TAX RELIEF AND REPRESENTATION LAW FIRM LOCATED IN BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS, WE REPRESENTED A PERSON WHO WAS INVOLVED IN TAX FRAUD/BANKRUPTCY FRAUD. THE TAX FRAUD HAD TO DO WITH RECEIVED PAYOFFS OR KICK-BACKS FROM A LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD IN REGARD TO CONTRACTS. THE BANKRUPTCY FRAUD HAD TO DO WITH THE CLIENT NOT FULLY DISCLOSING ALL ASSETS, AND THEIR VALUES, WHEN HE FILED HIS BANKRUPTCY CASE, APPARENTLY FEARING THAT HIS LIMITED BANKRUPTCY EXEMPTIONS WOULD NOT PROTECT ALL PROPERTY THAT HE HAD ACCUMULATED, METRO EAST, BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS CRIMINAL TAX AND CIVIL TAX LAW FIRM, AVAILABLE TO REPRESENT CLIENTS FROM CHESTER, RANDOLPH COUNTY, DU QUOIN, PERRY COUNTY, WEST FRANKFORT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, ILLINOIS.

TAX RELIEF AND REPRESENTATION LAW FIRM LOCATED IN BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS, WE REPRESENTED A PERSON WHO WAS INVOLVED IN TAX FRAUD/BANKRUPTCY FRAUD. THE TAX FRAUD HAD TO DO WITH RECEIVED PAYOFFS OR KICK-BACKS FROM A LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD IN REGARD TO CONTRACTS. THE BANKRUPTCY FRAUD HAD TO DO WITH THE CLIENT NOT FULLY DISCLOSING ALL ASSETS, AND THEIR VALUES, WHEN HE FILED HIS BANKRUPTCY CASE, APPARENTLY FEARING THAT HIS LIMITED BANKRUPTCY EXEMPTIONS WOULD NOT PROTECT ALL PROPERTY THAT HE HAD ACCUMULATED, METRO EAST, BELLEVILLE, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS CRIMINAL TAX AND CIVIL TAX LAW FIRM, AVAILABLE TO REPRESENT CLIENTS FROM CHESTER, RANDOLPH COUNTY, DU QUOIN, PERRY COUNTY, WEST FRANKFORT, FRANKLIN COUNTY, ILLINOIS.

We had a client that received monies from long-time friends and elderly individuals. They thought they were making investments into a strategy that would payoff handsomely for them. The client thought she could treat monies received as loans. However, she did not give written promissory notes at the time monies were received and there was no stated rate of interest. The Internal Revenue Service took the position that the monies received were not loans, but were investments or profits, and that the client should have declared income in the year received, and paid appropriate taxes. Not only did the client have to pay taxes, penalties and interest, she was also sued by the so-called investors when she was unable to repay the amounts they paid to her.