Quantcast
Connect with us

Exclusive: IRS ignored documents showing that billionaire Trump supporter avoided millions in taxes on Cape Cod estate used for Trump fundraiser

Published

on

Thanks for your support!
This article was paid for by reader donations to Raw Story Investigates.
ADVERTISEMENT

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

David Cay Johnston
David Cay Johnston

Sell your home at a loss and Congress says tough luck. Whether you overpaid or the market collapsed, it’s a personal loss and you get no tax deduction. The loss is 100 percent yours and yours alone.

In this fourth installment of The Koch Papers, we’ll look at Bill Koch’s purchase of an estate to expand his Cape Cod vacation home and a deduction he then took on his personal income tax return. The case raises questions about the diligence of federal tax law enforcement and whether under the Trump administration the IRS shows favoritism to Trump supporters.

William Ingraham Koch wanted to expand his Cape Cod vacation home compound, a lavish estate where he hosted a 2016 campaign fundraiser for Donald Trump. The Florida billionaire, whose primary Palm Beach home is six blocks from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, wanted the neighboring 26-acre estate so much that, The Koch Papers show, he paid more than twice the $29.5 million appraised value of the property.

The price Bill Koch paid, according to the documents? $63,744,920.

The total amount he deducted? $42,637,729.

ADVERTISEMENT

The 2013 purchase added 26 acres to Koch’s existing property, including a peninsula that gave him increased privacy. The purchased property boasted a magnificent 7,000 square foot home and more than a thousand feet of waterfront with a beach house, tennis courts and extensive gardens.

Sotheby’s, in a brochure, called the property Koch bought “One of the most significant parcels on the entire East Coast.” The Cape Cod real estate deal was widely reported in publications covering real estate and Boston area business.

How did Koch deduct two-thirds of the value of a personal residence? The key was buying the property not in his own name, but through a Limited Liability Company, or LLC. By liquidating the LLC after the purchase, he wrote the price premium off as a loss.

ADVERTISEMENT

On his tax return, Koch deducted all of the $34.6 million premium he paid for the neighboring property. Then he deducted another $8 million, The Koch Papers show. He did this even though Congress has enacted laws that explicitly deny losses on personal residences.

The IRS was told of this deduction in May 2018, in a whistleblower complaint filed by Charles Middleton, the former chief tax executive for Koch’s company, Oxbow Carbon LLC. Middleton and his office prepared both the company’s and Koch’s personal tax returns.

Middleton called the losses taken on the Cape Cod vacation home “tax fraud.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Koch’s spokesman, in a statement, said, “It is not Mr. Koch’s personal residence. It was an investment property.”

That position shows how Congress needs to hold hearings to clarify the rules barring losses on personal residences. By using S corporations to acquire homes where one lives, including neighboring properties whose purchase would expand an existing vacation home compound, taxpayers can easily get around the rules prohibiting losses on personal residences.

News reports on the sale at the time said the Mellon property had been listed at $29 million and sold for $19.5 million, attributing the pricing information to the real estate arm of the Sotheby’s auction house.

ADVERTISEMENT

In comments to real estate journalists at the time, Koch described the Mellon property as a personal residence. “I want to make it a family compound,” he told The Wall Street Journal, which noted he has six children.

The Boston Herald reported that Koch acquired the Mellon estate and another neighboring property owned by a DuPont to expand his vacation home complex. The Cape Cod Times quoted Koch as saying,“This is a chance of several lifetimes.”

Middleton, the whistleblower, told the IRS that the sale price, tax deduction and other amounts in his complaint were “all set forth in spreadsheets and PowerPoint documents prepared by Oxbow’s tax department.”

ADVERTISEMENT

There is no indication the IRS followed up on Middleton’s 2018 complaint. A prior complaint filed during the waning days of the Obama Administration about other Koch tax avoidance strategies sparked an IRS criminal inquiry, the Koch Papers show, but the IRS appears to have abandoned the investigation shortly after Trump took office in 2017.

Hidden Documents

Middleton told the IRS in an earlier 2016 complaint about an arrangement under which profits earned by Koch’s Oxbow Carbon LLC were reported as profits earned in the Bahamas. He also told the IRS that key documents were hidden from the IRS during an audit of the 2011 and 2012 tax returns of both Bill Koch and his Oxbow Carbon LLC.

