|
Friends of Chuck Ewing
DUBLIN,
OH
October ,
2004
– Most
people get upset with the Internal Revenue Service at some time in their
lives. But after a decade of harassment by the government, Chuck Ewing of Dublin, Ohio is really upset with the
IRS, he's not too happy with the Department of Justice either. Why?
Because four years after he served a year in a federal prison for
filing “false” deductions on his tax returns, the IRS has confirmed that those deductions were entirely
proper* and that he owed no tax.
But instead of simply admitting they made a huge mistake, the government
continues to stall his efforts for a fair
and just resolution. Ewing,
62 was convicted of two counts of filing “false” deductions
on his law office tax returns for the years 1992 and 1993.*
He spent a year of his life in the Ashland,
Kentucky, Federal Prison from September 1999 to August 2000. He has
received confirmation from the IRS Civil Appeals Office in Cincinnati,
Ohio that the
Internal Revenue Service now agrees that those
deductions were not false and that they were entirely deductible. That means that Ewing, who received the
confirmation four years after his release
from prison, served a year in prison for doing nothing
wrong! The
IRS did not audit Ewing's
1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994 law office tax returns prior to
trial, so there never was any discussion or finding that Ewing owed any
taxes. After an unrelated multiyear investigation by the IRS found
no wrongdoing, Ewing was indicted on four counts, one for each year of the tax
returns. Ewing repeatedly offered to answer
questions regarding tax returns to no avail. Ewing, who represented
himself during a weeklong jury trial in Columbus, Ohio, in April of 1999,
maintained to the jury that his deductions were completely disclosed on his returns
and that they were proper and legitimate in all respects. After
all the evidence was presented to the jury,
Federal Judge James Graham determined that 22 of the 26 “false deduction” claims made by the IRS were so weak that “no reasonable
person could find in favor of the government’s claim that they were
false” and dismissed two counts of the indictment.*
Nevertheless, Graham instructed the jury that they did not need to determine any tax was
due in order to convict Ewing. The judge refused Ewing’s request that he instruct the jury
on the law surrounding the four remaining deductions. Instead,
he ordered the jury
not to consider the “evidence”
they had heard concerning the 22 claims that Graham had dismissed. The
jury found Ewing guilty on two counts of "signing a false
statement," translation: he signed his tax returns as every American must
do. At
the sentencing hearing, Judge Graham ignored a recommendation by the
probation department that Ewing spend ten months in a halfway house in
Columbus, Ohio. The judge ordered Ewing to serve a one-year sentence in the
Federal Prison in Ashland, Kentucky.*
Graham based his ruling on sentencing guidelines dictated by the
IRS Criminal Investigation Division’s assertions that Ewing’s law
office owed taxes over $32,000. He
also ordered that Ewing serve a one-year supervised release after leaving
prison and ordered Ewing to either pay all taxes “due and owing” or
“enter into a compromise agreement with the IRS.” Ewing
refused to offer or agree to any compromises with the IRS arguing that
there could be no taxes “due and owing” until after the IRS had issued an
assessment and, more
importantly, until the civil appeals process was completed.
In order to offer a compromise, a taxpayer must agree that taxes are
owed. The
IRS initially refused to assess the taxes based on its assertion that Judge Graham had already done
so. As a result, Ewing could not file a
civil appeal. Judge Graham sided with the IRS and
threatened Mr. Ewing with another year of imprisonment for his refusal to
agree that any taxes were due. After
hearing Ewing's assertions regarding the law, however, both the IRS and
Graham eventually backed off and acknowledged that the civil appeals
process must be allowed to proceed–and be finalized–before any
further action could be taken against Mr. Ewing.*
But Judge Graham ordered Ewing to serve an additional year of
supervised release and forced him to make payments to the Justice Department to hold
until the completion of the civil process. In
the spring of 2003, Ewing was advised that the IRS Civil Appeals Office
had determined that no tax was due, but that the attorneys were reviewing
its determination. In September he received confirmation that
counsel had approved the determination. He has waited seventeen months
for a mailed notification by the IRS. Before
going to prison, Ewing asked trial Judge Graham and the Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals to allow him to remain free pending the outcome of his appeal.
Both Graham and the Appeals Court refused his request. The Clerk of the Court of Appeals
instructed him to file his appeal
“informally” since he was representing himself.* Ewing
filed several briefs while in prison and protested that he did
not have access to “an adequate library” while in prison. The Trial Court and the Appeals Court responded that Ewing had waived his right
to a library by representing himself.* Then, astonishingly, the
Appeals Court Clerk ignored the briefs Ewing had filed and dismissed his
appeal because he "had not filed a formal
appeal.” Ewing
filed a motion with the court to overturn the dismissal issued by the
Clerk. After being released from prison, he filed a formal appellate
brief supporting his appeal. To
date, the court has not responded to either the motion or the formal
appeal. Ewing's law practice was heavily involved in bankruptcy reorganization for farmers who fell on hard times back in the 80's and 90's. He won several significant victories against the government.* Ewing accuses the IRS and the Justice Department of severe bias against him because of this representation. Ewing claims that attorneys for the Justice Department and IRS agents have repeatedly advised him that “he did not know who he was messing with.” Considering
all that Ewing and his family have suffered throughout his decade-long
ordeal with the IRS and the government–being wrongly accused, being
unfairly imprisoned, being disbarred (and thus prohibited from earning a
living), and being totally and completely financially eviscerated for
having done nothing wrong-a reasonable person could conclude that those
lawyers and agents were right. And
that, Ewing believes, should scare the heck out of all of us. Chuck Ewing, Dublin, OH 614 771 7161 Email contact |
||||||||||