August, 05 2016, 02:15pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Email:,contact@whistleblowers.org,Phone: (202) 342-1902
Four-Year Campaign Results In Historic-Win For Tax Whistleblowers
On August 3, 2016 the U.S. Tax Court ruled that tax whistleblowers were entitled to a reward based on monies collected in criminal fines and penalties.
On August 3, 2016 the U.S. Tax Court ruled that tax whistleblowers were entitled to a reward based on monies collected in criminal fines and penalties. This landmark decision reversed the position of the Department of Treasury that severely limited the "collected proceeds" upon which a whistleblower reward could be based.The decision ruled that two anonymous whistleblowers, identified only as Whistleblower 21276-13W and Whistleblower 21277-13W were entitled to a reward of $17,791,607.00, based in part on $54 million obtained in criminal fines and civil forfeitures for which the IRS had illegally claimed were outside the whistleblower reward program.
The decision is the accumulation of four years of advocacy by the NWC, led by its Senior Policy Analyst Dean A. Zerbe and its Executive Director, Stephen M. Kohn, both of whom have actively and effectively represented tax whistleblowers since undertaking the representation of Swiss banker Bradley Birkenfeld in 2009.
Since the rule stripping tax whistleblowers who disclosed evidence of criminal tax violations from obtaining a reward was first announced by the IRS/Dept. of Treasury, the National Whistleblower Center has waged an extensive campaign to reverse this illegal and dangerous ruling. For example:
- November 29, 2012: The NWC filed an extensive brief to the IRS strongly urging the Service to reward whistleblowers who exposed criminal tax frauds.
- February 19, 2013: The NWC filed an 84-page comment on the proposed IRS whistleblower rules, strongly opposing the criminal disqualification.
- April 16, 2013: The NWC testified at the IRS rulemaking hearing opposing the criminal reward disqualification.
- June 5, 2014: The NWC provides the Secretary of Treasury with and exhaustive 55 page scholarly article co-authored by Kohn and Zerbe explaining in detail the legal basis as to why the criminal reward disqualification was illegal and should not be approved by the IRS. A copy of this article, published in Tax Notes, is linked here.
- Finally, Dean Zerbe and Steve Kohn, through their respective law firms, agreed to work with the legal team representing anonymous whistleblowers 21276/77-13W, in order to ensure that the IRS program properly implemented the whistleblower reward law, and criminal fines and penalties were included in any reward calculation.
The importance of the August 3rd Tax Court ruling, in case 147 T.C. 4, was explained in a June 13, 2014 Action Alert issued by the National Whistleblower Center, calling on the public to strongly oppose the IRS's plan to block whistleblower rewards, if the tax crimes were so serious as to result in criminal prosecution, and the payment of criminal fines and penalties:
"The Department of Treasury is poised to approve a final rule that will have a devastating impact on the IRS Whistleblower Program. The Treasury Department, along with the IRS office of general counsel, have concocted a rule to exclude whistleblowers from coverage if the violation of law they report is criminally prosecuted. Tax fraud whistleblowers will only receive rewards for information that results in civil or administrative penalties. If a whistleblower has solid evidence of a major fraud that triggers a criminal prosecution, he or she will get nothing."
"The proposed regulation undermines Congress's intent that whistleblowers who report tax fraud be protected and rewarded.
This proposed rule, which we have learned is on the verge of final approval, could not have come at a worse time. The IRS and the Justice Department are effectively using the threat of whistleblower disclosures to force international banks to plead guilty to tax fraud violations for illegally harboring non-disclosed offshore accounts. If the proposed rule is approved, the threat that international bankers will become whistleblowers will become toothless."
What is clear is that the August 3rd landmark ruling, effectively saving the international tax fraud whistleblower program, was the result, in large part, of a long-term campaign of the NWC and its leaders who conducted extensive research into the history and law behind the IRS tax whistleblower program, and thereafter engaged in an extensive public and legal battle to ensure that whistleblowers are fully protected.
This battle is not over. The Department of Treasury can still appeal the Tax Court's landmark ruling. All Americans who want to hold the millionaires and billionaires who illegally stash an estimated $3 trillion dollars in offshore accounts accountable should join with the National Whistleblower Center in making sure that this key decision is upheld, and that the Department of Treasury change its current regulations to comport with the law.
