From the Tax Law Offices of David W. Klasing - Can Employment Tax Crimes Lead to Prison Time?
IRVINE, Calif., Feb. 5, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- When people envision criminal tax cases that result in incarceration, they often think of high-profile celebrity cases. Yet any business owner, company executive, accounting personal, internal or external bookkeeper, or even a lender with control over financial decisions can face life-altering consequences if they mishandle employment taxes. Under federal law, all employers must withhold income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes (often called 'trust fund taxes') from employees' wages and promptly remit them to the IRS. Additionally, employers must comply with state payroll tax requirements by remitting taxes to state authorities such as California's Employment Development Department (EDD) for example. If the IRS or applicable state government is unable to recover the missing amounts from the business, it will pursue you personally—sometimes even your spouse—if you exercised or shared control over the funds.
Yes, employment tax crimes can lead to prison time. With the IRS criminal investigation division's clandestine investigation procedures, a situation that seems like a routine federal civil tax audit can suddenly become an exponentially more intense criminal tax investigation when initial indicators of fraud are identified, carrying severe negative public attention and potential life-altering incarceration.
Ordinary Oversight or a Felony? The IRS's Take on Payroll Taxes
Withheld employment taxes serve as a special trust for the government. Any perceived shortfall—particularly if repeated or deliberate—can trigger a wave of civil and criminal tax penalties. According to IRS examiners, frequent violations include:
Willful Failure to Account For, Collect, or Pay Over Taxes (IRC § 7202)
Willful Failure to File a Return (IRC § 7203)
Willful Failure to Pay Taxes Owed (IRC § 7203)
Willful Submission of a False Statement (IRC § 7206(1))
Failure to Collect and Deposit in a Special Trust Account (IRC §§ 7215, 7512(b))
Attempts to Obstruct or Impede Tax Administration (IRC § 7212(a))
Any single violation can have severe civil and criminal tax repercussions. Once an agent sees indications of intentional wrongdoing—like using a check-cashing service to convert payroll funds into untraceable cash—an ordinary civil tax audit can evolve into a criminal employment tax matter, leading to potential prosecution, incarceration & restitution. A restitution order cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, potentially leading to lifelong financial problems.
How Fraud Indicators Transform a Civil Audit into a Criminal Tax Investigation
IRS policy and Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) guidance clarify that the leap from a 'routine' payroll tax audit to criminal employment tax charges involves several steps:
Initial or First Indicators of Fraud: Often referred to as " badges of fraud,' these can be mere suspicions—like unexplained bank accounts, using check-cashing services to pay employees in cash followed by a failure to issue W2's or 1099's, intentionally underreporting employees' wages, Consistently failing to remit required payroll tax and withholding or suspiciously incomplete books. The agent is obligated to ask probing questions and examine any discrepancies.
Developing Firm Indicators of Fraud: When the agent believes the suspicion rises above a mere hunch, they work to solidify " firm indications of fraud.' This might entail evaluating the scope of unaccounted income, identifying misclassifications of workers, or noticing patterns like repeated cash payments. Upon establishing firm indicators of fraud, the agent must typically suspend the civil tax audit without explanation.
Referral to IRS Criminal Investigation (CI): The examiner then submits Form 2797 ('Referral Report of Potential Criminal Fraud Cases') with comprehensive evidence—like unusual financial statements, bank checks, and the agent's analysis of alleged fraud. After managerial approval, CI decides whether to assign the matter to a Special Agent for potential criminal tax prosecution.
In short, first indicators of employment tax fraud can develop into firm indicators once the agent gathers enough incriminating evidence. At that point, the civil side of the payroll tax audit effectively halts while criminal authorities gear up.
