Wednesday, March 28, 2007

A US Attorney who isn't getting fired

His name is Kenneth Wainstein, and he's the USA for the District of Columbia. He was an interim appointment of George Bush's, confirmed by the Senate after he brought charges against major tax cheat Walter Anderson, who, according to the DOJ, skipped out on over $200 Million in taxes.

But Kenny--who, again, has never had his job threatened--seems to have made a little boo-boo.
Apparently, the fuck-up could be Jeff Taylor's, one of the recent add-ons to the US Attorney position, who was put in place by Gonzales without confirmation. Love to see who really screwed this up. Either way, it's another mess for which Gonzales is ultimately responsible.
Poorly written Justice Department documents cost the federal government more than $100 million in what was supposed to have been the crowning moment of the biggest tax prosecution ever.

Walter Anderson, the telecommunications entrepreneur who admitted hiding hundreds of millions of dollars from the IRS and District of Columbia tax collectors, was sentenced Tuesday to nine years in prison and ordered to repay about $23 million to the city.

But U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman said he couldn't order Anderson to repay the federal government $100 million to $175 million because the Justice Department's binding plea agreement with Anderson listed the wrong statute.

Friedman said he could have worked around that problem by ordering Anderson to repay the money as part of his probation. But prosecutors omitted any discussion of probation -- a common element of plea deals -- from Anderson's paperwork.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wainstein is long gone from that office. He's now at Main Justice working for the national security division. He has not been the US Attorney in DC for about a year.

5:35 AM  
Blogger W2E said...

Hello and thanks for reading this post!

The issue of taxes has never been easy on mankind. As you know, the resource collected from the public through taxation is always greater than the amount which can be used by the government. The difference is called compliance cost, and includes for example the labor cost and other expenses incurred in complying with tax laws and rules. This has repercussions on different aspects of taxation, from personal income taxes to payroll taxes.

One of the most interesting things related to taxes are the proportional, progressive, and regressive taxation systems. This is an area where a property tax attorney would tell you that a progressive tax is a tax imposed so that the tax rate increases as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. The opposite of a progressive tax is a regressive tax, where the tax rate decreases as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. In between is a proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. Progressive taxes reduce the tax incidence of people with smaller incomes, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with higher incomes. Regressive taxes reduce the tax incidence of people with higher incomes, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with smaller incomes.

For more financial details you are more than welcome to visit my blog.

Best regards,

Michael Stevenson
All Tax Questions Website

11:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home