ADVERTISEMENT

Koch and his company, in a statement, said the IRS closed the audits without making any changes. The company said it fired Middleton for cause. Middleton says he was fired after discovering documents were withheld from the IRS and reporting this to Bill Koch.

Since Congress denies tax losses on personal residences, other taxpayers could reasonably expect the IRS to investigate. But Middleton’s lawyers say that five months after Trump took office, the IRS stopped communicating with them. William Cohan, the Rancho Santa Fe, Calif., tax litigator who is Middleton’s main lawyer said the IRS has also never responded to the 2018 complaint, the one that includes the claim of improperly deducting the loss on the Cape Cod vacation home purchase.

Normally, the IRS only looks at the past six years of tax returns unless fraud is involved. There is no statute of limitation on tax fraud. According to Middleton’s 2018 complaint, the tax return on which the deductions for the Cape Cod vacation home expansion were taken was filed less than six years ago.

ADVERTISEMENT

State Tax Issues, Too

The losses may also invite scrutiny by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue of both Koch’s actions, including whether property tax laws were violated, and the taxes of the seller, socialite Rachel “Bunny” Mellon, an heiress to the Listerine mouthwash fortune and widow of Paul Mellon, the art collector. The widow, a noted horticulturist who was 102 at the time of the sale, died a year after the sale.

Like our federal government, Massachusetts does not allow tax deductions for losses on personal residences. It does tax gains on residential sales with some exceptions that are not relevant here.

ADVERTISEMENT

Significantly, Koch didn’t even sell the property on which he took the deduction. Instead, he used a tax mechanism involving a widely used type of corporation, the LLC or Limited Liability Company.

He bought the Mellon property through Indian Point LLC, which Koch declared to be an S corporation, according to Middleton. Then Koch liquidated Indian Point, in effect closing it. When a business is closed down all of the internal gains and losses have to be taken into account.

Because of the accounting rules for such liquidations Koch had to report a gain of $8,819,817 on land that was undervalued. But he then more than offset this gain by reporting the more than $42 million loss. The loss represented the difference between the more than $63 million he paid for the property and the close-out value, which Koch reported as $19.5 million, Middleton told the IRS.

ADVERTISEMENT

The net tax effect of what Middleton told the IRS was “the improper position” Koch took on his personal tax return?  A tax benefit worth $8 million.

The way the IRS operates, employees, pensioners and investors have very limited opportunities to cheat because all of their income is independently verified by employers, retirement plan administrators and investment firms.

But Congress trusts owners of LLCs and other businesses to report their income in full without verification. Reports by the IRS, by its Taxpayer Advocate, by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, by the investigative arm of Congress and by journalists including me have in the past shown that unverified income results in vast opportunities to understate income and overstate deductions. Yet Congress has done nothing to correct this except to add stock and mutual fund investment gains to the income verification regime, a change I and a few others urged.

ADVERTISEMENT

Business owners like Bill Koch and Donald Trump still benefit from not having their incomes independently verified.

A Big Deal

Given the written evidence that Middleton says will show that Koch took a massive tax deduction on a personal residence, it is difficult to fathom any reason the IRS to not reach out to him for specific evidence. Even with the massive cuts to tax law enforcement that ProPublica, me and others have documented, the allegations here seem easy to pursue. It’s not like the complex allegations of fraud that Middleton described in his 2016 complaint to the IRS regarding the transfer of profits untaxed out of the United States and then sending them back, still untaxed, to Bill Koch and the 26 minority owners of Oxbow Carbon.

The IRS, as required by Congress under Section 6103 of our tax code, said it could not comment.

That brings up an interesting connection to the adoption of Section 6103, an anti-corruption law, in 1924.

Before 1924, tax returns were public record. Newspapers carried news items reporting that this and that ultra-wealthy American earned so much and paid so much income tax. But that ended in the wake of the 1920s Teapot Dome scandal.

An Ironic Twist

The 1924 law has a coincidental connection to Bunny Mellon’s father-in-law, banking and oil magnate Andrew Mellon. Andrew Mellon served as Treasury secretary under three successive Republican presidents. Mellon was accused by some in Congress of being a tax cheat, which he denied. Ironically, the law that gives tax confidentiality to the transactions in which Bill Koch took deductions on a personal residence was connected to the relative of the man whose conduct played a major role in inspiring the law.

