- 15 -
not disclose grand jury matters to the Internal Revenue Service
for use in determining or litigating civil tax liability without
a showing of particularized need. Upon such a showing, however,
Government attorneys may obtain a "rule 6(e) order" from the
District Court permitting such disclosure. United States v.
Baggot, 463 U.S. 476 (1983); United States v. Sells Engg., Inc.,
463 U.S. 418 (1983).
We have, in one instance, sanctioned the Commissioner, where
some of the Commissioner's employees engaged in "extreme and
substantial" breaches of grand jury secrecy, one which was
"intentional and flagrant" and lasted "over a period of many
years". Cohen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1981-345. On the
other hand we have indicated that we shall not impose such
sanctions when doing so would not serve the interests of justice,
such as, for example, when "'only isolated and technical
instances of improper disclosure had occurred.'" Crop
Associates--1986 v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-216 (quoting
Ballas v. United States (In re Grand Jury Proceedings), 62 F.3d
1175, 1178 (9th Cir. 1995)).
Rule 6(e) "'is intended only to protect against disclosure
of what is said or takes place in the grand jury room * * * it is
not the purpose of the Rule to foreclose from all future
revelation to proper authorities the same information or
documents which were presented to the grand jury.'" United
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011