§7214 — Offenses by officers and employees of the United States

18 cases·4 followed·1 overruled·13 cited22% support

(a)Unlawful acts of revenue officers or agents

Any officer or employee of the United States acting in connection with any revenue law of the United States—

(1)

who is guilty of any extortion or willful oppression under color of law; or

(2)

who knowingly demands other or greater sums than are authorized by law, or receives any fee, compensation, or reward, except as by law prescribed, for the performance of any duty; or

(3)

who with intent to defeat the application of any provision of this title fails to perform any of the duties of his office or employment; or

(4)

who conspires or colludes with any other person to defraud the United States; or

(5)

who knowingly makes opportunity for any person to defraud the United States; or

(6)

who does or omits to do any act with intent to enable any other person to defraud the United States; or

(7)

who makes or signs any fraudulent entry in any book, or makes or signs any fraudulent certificate, return, or statement; or

(8)

who, having knowledge or information of the violation of any revenue law by any person, or of fraud committed by any person against the United States under any revenue law, fails to report, in writing, such knowledge or information to the Secretary; or

(9)

who demands, or accepts, or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly as payment or gift, or otherwise, any sum of money or other thing of value for the compromise, adjustment, or settlement of any charge or complaint for any violation or alleged violation of law, except as expressly authorized by law so to do;

shall be dismissed from office or discharged from employment and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. The court may in its discretion award out of the fine so imposed an amount, not in excess of one-half thereof, for the use of the informer, if any, who shall be ascertained by the judgment of the court. The court also shall render judgment against the said officer or employee for the amount of damages sustained in favor of the party injured, to be collected by execution.

(b)Interest of internal revenue officer or employee in tobacco or liquor production

Any internal revenue officer or employee interested, directly or indirectly, in the manufacture of tobacco, snuff, or cigarettes, or in the production, rectification, or redistillation of distilled spirits, shall be dismissed from office; and each such officer or employee so interested in any such manufacture or production, rectification, or redistillation or production of fermented liquors shall be fined not more than $5,000.

(c)Cross reference

For penalty on collecting or disbursing officers trading in public funds or debts or property, see 18 U.S.C. 1901.

  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §301.7214-1 Offenses by officers and employees of the United States

18 Citing Cases

Rosa Janus, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1996-195 · 1996

7214 provides that any officer or employee of the U.S. convicted of certain criminal acts in connection with any revenue law of the U.S. may be dismissed from office or discharged from his employment and fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. It also provides for damages against such officer or employee in f

Felix Luu, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2022-126 · 2022

Specifically, petitioner also contends that the IRS violated the Internal Revenue Manual (IRM) and section 7214 by not issuing a Form 11369 transfer memo and purposefully hiding relevant information regarding his 10 [*10] claims.9 However, representations by respondent indicate that no such completed form exists in this case.

Elizabeth O'Brien, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2012-326 · 2012

Petitioner wrote that ifthe issues could not be resolved administratively, she would pursue a remedy under section 7214.6 She also requ sted that respondent conduct the hearing through written correspondence.

urn was filed on or after the.date prescribed)". However, if the taxpayer fails to file a return, .the Commissioner may assess the tax at any time. Sec. 6501(c)(3). 2(...continued) Cir. 1984). To the extent petitioner attempts to state a claim under sec. 7214, we are without jurisdiction to hear that claim. See, e.g., Rice v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1978-334. - 9 - Petitioner did not file any employment tax returns for 1996, 1997, or 1998. Thus, the period of limitations on assessment of employ

Robert Lee, Jr., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2002-95 · 2002

7214 which provide criminal sanctions for such threats and intimidation under color of law. This is a case of unreported income. I have denied receipt of that income. Under the current state of the law you have the burden of proving receipt of that income and that the income was from a taxable source. United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433, 441-

Stephen C. Smith, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2000-290 · 2000

1978-334 (stating that the allegation that the conduct of agents of the Internal Revenue Service in issuing the notice of deficiency violates section 7214 is a matter over which the Tax Court has no jurisdiction); Spencer v.

Section 7214 makes it a crime for IRS agents to seek to extract "other or greater sums than authorized by law" and to engage in "extortion and willful oppression under color of law." To the extent that IRS employees capriciously, wantonly, and arbitrarily disregard the court decisions, statutes, and other references con- tained in this document, th

Chris E. Columbus, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1998-60 · 1998

In his trial memorandum, petitioner cites section 7214 relating to offenses by officers and employees of the United States, as authority for his damage claim.

Robert R. Baker, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1995-495 · 1995

rough the mail the sender has committed mail - 7 - fraud. Since this counterfeit security says that I am liable for a tax without stating how I became liable it constitutes the making of a false statement on a government form in violation of 26 USC Section 7214(7). Petitioner attached to her second amended petition a number of documents, including some 18 pages of OMB-related documents pertaining to Form 1040 and its various schedules. Petitioner also attached to her second amended petition an "

Tashina Baker, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1995-495 · 1995

rough the mail the sender has committed mail - 7 - fraud. Since this counterfeit security says that I am liable for a tax without stating how I became liable it constitutes the making of a false statement on a government form in violation of 26 USC Section 7214(7). Petitioner attached to her second amended petition a number of documents, including some 18 pages of OMB-related documents pertaining to Form 1040 and its various schedules. Petitioner also attached to her second amended petition an "

Rob R. Olsen, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1995-471 · 1995

sent through the mail the sender has committed mail fraud. Since this counterfeit security says that I am liable for a tax without stating how I became liable it constitutes the making of a false statement on a government form in violation of 26 USC Section 7214(7). Petitioner attached to the amended petition a number of documents, including some 18 pages of OMB-related documents pertaining to Form 1040 and its various schedules. Petitioner also attached to the amended petition an "Affidavit in

United States v. Rabhan 540 F.3d 344 · Cir.
White v. Commissioner 72 T.C. 1126 · 1979
United States v. Graham 598 F.3d 930 · Cir.
United States of America, Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Eva C. Temple, Appellant-Cross-Appellee 447 F.3d 130 · Cir.
United States v. Luciano Pascacio-Rodriguez 749 F.3d 353 · Cir.
Robert Gessert v. United States 703 F.3d 1028 · Cir.
Romp v. United States 96 F. App'x 978 · Cir.