Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Legal Sparring Continues in Bitcoin User's Battle with IRS Tax Sweep (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the twisted-cases dept.

In a strange twist, Coindesk reports that the IRS has, somewhat indirectly, removed one target from its broad request for data about U.S. users of the Bitcoin exchange Coinbase. It no longer wants data about Jeffrey Berns, a lawyer who also happens to be fighting the IRS's "John Doe" request in court. From a report on Fortune: Berns originally filed a motion on December 13th asking the U.S. District Court for Northern California to stop the IRS' subpoena of Coinbase records. The IRS believes that its request, filed in November, is justified because Bitcoin owners "may fail, or may have failed, to comply with one or more provisions of the internal revenue laws." Berns is represented by his own law firm, Berns Weiss, whose motion argues that the IRS data search is "an abuse of process" and "overbroad." Berns has said his motion is intended to defend not only himself, but all targeted users. But according to a December 28th court filing by the IRS, Berns is no longer a target of its records request because he identified himself in his own filing, and the request is only for unidentified users. Therefore, the IRS argues, Berns is not a party to proceedings and his request to block the data grab should be thrown out of court. In response, Berns Weiss had its own spin, telling Coindesk that "The IRS's willingness to withdraw the summons as to Mr. Berns only because it is now aware of his identity," and without the additional information they're seeking about many other Coinbase users, "Makes it clear that the IRS does not have a legitimate purpose in seeking substantial personal and financial information concerning approximately 3 million Americans."

3 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. In Short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    In U.S. law, only someone who is involved in the conflict may ask the courts to resolve the matter in a particular way. The IRS then essentially removed this lawyer from the conflict; because the lawyer no longer meets the requirements for participating in the matter, the IRS is asking his petition to the courts to be rejected.

    Slick. And Stupid.

    1. Re:In Short by HiThereImBob · · Score: 3, Informative

      In U.S. law, "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and ...

      In U.S. law, early amendments to the constitution can be overridden by later amendments. The 16th Amendment authorizes the federal government to collect income tax, and there is no way to do that without sticking its nose into every nook and cranny of everyone's financial affairs.

      You may still have your 4th amendment rights in other areas, but not for anything to do with money. 99% of the people are okay with that. If you are not, then you can join the 1% that vote Libertarian. Good luck.

      The 16th amendment simply provides for basic authorization of tax collection. The implementation is a long list of laws passed by congress collectively referred to as the tax code (including the law that creates the IRS itself). These laws, just like any other, must comply with all the other amendments - 4th included.

  2. AND NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    And no warrants shall issue except upon PROBABLE CAUSE.

    When your government has routinely violated the very Constitution under which it is supposed to operate,
    and has been doing so for at least the last 15 years completely with rampant disrespect and wanton abandon,
    and refusal to listen and correct its ways,
    it is time for you to overthrow that government.