Fogbow

Mississippi sues NFL Hall of Famer Brett Favre over misspent welfare dollars
Quarterback was paid for speeches he did not make
Favre has not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing

The Mississippi Department of Human Services on Monday sued retired NFL quarterback Brett Favre, three former pro wrestlers and several other people and businesses to try to recover millions of misspent welfare dollars that were intended to help some of the poorest people in the United States.

The lawsuit says the defendants “squandered” more than $20m in money from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families anti-poverty program.

The suit was filed less than two weeks after a mother and son who ran a nonprofit group and an education company in Mississippi pleaded guilty to state criminal charges tied to the misspending. Nancy New, 69, and Zachary New, 39, agreed to testify against others in what state auditor Shad White has called Mississippi’s largest public corruption case in the past two decades.

In early 2020, Nancy and Zachary New, former Mississippi Department of Human Services executive director John Davis and three other people were charged in state court, with prosecutors saying welfare money had been misspent on items such as drug rehabilitation in Malibu, California, for former pro wrestler Brett DiBiase.

Seaview Trading, LLC, a California-based limited liability company, is classified as a partnership for federal tax purposes. In 2001, Robert Kotick was Seaview’s majority partner, owning over 99% of the company. Robert’s father, Charles, was the minority partner.

• The basic facts:
  • Seaview's tax return for the 2001 tax year claimed a $35 million loss from a tax-shelter transaction. The IRS would ultimately take a Highly Dim View of that transaction.
  • The IRS typically has three years to assess taxes for a given year. But If the taxpayer's return for that year isn't filed on time, then three-year clock doesn't start until the return is filed.
  • Seaview claimed that, in 2002, it mailed that 2001 tax return to the IRS Fun Center in Ogden, Utah. They even got a certified mail receipt when they sent it. If the IRS received it, then that would be a filing, and that would start the clock. But the IRS claimed that it never received the return, and Seaview ultimately conceded that it couldn't prove otherwise. So, no filing, and the clock doesn't start here.
  • In 2005, an IRS agent sent Seaview a letter: 'Hey, we don't have a 2001 tax return for you. Did you ever file one? If so, then send us copies of the return and of any proof of mailing that you have.' Seaview responded by faxing the agent a signed copy of the return, and a copy of the certified mail receipt, just as the agent requested.
  • In 2006 and 2007, the IRS interviewed Seaview's attorney and Kotick. For both interviews, the interview notes acknowledged that the IRS already had the 2001 return. And in 2007, Seaview's counsel sent another signed copy of the 2001 return to an IRS attorney.
  • In late 2010, the IRS finally sent Seaview a tax assessment, formalizing the previously-foreshadowed Highly Dim View. The assessment reduced that $35 million loss to zero, and demanded millions in back taxes and penalties.
• Seaview proceeded to Tax Court.
  • Seaview's argument was simple: Remember back in 2005, when an IRS agent asked us for a copy of our return, and we provided it exactly as requested? That there's a filin'. Therefore, the clock ran out in 2008. See Snooze v. Lose.
  • The IRS's counterargument was equally simple: The regulations say that a return for a California LLC is only filed once it's received by the IRS Fun Center in Ogden. That copy sent to that IRS agent was definitely not sent to the IRS Fun Center in Ogden. Therefore, the clock never started. Pay up.
  • The Tax Court ruled that the IRS was right; a return not received by the IRS Fun Center is not "filed", no matter who else in the IRS gets hold of it.
• Two judges on the Ninth Circuit panel disagreed and reversed.
  • The Internal Revenue Code itself doesn't define what's a proper "filing"; it leaves that issue to the regulations.
  • The regulations provide a definition of what it means for a return to be 'filed': it has to be received at the right place (in this case the Fun Center), and at the right time (before the deadline).
  • But if this is the only definition of 'filing', then it's impossible to 'file' a return belatedly: a return not received on time is not filed at all. And that would blow up all sorts of other parts of the law -- including the law that imposes the three-year clock itself -- that explicitly deal with what happens to a belatedly-filed return.
  • Furthermore, that right-time, right-place definition never actually says that it's the only way to file a return. And there are a number of IRS internal publications that say that, not only can an IRS examiner “advise the taxpayer of the requirement to file all delinquent returns” and “[a]dvise the taxpayer to deliver the returns promptly to the examiner” (rather than sending them to the Fun Center), but that “it is generally in the taxpayer’s best interest[] to file the delinquent return directly with the revenue officer instead of mailing it to the appropriate Fun Center.”
• The dissent spends over 50 pages saying 'No, nope, nuh-uh' in a very precise legal manner.

humblescribe wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 2:33 pm Yeah, it is peculiar that the SOL for tax returns is three years, but can be expanded to six years for a 20% understatement of income/overstatement of loss. There is no SOL for fraud.

