Martin and Barbara Schachter - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
               Petitioners' argument is premised on the notion that the               
          $250,000 criminal fine did not constitute punishment, that it               
          served only remedial purposes, and that it should be treated as             
          restitution.  Petitioners then appear to argue that, because                
          respondent routinely would reduce outstanding civil income tax              
          deficiencies by the amount of restitution, petitioners should be            
          allowed to reduce the civil fraud additions to tax by the                   
          $250,000 criminal fine.                                                     
               Petitioners also argue that the sentencing factors listed in           
          18 U.S.C. section 3622, which Federal District Court judges take            
          into account in imposing fines under 18 U.S.C. section 3623,                
          support petitioners' contention that the $250,000 criminal fine             
          imposed on petitioner should be regarded as remedial in nature              
          and as restitution for petitioners' civil fraud additions to tax.           
               Respondent disagrees with petitioners' characterization of             
          the $250,000 criminal fine as remedial in nature.  Respondent               
          argues that Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. section 3623 to provide              
          Federal District Court judges with alternative means to punish              
          criminals and to deter future criminal behavior.  Because                   
          criminal fines and civil fraud additions to tax serve different             
          congressional purposes, respondent argues that petitioners should           
          not be allowed a credit against the civil fraud additions to tax            
          for petitioner's $250,000 criminal fine.  We agree with                     

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011