The 1924 law introduced two significant changes to our federal tax code that were then enacted by our Congress.

It modified Section 6103 to make tax returns private, a huge boon to tax cheats unless the IRS is well financed to audit returns, which it is not. Under federal law, if an utterly fraudulent tax return is filed but not audited, it’s accepted. That means dishonest tax returns are accepted as filed and the tax thief gets away with his or her crime. Thanks to tax confidentiality, who but insiders would ever know?

Congress also granted itself the same power the President had to examine any tax return on written request. That is what Trump, whose campaign received more than $1 million of donations thanks to Bill Koch, is fighting in ordering the IRS to not turn over six years of his returns to the House Ways and Means Committee chairman.

As I teach my Syracuse University College of Law students, anti-corruption laws can end up fostering corruption because every legal sword can be fashioned into a legal shield. Not only should the IRS and the Massachusetts Department of Revenue investigate, but Congress should also examine whether it needs to overhaul Section 6103.

ADVERTISEMENT

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]. Send news tips to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

DC Report

Exclusive: Trump’s next environmental disaster: Reclassifying nuclear waste as ‘safe’

Published

on

With Congress Limiting What Can Be Dumped at Nuke Sites, the Energy Department May Just Redefine What It's Dumping

The U.S. Department of Energy wants to redefine what constitutes high-level radioactive waste, cutting corners on the disposal of some of the most dangerous and long-lasting waste byproduct on earth—reprocessed spent fuel from the nuclear defense program.

The agency announced in October 2018 plans for its reinterpretation of high-level radioactive waste (HLW), as defined in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982, with plans to classify waste by its hazard level and not its origin.  By using the idea of a reinterpretation of a definition, the DOE may be able to circumvent Congressional oversight. And in its regulatory filing, the DOE, citing the NWPA and Atomic Energy Act of 1954, said it has the authority to “interpret” what materials are classified as high-level waste based on their radiological characteristics. That is not quite true, as Congress specifically defined high-level radioactive waste in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and any reinterpretation of that definition should trigger a Congressional response.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

When radioactive wastes aren’t radioactive wastes

Published

on

The U.S. Department of Energy wants to redefine what constitutes high-level radioactive waste, cutting corners on the disposal of some of the most dangerous and long-lasting waste byproduct on earth—reprocessed spent fuel from the nuclear defense program.

The agency announced in October 2018 plans for its reinterpretation of high-level radioactive waste (HLW), as defined in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982, with plans to classify waste by its hazard level and not its origin. By using the idea of a reinterpretation of a definition, the DOE may be able to circumvent Congressional oversight. And in its regulatory filing, the DOE, citing the NWPA and Atomic Energy Act of 1954, said it has the authority to “interpret” what materials are classified as high-level waste based on their radiological characteristics. That is not quite true, as Congress specifically defined high-level radioactive waste in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and any reinterpretation of that definition should trigger a Congressional response.

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

How Julian Assange turned his London refuge into an election meddling command post

Published

on

What We Read last Week: Our Investigative News RoundupWikiLeaks Founder Met Russian Agents in the Ecuadorian Embassy

Surveillance reports obtained by CNN reveal that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange received in-person deliveries, potentially of hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, during a series of suspicious meetings at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The reports also describe how Assange turned the embassy into a command center and orchestrated a series of damaging disclosures that rocked the 2016 presidential campaign in the United States. Despite being confined to the embassy while seeking safe passage to Ecuador, Assange met with Russians and world-class hackers at critical moments, frequently for hours at a time. He also acquired powerful new computing and network hardware to facilitate data transfers just weeks before WikiLeaks received hacked materials from Russian operatives. These stunning details come from hundreds of reports compiled for the Ecuadorian government by UC Global, a private Spanish security company. They chronicle Assange's movements and provide an unprecedented window into his life at the embassy. They also add a new dimension to the Mueller report, which cataloged how WikiLeaks helped the Russians undermine the U.S. election.

Continue Reading
 
 
 

Copyright © 2019 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email [email protected]

Join Me. Try Raw Story Investigates for $1. Invest in Journalism. Escape Ads.
close-image