These additional SOL for underpaid taxes only apply to returns that actually pay tax. Generally, forms 1040, 1120, and 1041. Partnerships (or LLCs that elect the partnership rules) do not pay taxes; the various items of income, loss, deduction, and credit flow through to the partners and are reported on their returns. Hence, there is no extension of the SOL for form 1065, because no tax is ever due with that return.

I am not in the legal business, but have prepared and filed lotsa returns of all stripes over the decades. I do not understand why their individual returns would not fall under the six-year statute at the minimum, and perhaps the unlimited statute for fraud, if indeed, their position was fraudulent.

Guess that's why those justices make the big bucks.

• The Kotick Kwestion is put to rest, since there's a deposition of Robert Kotick in the file, and they warm up by asking about his background. This is quite definitely Activision's own Bobby Kotick.
• The FPAA (Final Partnership Administrative Assessment) lists several of the usual grounds for disregarding a tax-shelter transaction -- lack of economic substance, lack of real risk, circular flows of funds, etc. It disallows all the claimed losses and assesses penalties for underpayment of tax. But it never claims that the transaction was fraudulent, or assesses fraud penalties. Which is presumably why the IRS didn't claim in the Tax Court or 9th Circuit proceedings that the three-year clock doesn't apply due to fraud.

Postal Service sued for seizing Black Lives Matter masks during 2020 protests


WASHINGTON — A California screen printer is suing the U.S. Postal Service for seizing shipments of Black Lives Matter masks intended to protect demonstrators from Covid-19 during protests following the May 2020 murder of George Floyd.
The cloth masks, with slogans like "Stop killing Black people" and "Defund police," were purchased by the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL) and were meant to be shipped to D.C., St. Louis, New York City and Minneapolis, where Floyd was killed by a police officer. But four boxes containing about 500 masks each were marked as "Seized by law enforcement" and their shipment was delayed more than 24 hours.

The lawsuit, filed on Wednesday and shared first with NBC News, accuses U.S. Postal Service and U.S. Postal Inspection Service officials of violating constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment by improperly seizing the boxes without probable cause, a warrant, or even reasonable suspicion. The lawsuit also raises the possibility that officials violated the First Amendment by seizing the masks because of their political messaging.

Movement Ink owner René Quiñonez, who owns the screen-printing business in Oakland, California, that manufactured the masks, told NBC News that his small family business had been impacted by the seizure.

Mariah Carey Being Sued Over Holiday Hit ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You'
The lawsuit has been brought by songwriter Andy Stone who alleges he co-wrote a song with the same title five years earlier

A complaint filed Friday in New Orleans federal court shows that Stone, who lives in Mississippi, is seeking at least $20 million in damages for copyright infringement and misappropriation, among other claims, from Carey and her co-writer Walter Afanasieff as well as from Sony Corporation of America and its subsidiary Sony Music Entertainment.

Stone, artistically known Vince Vance of the New Orleans country-pop band Vince Vance & the Valiants, co-wrote and recorded his version of “All I Want for Christmas Is You” in 1989, according to the complaint. The song then received "extensive airplay" during the 1993 Christmas season and "began making appearances on the Billboard Music Charts."

Carey’s version was released in 1994 as part of her “Merry Christmas” album. The tune has long received widespread play on the radio and on streaming services, particularly during the holiday season, essentially turning the song into the ultimate Christmas anthem.

Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 10:59 am Aren't there lots of songs* (and books and movies and...) with the same title? It doesn't appear to insinuate she stole his song, just used the same title.

*Jump: Van Halen
Jump: Pointer Sisters

I know there have been lots of successful lawsuits where one artist stole the music from another song, such as George Harrison's My Sweet Lord (The Chiffon's He's so fine) and Ray Parker Jr's Ghostbusters theme (Huey Lewis' I Want A New Drug).

While both songs share the same title, they have different lyrics and melodies.

However, the lawsuit argues that Carey and the other defendants “never sought or obtained permission” to use, reproduce or distribute Stone's song which was a "copyrightable subject matter" prior Carey's 1994 release.

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 10:47 am https://www.nbcnewyork.com/entertainmen ... 20468/?amp

Mariah Carey Being Sued Over Holiday Hit ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You'
The lawsuit has been brought by songwriter Andy Stone who alleges he co-wrote a song with the same title five years earlier

A complaint filed Friday in New Orleans federal court shows that Stone, who lives in Mississippi, is seeking at least $20 million in damages for copyright infringement and misappropriation, among other claims, from Carey and her co-writer Walter Afanasieff as well as from Sony Corporation of America and its subsidiary Sony Music Entertainment.

Stone, artistically known Vince Vance of the New Orleans country-pop band Vince Vance & the Valiants, co-wrote and recorded his version of “All I Want for Christmas Is You” in 1989, according to the complaint. The song then received "extensive airplay" during the 1993 Christmas season and "began making appearances on the Billboard Music Charts."

Carey’s version was released in 1994 as part of her “Merry Christmas” album. The tune has long received widespread play on the radio and on streaming services, particularly during the holiday season, essentially turning the song into the ultimate Christmas anthem.