In addition to the leadership Dean Zerbe and Stephen Kohn gave to this successful campaign, the NWC would also like to thank the whistleblowers who risked all to expose wrongdoing and the attorneys, staff and interns at the NWC who tirelessly worked on this campaign, and the members of the public who strongly supported these efforts.
Related links:
- Tax Court decision in Anonymous Whistleblowers 21276/77-13W, 147 T.C. 4 (August 3, 2016)
- Zerbe and Kohn, "The Legality of the IRS' Proposed Rule," Tax Notes and Letter to Secretary of Treasury (June 5, 2014).
- Sign up to receive updates about the NWC's Tax Whistleblower Campaign, click here.
Since 1988, the NWC and attorneys associated with it have supported whistleblowers in the courts and before Congress and achieved victories for environmental protection, government contract fraud, nuclear safety and government and corporate accountability.
LATEST NEWS
Judge Slaps Down RFK Jr's Likely 'Unlawful' Mass Layoffs at HHS
"We're not going to let Trump and RFK Jr. dismantle our nation's health systems to promote conspiracy theories and tax breaks for billionaires," said Connecticut Attorney General William Tong.
Jul 01, 2025
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked planned mass layoffs at the Department of Health and Human Services while declaring that the firings were likely unlawful.
Judge Melissa DuBose of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island ruled that the Trump administration exceeded its legal authority when it moved to lay off thousands of HHS employees on the grounds that such large-scale firings would leave the agency unable to fulfill its legislatively mandated duties that can only be altered by an act of Congress.
"The executive branch is vested with the power and is imbued with the responsibility to faithfully execute the laws which govern the governance structure of our country," wrote DuBose. "The executive branch does not have the authority to order, organize, or implement wholesale changes to the structure and function of the agencies created by Congress."
DuBose further noted that courts have the power to "set aside" actions taken by federal agencies that are "unlawful," and she argued that the actions taken by HHS under the leadership of Trump-appointed Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. likely flouted the law.
The judge granted a preliminary injunction against the agency and blocked it from carrying out its planned reduction in staffing that it first announced this past March 27. HHS has until July 11 to file a status report affirming compliance with the court's order.
The lawsuit was originally filed by the attorneys general of 19 states plus the District of Columbia, who alleged that the layoffs violated the United States Constitution's separation of powers doctrine, as well as the Constitution's appropriations clause and the Administrative Procedure Act that prohibits agencies from taking "arbitrary and capricious" actions.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong took a victory lap in the wake of the ruling but cautioned that there was still a long fight ahead to save HHS.
President Donald Trump and Kennedy "are playing dangerous games with the health and safety of American families, and we just stopped them," he said. "Today's order means vital programs and services—including those supporting Head Start, disease monitoring at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] and Medicaid eligibility, and others—will remain accessible. This is still the beginning of a long fight ahead, but we're not going to let Trump and RFK Jr. dismantle our nation's health systems to promote conspiracy theories and tax breaks for billionaires."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'You Know It's a Terrible Bill': Murkowski Helps GOP Gut Safety Net After 'Bribe' Shields Her State
Sen. Lisa Murkowski was the deciding vote to pass Republicans' massive social safety net cuts through the Senate. She said she didn't like the bill, but voted for it anyway after getting Alaska exempted from some of its worst harms.
Jul 01, 2025
By the thinnest possible margin, the U.S. Senate voted Tuesday to pass a budget that includes the largest cuts to Medicaid and nutrition assistance in U.S. history while giving trillions of dollars of tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans.
The deciding vote was Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who admitted she didn't like the bill. However, she voted for it regardless after securing relief for her home state from some of its most draconian cuts.
But in an interview immediately afterward, she acknowledged that the rest of the country, where millions are on track to lose their healthcare coverage and food assistance, would not be so lucky.
"Do I like this bill? No," Murkowski told a reporter for MSNBC. "I try to take care of Alaska's interests. I know that in many parts of the country there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill. I don't like that."
The 887-page bill includes more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program over the next decade—cuts the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects will result in nearly 12 million people losing health coverage. The measure also takes an ax to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—imperiling food aid for millions.
