Martin and Barbara Schachter - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963); Spies v. United           
          States, 317 U.S. 492 (1943); Grimes v. Commissioner, 82 F.3d 286            
          (9th Cir. 1996), affg. Ward v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-286.           
               In Spies v. United States, supra at 495 (citing Helvering v.           
          Mitchell, supra), in explaining that Congress may impose both               
          criminal and civil sanctions in enforcing the tax laws, the                 
          Supreme Court stated that “invocation of one does not exclude               
          resort to the other.”  See also United States v. Sabourin, 157              
          F.2d 820, 821 (2d Cir. 1946); and Schwener v. Commissioner, T.C.            
          Memo. 1987-594, for the same proposition.                                   
               In light of Helvering v. Mitchell, supra, and the subsequent           
          cases, in Schachter v. Commissioner, supra, we rejected                     
          petitioners' double jeopardy argument, and we sustained                     
          respondent’s determination of the civil fraud additions to tax.             
               In the current computational dispute, petitioners do not               
          again dispute -- under the double jeopardy clause of the U.S.               
          Constitution -- imposition of both criminal and civil sanctions             
          with regard to the same acts.  Rather, petitioners argue that the           
          $250,000 criminal fine that was imposed on petitioner should be             
          allowed as a credit against the civil fraud additions to tax for            
          1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988 that were determined by respondent               
          against petitioner and that were sustained in our prior opinion.            
               Helvering v. Mitchell, supra, and its progeny do not                   
          directly address whether taxpayers have a right to credit against           
          civil fraud additions to tax the amount of related criminal                 

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011