Political organization

Manhattan DA defends right to sue Trump Organization tax theft case

  • The Manhattan prosecutor’s only indictment in a 3-year investigation into the Trump Organization is nearing a possible trial in September.
  • In a new court filing, prosecutors are defending their right to pursue a tax theft case that the IRS fell victim to.
  • Trump’s side argued that New York prosecutors were improperly using state charges to enforce federal law.

In documents released Friday night, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg defends his right to pursue his ongoing tax theft case against the Trump Organization and its ex-chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg.

The new filing challenges defense claims that, as state-level prosecutors, the DA lacks jurisdiction to prosecute alleged thefts and conspiracies to theft in which the IRS is an alleged victim.

The 2021 case — the only indictment in the DA’s 3-year investigation into the Trump Organization — alleges that Trump’s company and its chief financial officer robbed the IRS by padding executives’ salaries. the company with


income tax

– free benefits and social benefits.

“To convict Weisselberg of grand larceny under Count 3,” the file saysreferring to the most serious charge in the 15-count indictment, “the jury will simply have to find that as a result of Weisselberg’s lies, he wrongfully obtained more than $50,000 from the IRS in the form of wrongfully claimed tax refunds.

“The jury does not need to determine Weisselberg’s exact tax liability or the exact amount he wrongly claimed for reimbursement or the amount currently owed to the IRS,” the filing said.

“A finding of guilt would not in itself impose any obligation on Weisselberg to make a payment to the IRS,” the filing adds, refuting defense claims that the state-level prosecution wrongly prosecutes a collection of federal income tax.

The filing also disputes the defense’s “selective prosecution” claims that the former president’s cases are singled out because of Democratic DA political bias.

“Defendants continue not to name a single defendant, company or individual, similarly situated, who has been treated differently by this office or to advance any argument that defendants were inadmissibly selected for prosecution.” , indicates the folder.

The case is approaching a possible trial in September; the parties are scheduled to appear in Manhattan court on July 12, when pretrial issues are to be discussed and a firm trial date set.