Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (103018)	2/1/2008 9:00:33 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I'm not a tax law expert, and I don't have all the facts, but the article says the $11 million is what he was trying to get BACK from the IRS for tax returns filed in 96 and 97. I'm guessing he still has to pay the tax, interest, and penalties on three years of income, just like anybody else who fails to pay their taxes. I'm guessing his income was significant from 2001-2004. I thought they were battling over only five years of tax returns, from 1999-2004, so they should be able to get 3/5 of the taxes he owes. And let's not forget, he faces the possibility of a three year prison sentence. Last I checked, there is no parole in a federal pen.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (103018)	2/2/2008 5:29:33 AM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

He won because the jury concluded he honestly believed he did not owe those taxes and did not try to hide what he was doing ... thus no crime ... if you are going to fail to pay taxes it is better to do so openly than in secret. IRS has ten years to collect taxes after they are assessed. Justice department might go after him again based on his offshore trust, those things are deadly.