Sometimes a “visionary” is just seeing things. The Department of Justice yesterday announced that a “visionary” tax advisor has been enjoined from giving any more tax advice. From the Department of Justice press release:
The civil injunction order against Scott A. Waage, of San Diego, was signed by Judge William Q. Hayes of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. Waage agreed to the injunction without admitting the allegations against him.
The government complaint in the case alleged that Waage, a self-proclaimed “visionary tax attorney,” promoted tax fraud schemes that helped customers evade income taxes through a concept he called “Strategic Integrated Planning.” According to the complaint, one of Waage’s schemes involved creating and using sham consulting corporations (purportedly headquartered in customers’ homes) that did not perform consulting services. Customers funneled funds to the sham companies to pay for and improperly deduct the customers’ personal expenses, the complaint alleged.
They must have lowered the bar for what is “visionary.” Using phony businesses to try to deduct personal expenses isn’t exactly the cutting edge of tax chiseling.
The injunction order requires Waage to give the government a list of all clients who used his tax planning or tax preparation services since 2001. Waage also must send his former clients notice of the injunction order.
That’s the problem when you use a “visionary” tax preparer who is willing to take “aggressive” positions that your everyday namby-pamby practitioner like me won’t touch. When the preparer gets in trouble because he confuses “aggressive” with “absurd,” his clients can expect the IRS to take a close look at everyone on the client list.
Trish McIntire, Disaster Preparedness and Response
Jim Maule, More on Income Averaging:
The special income averaging for farm and fishing income is available regardless of the economic status of the taxpayer. In the meantime, the taxpayer in Francis v. Comr., T.C. Summ. Op. 2012-7, a member of the Armed Forces not counted among the ranks of the wealthy, is stuck with a disappointing tax outcome caused by circumstances beyond his control. Why the better tax treatment for farming and fishing income and not for military back pay? Something about this nation’s tax priorities isn’t right, but those who pay attention have known that for a long time.
But weep for the farmers. 2012 US Net Farm Income At a New Record Even With The Drought! (Paul Neiffer)
Why You Need a Will (Missouri Tax Guy)
Tax headaches if money-market funds are allowed to break the buck? Floating NAVs could prove taxing (Robert N. Gordon)
Linda Beale, Tax Extenders: where the Senate stands.
Howard Gleckman, Should Congress Curb Tax-Exempt Municipal Bonds? (TaxVox)
Shock! Media Leaves Out Key Things in Covering Poll Showing Support for Taxing Rich (Joseph Henchman). “Support for increasing taxes on the rich has been dropping over time, not increasing.”
Daniel Shaviro, Why didn’t the IRS and Treasury do more about aggressive tax planning techniques of the sort that Romney appears to have used extensively? Because they were legal, maybe?
It’s Wednesday, so it’s a Buzz Day for Robert D. Flach.
Anthony Nitti, Blog Author Makes Appearance in Taxes Magazine; Though Regrettably, Not the Swimsuit Issue. No disrespect, but I don’t regret for a moment that “Taxes” lacks a swimsuit issue. There are vanishingly few practitioners you’d want to see that way.
News you can use: Look, It’s Okay, The Big 4 Doesn’t Want You (Going Concern)