Examples of Employment Tax Violations Leading to Potential Prison Time
Paying Employees in Cash
Some employers pay wages entirely in cash, hoping to evade standard withholding requirements. Such practices often constitute willful failure to collect or pay over taxes (IRC § 7202) or even willful failure to file a return (IRC § 7203) if these wages never appear on required filings. Furthermore, if an employer tries to mask or hide these cash transactions by not issuing 1099's or W2's, aiding and abetting the income tax evasion of the company' employees can be charged, attempts to obstruct or impede tax administration (IRC § 7212(a)) can also be alleged.
Misclassifying Employees
Labeling full-time employees as independent contractors may appear cost-effective, but it triggers parallel inquiries by the IRS, state income tax agencies, unemployment agencies, and workers' compensation boards. A pattern of deceit may give rise to willful violations under IRC §§ 7202, 7203, or 7206(1) for submitting false statements or tax returns. Where deliberate misclassification is found, felony tax charges are likely.
Failing to File or Pay
Neglecting to submit Form 941 altogether, or paying only a fraction of required amounts, commonly results in a 100% Trust Fund Recovery Penalty (TFRP) under IRC § 6672—plus interest and civil fines. If deemed willful under IRC § 7202 or IRC § 7203, this can escalate to criminal tax prosecution. Sometimes, employers even fail to deposit withheld taxes into the special trust account mandated by IRC §§ 7215 and 7512(b), inviting strict liability and additional criminal tax penalties.
Filing False Payroll Tax Returns
Underreporting wages or distorting employee compensation can initially seem to lower immediate tax bills, but repeated shortfalls become 'firm indications of fraud.' Such willful submission of a false statement under IRC § 7206(1) invites a criminal tax referral. Once labeled fraudulent, the matter may morph into a felony with severe civil and criminal tax penalties and potential prison time.
Pyramiding
Skipping payroll deposits quarter after quarter drastically expands the government's total loss, resulting in stiffer potential prison sentences if charged. The IRS categorizes these repeated lapses—especially post-warning—as willful acts in violation of IRC § 7202 or IRC § 7203, highlighting an affirmative intent to evade. Combined with 'badges of fraud,' pyramiding can become a key factor in determining sentencing severity. Switching from entity 1 to entity 2 to entity 3 to hide this pattern can exponentially increase your exposure.
Employee Leasing Scams
Third-party leasing entities sometimes withhold employment taxes but fail to remit them, then dissolve to dodge liability. Under IRC § 7202 or IRC § 7203, the original client and any " responsible persons" can face both civil and criminal tax sanctions if they ignored red flags or otherwise facilitated the scheme. Willfulness is often inferred when no steps were taken to verify that withheld sums reached the Treasury.
A taxpayer might assume that if the IRS halts the audit, it signifies success. In reality, IRM policy often instructs the agent to provide no reason for suspending the examination once it has located firm indicators of fraud. Meanwhile, IRS Criminal Investigation (CI) may be constructing a case. By the time you discover the matter has escalated, you might have lost crucial time to prepare a defense.
Owners who use questionable tactics—paying employees off the books or employing 'creative' recordkeeping—risk having innocent mistakes interpreted as willful acts. Any attempt to 'explain away' discrepancies might inadvertently confirm the examiner's suspicions. This is how a federal civil tax audit can shockingly become a criminal tax matter.
Defenses and Limited Excuses
Courts rarely accept claims like 'we were short on funds' or 'we needed the money to keep the business alive' as valid excuses. Only extraordinary events—such as theft, embezzlement, or catastrophic bank failure—that occur before the tax deposit are typically considered valid defenses. A consistent failure to investigate or rectify known payroll tax issues can meet the government's standard for willfulness, leaving little room for leniency.
Defend Yourself Against Employment Tax Crimes and Prison Time – Contact David W. Klasing Today
Strict liability under Form 2841, the TFRP at 100%, and felony charges under IRC § 7202 amplify the risk of incarceration. If you're behind on payroll deposits, suspect an agent is testing your 'first indicators of fraud,' or want to correct questionable worker classifications, time is of the essence. Each day of delay heightens the likelihood of the IRS or DOJ treating your shortfalls as life-altering felony indictments.