In recent days, Murkowski—a self-described "Medicaid moderate"—expressed hesitation about signing onto a list of such devastating cuts, calling the vote "agonizing". To get her on board, her Republican colleagues were willing to give her state some shelter from the coming storm.
As David Dayen explained in The American Prospect, Murkowski was able to secure a waiver that exempts Alaska from the newly implemented cost-sharing requirement that will force states to spend more of their budgets on SNAP.
In The New Republic, Robert McCoy described it as a "bribe."
Initially, Republicans attempted to simply write in a carve-out for Alaska and Hawaii. But after this was shot down by the Senate parliamentarian, they tried again with a measure that exempted the 10 states with the highest error rates.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) called it "the most absurd example of the hypocrisy of the Republican bill."
"They have now proposed delaying SNAP cuts FOR TWO YEARS ONLY FOR STATES with the highest error rates just to bury their help for Alaska," she said.
Murkowski also got a tax break for Alaskan fishing villages inserted into the bill. She attempted to have Alaska exempted from some Medicaid cuts as well, but the parliamentarian killed the measure.
"Did I get everything that I wanted? Absolutely not," she told reporters outside the Senate chamber.
However, as Dayen wrote, "Murkowski decided that she could live with a bill that takes food and medicine from vulnerable people to fund tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy, as long as it didn't take quite as much food away from Alaskans."
Murkowski showed herself to be well aware of the harms the bill will cause. After voting to pass the bill, she said, "My hope is that the House is gonna look at this and recognize that we're not there yet."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) called Murkowski's bargain "selfish," "cruel," and "expensive."
"Voting for the bill because [of] a carve-out for your state is open acknowledgement that people will get kicked off healthcare and will have to go to much more expensive emergency rooms," Jayapal wrote. "Clear you know it's a terrible bill for everyone."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Let's Break It Down': Mamdani Gives His Perspective on Historic NYC Win
Zohran Mamdani solidified his win in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor with the release of ranked choice voting results.
Jul 01, 2025
Last week, democratic socialist and state Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani stunned in an upset victory over disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary—sparking broader conversations about the future of the party and sending shockwaves through the American political system.
One week later, on Tuesday, Mamdani both solidified his win thanks to the release of the election's ranked choice voting results and unveiled a new video highlighting factors that in his view were key to his campaign's success. Mamdani credits his relentless focus on affordability and a commitment to reaching all New York City voters, including those who have previously voted for U.S. President Donald Trump, are inconsistent primary voters, or who speak languages besides English.
The goal, in Mamdani's words, was nothing short of rebuilding "a coalition that had frayed over years of disappointment and neglect, to win people back to a Democratic Party that puts working people first."
On Tuesday, New York City's Board of Elections announced the ranked-choice voting results from the June 24 primary, underscoring Mamdani's decisive victory. Mamdani secured 56% of the vote compared to Cuomo's 44%. All other candidates' votes were reallocated to Mamdani and Cuomo in the third round of voting. All told, some 545,000 New Yorkers ranked Mamdani on their ballots.
In the video, Mamdani touted some of his impressive margins, including his ability to win over districts that had gone for Trump in the last election, noting the inroads that Trump made in New York City in 2024. According to an analysis from Gothamist, Mamdani won 30% of primary election districts Trump carried in the general election last year.
Mamdani said his campaign achieved this by visiting areas that went for Trump, "not to lecture, but to listen."
He also said that his campaign knew it could turn out less consistent primary voters if "they saw themselves in our policies."
"We ran a campaign that tried to talk to every New Yorker, whether I could speak their languages or just tried to... and the coalition that came out on Tuesday, reflected the mosaic of these five boroughs," Mamdani said.
As part of the focus on connecting with voters, Mamdani put out campaign videos with him speaking in languages like Hindi and Spanish.
On Election Day, Mamdani led in areas with majority Asian, white, and Hispanic voters, while Cuomo led in areas with majority Black voters. "We narrowed Andrew Cuomo once sizable lead with Black voters, outright winning young Black New Yorkers in neighborhoods like Harlem and Flatbush," he said.
Mamdani also highlighted that he trounced Cuomo despite the super political action committee money supporting the former governor.
"We rewrote the rule book by, get this, talking to New Yorkers," he said. "Politics in this city won't ever be the same, and it's all thanks to you. The next chapter begins today New York."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular