logo
Pardoned Or Not, ‘Chrisley Knows Best' About Tax Evasion

Pardoned Or Not, ‘Chrisley Knows Best' About Tax Evasion

Forbes2 days ago

In 2022, Todd and Julie Chrisley were sentenced to prison for, among other things, tax fraud. The celebrity couple known best for their reality TV show titled 'Chrisley Knows Best' became famous, in part, for their impression of living a lavish lifestyle. However, it was all a sham, which led to them being convicted of financial crimes. In unexpected news, President Trump has pardoned the Chrisleys. This article discusses their crimes, how what they did for tax evasion differs from legal tax avoidance, and what their pardoning might mean for tax enforcement during Trump's second term.
According to the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia, Todd and Julie Chrisley's fraudulent activity began when the couple defrauded community banks in Georgia. The couple used falsified bank statements, financial records, and personal financial information to obtain over $36 million in loans from these banks.
Additionally, the Chrisleys provided false financial documents to the IRS, suggesting they made less money than expected. Reporting lower income than earned is tax fraud, leading to those charges. As time continued, the couple ran out of options to continue this fraud, which led to them filing for bankruptcy, ultimately casting a bright light on their fraudulent activity.
While there was a host of financial crimes committed by the Chrisleys, their main issues ultimately came down to using fake tax information to obtain loans from financial institutions and then providing different false tax information to the taxing authorities, leading to them committing tax evasion.
While even the IRS states that taxpayers are not required to pay more taxes legally than what the tax law explicitly specifies, they also cannot provide false information to lower their tax liabilities. This distinction often leads to taxpayers' confusion when assessing the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.
Tax avoidance occurs when taxpayers lower their tax liability via a deduction or credit. For instance, a taxpayer can buy a home by borrowing money and receive a mortgage interest itemized deduction. This deduction was passed into law by Congress to increase incentives for home ownership. While this activity results in the home owning taxpayer having a lower tax liability than a taxpayer who does not own a home, it is not considered evasion because it was legally obtained. Similar tax deductions exist for donating to charitable organizations, excessive healthcare expenses, paying state and local income taxes, among others.
Taxpayers also might have legal tax avoidance by way of tax credits. Credits also lower a taxpayer's tax liability. However rather than reducing their taxable income, a tax credit lowers the taxes owed themselves. Because of this, tax credits are even more valuable than tax deductions. Common tax credits include the child tax credit, the lifetime learning tax credit, and the earned income tax credit.
This decrease in tax liability via legal deductions and credits stands in stark contrast to the activities of Todd and Julie Chrisley, who only had lower tax liability because they underreported their income. Because their behavior was deliberate and careless, it was deemed tax evasion, which contributed significantly to the harsh sentence they faced. Furthermore, the Chrisley's also faced sweeping criticism by impeding the investigation process by not timely filing tax returns in many years as well as not cooperating with the tax authority.
Trump pardoning Todd and Julie Chrisley for their crimes sends a message about the administration's stance on tax enforcement. In particular, the Chrisley family is connected with Trump as Todd and Julie's eldest daughter, Savannah, was among the limited speakers during the 2024 Republican National Convention. This connection parallels Trump's pardoning of Paul Walczak for his tax crimes. According to The New York Times, Walczak's mother attended a $1 million dinner supporting Trump.
While it is not unusual for the President to issue pardons, especially when the individuals are connected with the President, the timing of this one is quite unusual as it took place during the first few months. Presidents typically reserve these pardons for the end of their term as the pardoning activity has the potential to signal policy and preferences that can impact their administration.
In this case, Trump has signaled his willingness to overlook a relatively straightforward tax fraud among a celebrity couple, plausibly (and potentially solely) due to their support for him. According to Kiplinger, this action can signal Trump's willingness to condone these actions and activities to his supporters. A Forbes contributor suggests that Trump's decisions erode confidence in the tax system.
The IRS continues to have a questionable future. According to The Washington Post, Trump has effectively removed any funding increases the agency was supposed to receive from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Bloomberg reports that Trump's proposed $9.8 billion budget for the IRS would be approximately 20% lower than last year's budget of $12.3 billion. As the funding for the IRS continues to be under fire, these actions to pardon wealth tax cheats are yet another piece of the puzzle, creating the image that tax enforcement among wealthy taxpayers may be of low importance.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate GOP leaders face spending squeeze on Trump's big bill: From the Politics Desk
Senate GOP leaders face spending squeeze on Trump's big bill: From the Politics Desk

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Senate GOP leaders face spending squeeze on Trump's big bill: From the Politics Desk

Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. Happy Monday and welcome to our first edition of June! The Senate is back this week and will begin the process of taking up the 'big, beautiful bill' the House passed. Sahil Kapur breaks down the challenges facing GOP leaders as they try to send the legislation to President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. Plus, Scott Bland digs into the archives for a quote from the 2016 campaign trail from a Republican that provides a guide for Democrats today. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner The House-passed legislation for President Donald Trump's domestic agenda is moving to the Senate, where Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., is facing a squeeze from opposing party factions about how to modify it. Spending and the debt: Some Republicans say they want steeper spending cuts to offset the debt increase as a result of the tax breaks and funding bumps for immigration enforcement and the military. That includes Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., both of whom have said they cannot support the bill in its current form as it adds an estimated $2.3 trillion to the debt. 'It's wrong. It's immoral. It has to stop,' Johnson said Sunday on Fox News. 'My loyalty is to the American people, to my kids and grandkids. We cannot continue to mortgage their future.' Medicaid: On the other hand, Thune must navigate worries and political considerations from senators about the existing spending cuts in the legislation — particularly on Medicaid, SNAP and clean energy funding. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted for the Senate's initial budget blueprint to begin work on the bill, but later objected to a revised version, citing concerns that it could impact her constituents who rely on Medicaid coverage. Collins is up for re-election in 2026, along with Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. All are likely to face attacks from Democrats about the stricter burdens for Americans to stay on the health care program. And at least one solid Trump ally from a red state is warning against rolling back Medicaid. 'I've got some concerns,' Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told reporters recently. 'I continue to maintain my position; we should not be cutting Medicaid benefits.' Hawley notably told NBC News last month he's fine with 'coverage losses' resulting from the work requirements and anti-fraud measures. So he may ultimately get in line with the bill, as Trump and Republican leaders are portraying the Medicaid provisions as program integrity measures, instead of cuts to rescind coverage. Regardless, Hawley's vocal support for preserving Medicaid benefits creates a potential land mine for Republicans to maneuver around, making it harder to cut deeper than the House bill if they want more savings to appease spending hawks. Clean energy: As part of the spending caution, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, says there is a faction of GOP senators who opposes the 'termination' of the clean energy tax credits passed by Democrats in 2022, which Republican leaders have put on the chopping block to finance their bill. Getting technical: And there's a procedural hurdle Thune must navigate: The so-called 'Byrd bath.' Senate rules limit bills under the 'reconciliation' process — which Republicans are using here to bypass Democrats in the Senate — to budgetary measures that are primarily about dollars and cents, not policy changes. Democrats are preparing to challenge a host of provisions in the package. In the end, the three-vote margin for defection may give Thune the breathing room he needs to pass the bill. But any changes the Senate makes need to go back to the House for another vote in the paper-thin majority. And Thune is on deadline, as the Treasury Department has said Congress needs to pass a debt ceiling increase — which is part of the broader package — no later than July in order to prevent a catastrophic default. Up until now, the GOP's deadlines have all been fuzzy. But this one is real. Related read: Thune says Senate on track to pass GOP megabill by July 4, by Frank Thorp V Democrats are in regroup mode after losing the 2024 election, acutely aware of the party's low standing with the American public and thinking through everything from their policy platform to where and how they talk to voters — like the $20 million pitch reported by The New York Times for a research project titled 'Speaking with American Men: A Strategic Plan.' More power to them, if someone wants to fund it. And Democrats desperately want to do something to move forward right now. They might want to consider some long-ago advice from one Marco Rubio about what really matters for a political party's viability — and why it could take an excruciatingly long time to get there. When Rubio — currently President Donald Trump's secretary of state — was running for president in August 2015, he gave a prescient response to questions about then-candidate Donald Trump's rhetoric about immigration. Asked by CNBC whether the way Trump and others were talking about immigrants would hurt the Republican Party in the 2016 general election, Rubio said, 'This is not the Republican Party. These are individual candidates who are responsible for their own rhetoric and what they say,' adding, 'The face of the Republican Party is going to be our nominee.' Rubio hit a similar theme days later, speaking to Bloomberg News in New Hampshire: 'Ultimately the Republican Party will reach out to all voters based on who our nominee is. And I don't believe Donald Trump will be our nominee.' Don't be distracted by the admittedly big thing that Rubio got wrong. The broader point is that American political parties are shaped and defined by their candidates. The biggest and best thing that the Democratic Party can do to change voter perceptions of itself is to nominate a national candidate that voters see more favorably. The party can't just erase former President Joe Biden's struggles and former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss to Trump — especially among the slice of Democrats fed up with their own party right now, a big contributor to those record-low poll numbers. That's just stuck to the Democratic brand right now. Of course, Democrats aren't going to nominate another presidential candidate for three years or so. Perhaps that's why some are itching to get that contest started sooner rather than later. Even formally nominating the party's next slate of congressional or Senate contenders is a year or so away. It's no wonder that research and investment efforts are getting a lot of attention — on the long road to fixing a party brand, that's what's available right now. ⚫ Boulder attack: A man who shouted 'free Palestine' and used a 'makeshift flamethrower' on demonstrators marching in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas was charged with a federal hate crime and first-degree murder in Colorado. Follow live updates → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch: Trump's agenda is shaping the Supreme Court's traditional monthlong ruling season, as consequential emergency cases flood the docket. Read more → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch, cont.: The high court decided not to hear two big gun cases, a decision that allows restrictions on assault-style weapons in Maryland and large-capacity magazines in Rhode Island to remain in effect. Read more → ⚕️ Obamacare wars: Congressional Republicans are facing new pressure to extend expiring tax credits under the Affordable Care Act. If the money lapses this year, 5 million Americans would be expected to lose coverage and others would face premium hikes. Read more → 🍎 Big Apple battle: New York Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado launched a primary challenge against Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul. Read more → 💰 2028 watch: Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., launched a new national political action committee to fight back against Trump and the GOP. Read more → 🤖 Conspiracy corner: Over the weekend, Trump reposted a baseless claim on Truth Social that former President Joe Biden was executed in 2020 and replaced with clones or robots. Read more → Follow live politics coverage → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Ben Kamisar. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on