At the Tax Law Office of David W. Klasing, our dual-licensed Employment Tax Attorneys and CPAs bring nearly three decades of experience assisting businesses and individuals on a broad range of federal, California state, and international tax issues. From employment and payroll tax audits to potential criminal tax charges arising from alleged falsifications in audits, our team excels at devising and executing robust defense strategies that protect our clients' livelihoods and personal freedoms. We have consistently earned a stellar 'A+" rating from the Better Business Bureau and a flawless 10.0 from AVVO, underscoring our unwavering commitment to premier tax representation. David W. Klasing is among the fewer than 24,000 professionals nationwide who are dually licensed as both an Attorney and CPA, having distinguished himself by earning a master's in taxation—credentials that enable him to handle high-risk civil and criminal tax controversies at the highest level of sophistication. Whether you are grappling with a high-risk eggshell or reverse eggshell tax audit by agencies like the IRS, EDD, CDTFA, or FTB—especially amid red flags like unfiled returns, underreported income, or badges of fraud—our blend of legal advocacy and advanced tax expertise will help you navigate the potential threat of prison time if your matter escalates to a criminal tax investigation.
We have introduced a flexible scheduling option to meet the demands of our diverse clientele—ranging from small businesses worried about payroll compliance to larger corporations under scrutiny for suspected misclassification of employees or failure to remit withheld taxes. Clients can reserve a four-hour slot at one of our satellite offices. Mr. Klasing—an instrument-rated private pilot—will personally travel in the firm's fast and efficient Cirrus SR22 to meet with you in person at no added travel cost. This approach ensures that individuals and businesses facing potential felony-level exposure in employment tax matters receive the immediate and comprehensive defense they need before civil tax audits evolve into exponentially more intense criminal tax investigations—a scenario that can bring severe negative public attention and potentially life-altering prison sentences. Call us at (888) 904-4096 or contact us online to set up a reduced-rate initial consultation today.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Kevin Hassett says if Senate finds Medicare abuse, then "we would look at it" in Trump bill
Kevin Hassett says if Senate finds Medicare abuse, then "we would look at it" in Trump bill White House National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett said Sunday the Trump administration is not targeting Medicare in its sweeping budget proposal, but signaled the administration would be open to changes if senators uncover fraud or abuse as they look at the bill. "If somebody finds waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare, then of course we would look at it," Hassett said on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan." "But there have been a lot of false stories about Medicare being on the table, and it's totally not on the table." Senate Republicans this week are working on the House-passed budget bill, dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill" by President Trump, which includes deep tax cuts, border security measures, and changes to Medicaid and food assistance programs. Hassett on Sunday pushed back against the idea that Republicans are targeting Medicare for cuts. "That story that got out last week was covered as our intent to go after Medicare," Hassett said bluntly. "And it was just a big fake news story." National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," June 2, 2025. CBS News Asked whether the administration would revisit the Medicare provision if the Senate identifies abuse, Hassett said they would. "I've seen a massive amount of waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, and I've not been briefed on Medicare waste, fraud and abuse. But if they find something then, of course, we would look at it," he said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated earlier this week that the bill will add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Sen. Thom Tillis told Charlotte's WCNC on Thursday that he supports legislation that would address waste in the Medicare Advantage Program. This addition, he said, would not touch beneficiaries but would focus on "eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse of the Medicare Advantage program, including costly government overpayments to insurance companies." To pay for some of Mr. Trump's tax reforms, such as extending his 2017 tax cuts and eliminating tax on tips, there are cuts to several programs. Republicans have insisted they are not cutting Medicaid, and reductions in the low-income entitlement program have become one of the most charged parts of the bill. In a closed-door session with members of the Republican conference days before the bill's passage, sources in the room told CBS News Mr. Trump said, "Don't f*** around with Medicaid." House Republicans passed the bill late last month on a 215–214 vote, sending it to the Senate where GOP leaders are weighing revisions to secure enough