• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics


Fairly typical as most "Tax filing firms" cant be held responsible if they didn't knowingly help commit fraud themselves. Disavowing the returns gives them a legal shield that basically indicates that they have reason to beleive their client lied to them and therefore they are advising not to trust what they reported. note if Mazars "helped" Trump org hide something that could get them in trouble.. but filing the information Trump org provided isn't considered that.

Addendum: They do have to do some cursory checks but it's no where near a full audit. My Guess is it's on the cusp of what was considered "reasonable" and the Trump org Financial guy is going to take this bag of _hit and Fall on his sword freeing the Trumps from this..
 
Last edited:
Fairly typical as most "Tax filing firms" cant be held responsible if they didn't knowingly help commit fraud themselves. Disavowing the returns gives them a legal shield that basically indicates that they have reason to beleive their client lied to them and therefore they are advising not to trust what they reported. note if Mazars "helped" Trump org hide something that could get them in trouble.. but filing the information Trump org provided isn't considered that.
just the equivalent of the accountant throwing the client under the bus, no?
 
just the equivalent of the accountant throwing the client under the bus, no?
Not exactly. As it doesn't have to contain any proof their client lied for example.. AKA Mazars might not have the info to sink them and if done correctly they definitely don't.. since that could expose them to legal troubles regarding fraud. Which they would want to avoid.
Normally the accountant might have the real books and I highly suspect Mazars wouldn't as they would not want that culpability.
 

just reminds me of these by the grocery store cashier

626827-weeklyworldnews4.jpg
 
Back
Top