Judge Blocks Trump's Union-Busting Plan At TSA
Judge Blocks Trump's Union-Busting Plan At TSA

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Judge Blocks Trump's Union-Busting Plan At TSA

The Trump administration faced another legal setback on Monday when a judge temporarily blocked their plan to dissolve labor unions at a federal agency. The White House moved in March to revoke collective bargaining rights at the Transportation Security Administration, aiming to nullify the union contract for some 47,000 airport security officers. But U.S. District Judge Marsha J. Pechman in Seattle, Washington, granted an injunction Monday at the request of the union, the American Federation of Government Employees. Pechman, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, determined that the union was likely to prevail in its argument that the administration ran afoul of the law. She said Trump's homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, offered only a 'threadbare justification' for stripping workers of their union rights, and the move appeared purely retaliatory. 'The Noem Determination appears to have been undertaken to punish AFGE and its members because AFGE has chosen to push back against the Trump Administration's attacks [on] federal employment in the courts,' she wrote. AFGE President Everett Kelley called Pechman's order 'a crucial victory for federal workers.' 'We remain committed to ensuring our members' rights and dignity are protected, and we will not back down from defending our members' rights against unlawful union busting,' Kelley said in a statement. The order means that the Trump administration must honor the union's collective bargaining agreement for now. But the White House could still win the underlying case and succeed in having the contract tossed out. The union-busting efforts are a key piece of President Donald Trump's broader plan to decimate the federal workforce and end longstanding civil-service protections. In addition to trying to kill unions at TSA, Trump has tried to nullify collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of other workers at a slew of federal agencies, all in the name of 'national security.' The White House has said explicitly that it's taking such actions at least in part because federal labor groups have stood up to the president. It noted in a 'fact sheet' on revoking collective bargaining rights that federal labor groups had 'declared war on President Trump's agenda,' a statement Pechman noted in her order Monday. 'The First Amendment protects against retaliation for engaging in litigation and public criticism of the government,' she wrote.

Russia severely limited after attack: Ex-Ukraine ambassador
Russia severely limited after attack: Ex-Ukraine ambassador

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Russia severely limited after attack: Ex-Ukraine ambassador

(NewsNation) — Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia are taking place in Turkey following a series of surprise attacks by Ukraine over the weekend. Ukraine says the drone attacks reportedly disabled 40 bombers, or a third of Russia's bomber fleet, though Russia disputes those claims and says only a few of its planes were hit. 'This means Russia's ability to strike into Ukraine will be severely limited,' John Herbst, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, said. 'It's also good news to the United States, because those long-range bombers are nuclear weapons-capable.' Herbst said if Ukraine's estimates are correct, then it's a plus for American nuclear security. He added that Russian President Vladimir Putin believes time is on his side in the three-year conflict and that he will be able to gain control over Ukraine and later other surrounding NATO nations if western support for Ukraine stops over time. Michael Cohen: Trump will 'go after Elon's money next' 'This is Putin's game, and sadly, weak Western leadership has proved him right with his war on Georgia in 2008, his seizure of Crimea in 2014 and the not-quite adequate Western response to the big invasion in 2022,' Herbst said. 'So he's hoping Trump's going to stop American military supplies to Ukraine. I think that may be a bad bet to Putin.' Herbst said the war is a life-or-death matter for Ukraine, and just as Israel also does not notify the U.S. of major military initiatives it takes, Ukraine is doing the same thing to protect itself. He added Russia realizes a major blow has been dealt to it, but it is downplaying the impact of the strike. 'It undermines the narrative that Russia will inevitably win this war,' Herbst said. 'If American military supplies continue to Ukraine, or they have support from other European nations, Ukraine will not lose this war. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store