votes under budget reconciliation rules. "What we want to see done now is we want the Senate to pass the bill, and then we want the House and Senate to work out their differences," Hassett said. "So right now, the Senate has to get the votes they need to pass the bill, and we're supporting them in that process." Some Republican senators, including Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Josh Hawley of Missouri, have voiced concerns about Medicaid provisions in the bill, particularly new monthly premium requirements for low-income recipients. Their opposition highlights ongoing uncertainty as Senate GOP leaders work to secure enough votes. The bill can't afford to lose more than four votes in the Senate, granted that all Democrats vote against it. Hawley has called the Medicaid work requirements "both morally wrong and politically suicidal." When asked about Hawley's concerns, Hassett said, "I'd have to go see what he has and talk to him about it. And I also would want to talk to the president about the specific matter. So I can't speak to that one." The administration has repeatedly argued that failure to pass the legislation could hurt the broader economy. "If we don't pass this bill, then we lose 6 to 7 million jobs and 4% GDP," Hassett said Sunday. "If we create the jobs that we have in the bill, then we're going to create a heck of a lot more insurance than what we're talking about in waste, fraud and abuse." Senate Republicans are expected to release their version of the bill in the coming days. If there are significant changes, it will then have to go back to the House for final passage before landing on Mr. Trump's desk.
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
Should you claim Social Security at 62 or 70? The answer may surprise you
Should you claim Social Security at 62 or 70? The answer may surprise you The decision on when to claim Social Security is complex and personal. What's the ideal age for claiming Social Security retirement benefits? It depends on who you ask. The earlier you start, the smaller your checks. But, you'll collect these payments for more time. That's the trade-off. But what exactly are your options, and how much of a difference can claiming later rather than earlier make? The answer might surprise you. Claiming Social Security early vs. waiting Social Security offers taxpayers a respectably wide range of payment options. Eligible individuals can claim as early as the age of 62, but can also wait until they turn 70. Or, they can file at any point in time in between. Each of these choices, however, results in a different monthly payment. And the disparity between these payments can be stark. The table below puts things in perspective, comparing the difference in payment size for each age of this nine-year range relative to this year's average Social Security retirement benefit of $1,976 per month. Notice that while there's a progressive reduction in benefits the earlier you claim, there's also an ever-growing benefit for delaying the initiation of benefits beyond your full retirement age (or FRA). This additional benefit, however, stops growing once you turn 70. You're reading that right. For the average beneficiary right now, the difference between claiming when you're 62 versus claiming at the age of 70 is over $1,000 per month. That's no small amount for most households. And the bigger your payment, the bigger the potential difference. Things to consider about taking Social Security The comparisons are clear -- there's an obvious and meaningful mathematical upside in waiting as long as possible to file for Social Security's retirement benefits. Except these numbers alone don't necessarily tell the entire story for every individual and their unique situation. It's possible there's a very good reason to claim Social Security benefits as early as you possibly can, like health-related matters. You may also have enough money saved up to tap later in your life (like an IRA) to allow you to begin collecting some income before you otherwise might. More: 3 ways to increase your Social Security benefit today There's another often overlooked upside to claiming at 62 years of age, however, even if you don't need this money yet because you're still gainfully employed. That is, you might be able to do something more financially productive with these cash payments than the Social Security Administration is doing for you on your behalf. Although the figure's not etched in stone, the average internal rate of return on money withdrawn from your paycheck and forked over to Social Security has been in the ballpark of 4%, after inflation. Sometimes it's more. Other times it's less. Any given year's effective return on this "investment," however, mirrors the average yields on longer-term U.S. Treasury Bonds at the time. Right now that's between 4% and 5%. If you can take these payments and do something more constructive with the money, it makes sense to do so. But won't collecting Social Security while you're also working possibly reduce your Social Security payment? If you're below your full retirement age, yes, it can. Specifically, any work-based wages beyond $23,500 you earn this year will start to shrink any Social Security payments you're already collecting. If you're going to earn enough at your job in 2025, in fact, it's possible you could erase all of your current Social Security benefits payments. You're not actually losing money if this ends up being the case, however. These reductions are ultimately credited toward future Social Security payments, which are no longer reduced by work-based income once you're past your full retirement age. (There's also a very specific income threshold that applies only in the year in which you reach your full retirement age, although that's best left to another discussion.) In many regards this option allows you to have your cake and eat it, too. For most people though, just know that plans to invest their early Social Security payments rarely pan out as initially intended. Successfully implementing such a plan requires a great deal of discipline. Just think about it very carefully Bottom line? There's no one-size-fits-all answer as to when you should claim your Social Security retirement benefits. You'll want to think carefully about your particular situation, including making some predictions as to what it will look like in the future. Broadly speaking though, it rarely hurts to wait just a little while longer to claim, if only to make sure that plan is going to work for you, or to beef up your numbers just a little bit more. And you will most definitely want to make sure it works for you before making the decision. The Social Security Administration will allow people who have claimed at or after reaching full retirement age to suspend these payments if they've only been collecting for 12 or fewer months. Anyone initiating these benefits before reaching their full retirement age, however, is permanently locked into their reduced payments. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »
Fox News
4 hours ago
- Fox News
Trump admin sets the record straight on reports of Musk 'body-checking' Treasury Secretary at White House
The Washington Post reported after speaking with Steve Bannon that Elon Musk aggressively "body-checked" Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at the White House earlier this year, highlighting flared tensions between the tech billionaire and members of the Trump administration. The report stated that Musk and Bessent had entered the Oval Office in April to express their preferences for acting IRS commissioner. After Trump sided with Bessent's choice and the two men exited the Oval Office, they were said to have exchanged insults and, at one point, Musk allegedly rammed his shoulder into Bessent's ribcage and Bessent hit him back, Bannon said, informing the outlet that the information had been shared with him. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed the report on this week's "Sunday Morning Futures," telling Fox News' Maria Bartiroimo that the incident was less dramatic than many assumed. "I certainly wouldn't describe it as a fistfight. It was definitely a disagreement," she shared. "Although I was not there, I didn't witness it with my own eyes. I heard about it through secondhand reporting. But again, we've moved on from that. The president has moved on from it, and the entire administration is focusing on passing this [big beautiful] bill." The former DOGE cost-cutter is allegedly discontent over the president pulling the nomination of his ally and longtime Democratic donor Jared Isaacman to run NASA, as well as Trump's big, beautiful bill, which does not solve the deficit or include subsidies for electric vehicles. The bill caused some contention from Musk and within the GOP, with some lawmakers, including Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., unwilling to vote "yes." Musk lambasted the bill as a "pork-filled," "disgusting abomination" with a public attack on X last week, writing, "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." Leavitt cited a previous assertion that "healthy disagreements" have occurred between Trump's cabinet members and the former DOGE leader, adding that the team was still able to come together for the good of the American people despite the friction. "You saw when President Trump graciously sent Elon Musk back to his companies, Secretary Bessent was there in the Oval Office, along with Secretary Lutnick and Stephen Miller. I was there, the chief of staff was there, and we were all hoping for the best for Elon," she said. The press secretary also sounded off on a recent tweet from ABC News correspondent Terry Moran, who drew ire from the White House on Sunday after tweeting a rant against deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller and President Trump in a now-deleted social media post, in which he called them both "world-class" haters. "This is, again, coming from someone who is supposed to be an unbiased and professional journalist. This is unacceptable and unhinged rhetoric coming from somebody who works at a major television network," Leavitt said. An ABC spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement that the outlet stands for "objectivity and impartiality in its news coverage and does not condone subjective personal attacks on others." "The post does not reflect the views of ABC News and violated our standards — as a result, Terry Moran has been suspended pending further evaluation," the statement continued.
