Fatal Subtraction

An attorney who was suspended for three years with proof of current fitness has been denied reinstatement by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.

The court had noted in suspending the petitioner

Given the nature of the misconduct at issue, we expressed “no doubt that if and when Daniel seeks reinstatement, his status with the IRS will be a relevant consideration.”

Notwithstanding that admonition

We agree with the Hearing Committee that Mr. Daniel failed both to fully document his tax deficiencies and to substantiate his assertion that he had satisfied his tax obligations. His failure to submit adequate proof—in particular, his failure to demonstrate that he had come clean to the IRS5—is fatal to his petition for ^{reinstatement…}

There is simply nothing in the record before us to show that Mr. Daniel ever advised the IRS in a meaningful way that he had concealed taxable income such that it could reliably make an assessment of his tax obligations and any outstanding deficiencies. Given his history of dishonesty, his conclusory assertions that he was  “all square” with the IRS are inadequate.

A word to the wise

Should Mr. Daniel once again petition for reinstatement, he will have to provide some documentation that he has communicated with appropriate staff at the IRS to disclose his past concealment of funds and to ensure that the agency has accurate information from which it can assess his tax obligations and deficiencies from 1996 (when he opened the 329 IOLTA account12) through 2005. In addition and for the same time period, Mr. Daniel will have to provide documentation from the IRS detailing his income, his tax obligations, any tax deficiencies, and any payments made to address those deficiencies.

The court’s opinion had been released as an unpublished memorandum and opinion on February 22. It was published on motion of Disciplinary Counsel. (Mike Frisch)