation payment, salary and or bonus, by paying personal expenses directly by the firm is the affirmative act of evasion of the tax dues so the second condition of the affirmative act of evasion of tax dues is also met. Filling of income tax returns and amended income tax returns proves estimation of tax dues but does not make the payment thereof is a willful act so the condition of the willfulness is also fulfilled by Boisseau for Appeals Court affirming the District Court's decision.
GET READYMADE BOISSEAU DISTRICT COURT CASE ASSIGNMENT SOLUTIONS - 100% PLAGIARISM FREE WORK DOCUMENT AT NOMINAL CHARGES!