Tax Fraud Lawyers

Representing Whistleblowers in IRS and Tax Fraud Claims

Tax fraud by individuals and businesses has been estimated to cost the United States government over $450 billion annually. Tax evasion or fraud can be carried out by filing false or deceptive tax returns, hiding assets and income in offshore bank accounts, concealing business ownership or other financial activities, or through outright identify theft.

Cracking down on tax fraud is a simple matter of fairness to the vast majority of taxpayers who regularly pay the government what they owe. Tax whistleblowers are a vital weapon in the fight against tax fraud. Individuals who bring information to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) relating to tax fraud or tax underpayments exceeding $2 million may also be eligible to receive a reward if their information leads to a successful enforcement action.

Based in California, our legal team at Wisner Baum can represent tax fraud and IRS whistleblowers nationwide. Call (310) 207-3233 for a free consultation.

About IRS Whistleblowers

IRS whistleblowers play an important role in exposing corporate tax fraud, and the Tax Relief and Health Care Act offers IRS whistleblowers significant rewards for bringing original information concerning tax fraud to the government’s attention.

Under the Tax Relief and Health Care Act, tax fraud whistleblowers may be entitled to receive between 15 and 30 percent of the amount recovered by the IRS in a successful enforcement action, as long as the tax, penalties, interest, and additional amounts in dispute exceed $2 million. If the tax, penalty and interest is less than $2,000.000 the reward will be limited to a maximum of 15% and will be at the discretion of the IRS.

The IRS whistleblower program gives any individual with original information concerning large-scale tax underpayments, fraud, or evasion—including accounting errors—significant financial incentive to file a whistleblower lawsuit against the perpetrator(s). Since 2007, whistleblowers have helped the IRS collect billions in lost revenue, and whistleblowers have been rewarded hundreds of millions for their assistance.

What the IRS Wants From Tax Whistleblowers

  • “Specific and credible information concerning the person(s) that the claimant believes have failed to comply with tax laws and which will lead to the collection of unpaid taxes;
  • “Documentation to substantiate the claim (e.g., financial data; the location of bank accounts, assets, books, and records; transaction documents or analyses relevant to the claim);
  • “An explanation of how the information that forms the basis of the claim came to the attention of the claimant, including the date(s) on which this information was acquired, and a complete description of the claimant’s present or former relationship (if any)” to the person or persons they believe have violated tax laws.

Tax whistleblowers who are aware of supporting documents, but not able to get them, are instructed to describe these documents and identify their location to the best of their ability.

Types of Tax Fraud

Below are some common types of tax fraud:

  • Hiding Income Offshore – Occurs when individuals or businesses attempt to hide income in offshore banks, brokerage firms or by using nominee entities in an attempt to limit their tax liability. Those who attempt this scheme typically do so through the use of offshore credit or debit cards, foreign trusts, employee-leasing schemes, private annuities or wire transfers. In one landmark case, Swiss banking group UBS agreed to resolve criminal charges that it conspired to defraud the United States by promoting tax evasion through secret offshore accounts. The bank was forced to pay a fine of $780 million and turn over the names of over 4,000 account holders. The IRS whistleblower who exposed the tax evasion scheme was awarded $104 million.
  • Filing False or Misleading Returns – Occurs when individuals or businesses fraudulently file returns in order to reduce their tax bill or claim refunds or tax credits they are not entitled to receive. False tax returns may also be filed in order to cover up other illegal activities. In 2005, KMPG, a firm that provides audit, tax, and advisory services, agreed to pay $456 million in fines, restitution and penalties to settle charges that it designed, marketed and implemented fraudulent tax shelters. The defendants allegedly filed false tax returns in support of the scheme.
  • Transfer Pricing – Transfer pricing schemes involve multinational corporations doing business in several countries attempting to avoid taxes by making it appear that its operations in a high-taxed country produced relatively little profit, while its operations in a low-taxed country did well. The practice is widespread and the IRS has an entire team devoted to pursuing transfer pricing fraud. The GlaxoSmithKline scandal in 2006 is a good example of a transfer pricing scheme. GSK paid $3.4 billion to settle IRS charges that it engaged in transfer pricing by assigning too little of its worldwide drug sales to its U.S. subsidiary. In 2011, Western Union paid $1.2 billion to settle transfer pricing charges.
  • Abuse of Charitable Organizations and/or Deductions – Occurs when individuals or businesses highly overvalue or overstate donations to a charitable organization in order to fraudulently reduce their taxable income.
  • Disguising Business Ownership or Financial Activity – Occurs when corporations or businesses operate using a third party to disguise the true owners. These third parties can be used to underreport assets, create fictitious deductions, and launder money or a variety of other financial crimes.
  • Misstating Wages – Occurs when businesses file false statements about wages or income in order to limit the amount of taxes owed at the end of a fiscal year.
  • Abuse of “Independent Contractor” Rules for Actual Employees – Occurs when employees are designated as contractors and given 1099s at the end of the year, therefore avoiding the employer’s share of taxes. It has been estimated that employers misclassify millions of workers as independent contractors every year in order to avoid the payment of employment taxes.

Contact us today at (310) 207-3233 to start exploring your legal options. Located in Los Angeles, we take cases across the U.S.

Get Started
Call (310) 207-3233 or fill out the form below and request a free consultation.
20,000+ Families Represented

"Wisner Baum gave exceptional attention to all aspects of the case, detailed inquiry, and tenacious overview of all the information submitted. The paralegals are efficient and diligent. I was completely surprised to find an empathic personal message to take care of my own health during the challenging time of being a full-time caretaker.*"

Mary Flores
Reviewed
on Google
Read More Reviews
Case Results
We Demand Accountability.
More Successful Results
$2.0 Billion Verdict
Personal Injury
In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case. The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.
In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case. The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.
Continue Reading
$2.0 Billion Verdict
Personal Injury

In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case.

The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.

$289.2 Million Verdict
Personal Injury
$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million. Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.
$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million. Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.
Continue Reading
$289.2 Million Verdict
Personal Injury

$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial

Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million.

Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.

$265 Million Settlement
Fatal Train Crash
In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.
In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.
Continue Reading
$265 Million Settlement
Fatal Train Crash

In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.

When powerful systems fail, we step in. Wisner Baum exposes injustice, demands accountability, and delivers real results for those who’ve been harmed. Justice Starts Here.
Los Angeles
11111 Santa Monica
Blvd Suite 1750
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Get Directions
Bay Area
100 Drakes Landing Road
Suite 160
Greenbrae, CA 9490412
Get Directions
Washington, D.C.
2101 L St NW 

Suite 800
Washington, DC 20037
Get Directions
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute a client relationship.
Send Us Your Case Details
We’ll respond and let you know the best way to proceed with your case.
crossarrow-up linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram