Los Angeles Tax Fraud Defense Lawyer

Mr. Dudley has extensive experience representing individuals who are arrested for a number of white-collar crimes, including various tax schemes. Tax law is extremely complex and constantly evolving. You need an experienced defense attorney on your side to defend you if you are accused of tax evasion.

How Is Tax Fraud Defined?

Tax fraud and tax evasion include several crimes involving many penal codes, making it difficult to find an exact definition that encapsulates all of them. Generally speaking, tax fraud occurs when someone (an individual, business, or other entity) will intentionally falsify or misrepresent information on tax documents or returns. This makes it possible for these entities to underpay on their tax returns, holding onto more money than they should and avoiding their obligations to federal and state governments.

Tax evasion includes the following crimes:

• Mail fraud
• Wire fraud
• Bank Fraud
• Fraud involving foreign trusts
• Fraud involving domestic trusts
• Mortgage fraud
• Corporate fraud
• RICO violations
• Health care fraud
• Money laundering
• Anti-tax law evasion
• Offshore transactions
• Securities and commodities fraud
• Illegally using offshore bank accounts to avoid paying taxes

If you have been charged or accused of tax evasion or fraud, we recommend you work with a qualified and experienced Los Angeles tax fraud lawyer. Retaining support from a Los Angeles tax fraud defense attorney who knows how to navigate fraud and other white collar crimes can be instrumental in positively influencing end-results in your favor. Attorney David Dudley can help you identify which tax codes are in question, analyze documents where issues have been identified, and manage your case in several other ways. Don’t hesitate to contact us if you want legal support.

Why Do States Enforce Income Tax Laws?

The main sources of income of the federal government are income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office. U.S. individuals in 2008, for example, paid approximately $1.15 trillion in income taxes, equaling 45 percent of the money taken in by the federal government. Another $304 billion came from corporate income taxes, equaling 12 percent of federal revenue. Other income taxes come from corporations, trusts, estates and many other types of entities.

State total income taxes vary widely from state to state, because rates differ from one state to another and because the states have additional sources of income including sales tax, property tax, and federal assistance. In 2012, only the following states charged no state income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming.

While paying income tax is “voluntary,” it is not optional. Governments both state and federal, which depend on this money to operate, have stringent rules about paying taxes as well as ways to ensure that people pay appropriately and are penalized if they do not.

Contact David M. Dudley for Experienced Legal Help

If you are accused of any type of tax scheme, you should have an LA tax fraud defense attorney represent you to present the best possible defense. Fines and jail terms are common punishments for tax fraud and having someone knowledgeable and effective on your side is essential.

Los Angeles tax fraud lawyer Mr. Dudley has been defending clients accused of tax fraud for many years. His practice extends from coast to coast at both state and federal levels.

Selected Case Results:

• U.S. v. G.A.: The defendant owned several tobacco stores. As a result of an undercover operation, law enforcement officers learned that he was avoiding payment of state taxes on cigarettes sold from his store by placing counterfeit tax stamps on the cigarette packages. A federal grand jury then indicted him for numerous contraband cigarette offenses through which he allegedly avoided paying over $1,500,000 in state taxes. The defense later reached a settlement of the case under which the defendant received a sentence of only 24 months. Although he was only a permanent resident, not a citizen, of the United States, the defendant was able to avoid deportation to his home country after his release from custody.
• U.S. v. T.S.: The defendant was indicted for over $6,000,000 in bank fraud in three jurisdictions: the District of Minnesota, the District of West Virginia, and the Central District of California. After extended negotiations, the defendant, who was looking at 20 to 30 years in federal custody, received a sentence of less than eight years.
• U.S. v. W.C.: The defendant managed several major music artists. During a nationwide tour, an employee of his company used several fraudulent credit cards to pay for hotel rooms, airline tickets, and other expenses. The federal government subsequently indicted the defendant for mail and wire fraud. Before trial, however, Attorney Dudley was able to convince the Assistant United States Attorneys handling the prosecution to DISMISS the indictment against his client.
• P. v. R.B.: The defendant was charged with numerous counts of money laundering. A two-week trial resulted in a HUNG JURY. Shortly before the re-trial was to commence, the prosecutor agreed to DISMISS all charges.
• Investigation of N.M.: Federal law-enforcement agents targeted N.M., a real estate investor, for millions of dollars in real estate fraud. Over several years, N.M. was represented by Attorney Dudley. Federal authorities were able to bring NO CHARGES against N.M.
• U.S. v. R.D.: An attorney was indicted for mail and wire fraud in federal court after filing an insurance claim for his yacht which he claimed had been destroyed by pirates in the Mediterranean Sea. Convicted at trial, the defendant hired Mr. Dudley for sentencing. At the sentencing hearing, Attorney Dudley persuaded the court to impose a prison term significantly less than that which both the government and the PSR had recommended. In the process, however, the court rejected the defense contention that a two-point upward guideline adjustment did not apply. The court of appeals later agreed with that argument and REVERSED the defendant’s sentence. A subsequent re-sentencing resulted in the defendant’s prison term being reduced.