DENVER – LAWFUEL – Law News, Law Jobs – Troy A. Eid, U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado, announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Robert E. Blackburn for the District of Colorado found the promoter of a fraudulent tax avoidance program, Austin Gary Cooper, formerly of Fort Collins, Colorado, guilty of criminal contempt. Judge Blackburn sentenced Austin Gary Cooper to six months of imprisonment following his conviction.

Austin Gary Cooper and his wife, Martha E. Cooper, had been charged with one count of criminal contempt, for violating a permanent injunction order related to their sale and promotion of the fraudulent tax avoidance program in May of 2006. Martha E. Cooper failed to appear for her initial appearance and remains a fugitive from Justice.

The evidence at trial showed that on November 19, 2003, Chief U.S. District Court Judge Lewis T. Babcock in Denver, CO, ordered the Coopers and their organization, Taking Back America, to stop promoting the tax avoidance program, to provide the United States with a complete customer list of the individuals who had purchased it, advise their clients of the injunction order, and post the order on the various websites controlled by the Coopers, including www.paral.org and www.tenfoundation.com.

Evidence at trial established that Austin Gary Cooper failed to comply with the injunction order. The government also introduced evidence that the Austin Gary Cooper was read the order in open court and that the U.S. District Court in Denver, CO gave Austin Gary Cooper repeated opportunities to comply with the permanent injunction order.

Evidence supporting the government’s injunction request established that the Coopers were promoting and selling a so-called expatriation/repatriation package that purported to exempt participants from the nation’s tax laws. The Coopers sold the package for up to $1,600 to as many as 2,000 individuals nationwide, according to papers filed by the Justice Department in the injunction case. The evidence also indicated that the Coopers knew that the expatriation/repatriation package they were selling would not exempt individuals from the nation’s tax laws as they fraudulently claimed. Information about the permanent injunction can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv03301.htm , http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv03361.htm , http://10.173.2.10/tax/txdv03641.htm and http://10.173.2.10/tax/txdv03601.htm

The case was investigated by Special Agent Anthony Romero of the Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations. The case was prosecuted by Department of Justice Tax Division Trial Attorney Jed Dwyer.

TALLAHASSEE – LAWFUEL – Law News, Law Jobs – Attorney General Charlie Crist today sent a letter to Kevin J. Martin, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, urging the FCC to reject a plan that could cost local telephone customers nationwide more than $6.9 billion per year.

The so-called Missoula Plan could increase residential telephone charges by $3.50 per month, forcing consumers to absorb the costs that telephone carriers pay other carriers. Currently, customers and long distance carriers share the cost of local access charges. The Missoula Plan shifts the majority of the burden to local customers. The plan could cost Floridians more than $300 million per year.

“This plan would significantly harm Florida consumers while providing a windfall for a select group of phone companies,” said Crist. “The Missoula Plan, if implemented, would clearly place an unjustified increase on the citizens of the State of Florida without any increase in the level of service.”

The complete text of the letter follows below:

October 24, 2006

Mr. Kevin J. Martin
Chairman
Federal Communications Committee
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

RE: Missoula Intercarrier Compensation Reform Plan
DA 06-1510

Dear Chairman Martin:

I write in opposition to the “Missoula Plan” that purports to comprehensively and equitably address inter-carrier compensation for telecommunications companies. Unfortunately, this very complicated, convoluted plan would, if implemented, significantly harm the consumers of my state while providing a windfall for a select group of carriers. Let me elaborate.

Under the Missoula Plan, consumers will be burdened with additional surcharges and higher rates so that the revenues of incumbent telecommunications companies like AT&T will be preserved, if not enhanced.

The customers that I am concerned about want reasonably priced dial tone and simple, affordable calling plans. These are the customers who want – and need – viable options in wireline telecommunications services.
With that said, these same customers, many of them on fixed incomes, also cannot tolerate further increases in their phone bills.

Under the Missoula Plan ICC payments between carriers are reduced $6 billion, and end-user local rates go up $6.9 billion. This consists of a
$4.7 billion increase in the subscriber line charge (“SLC”); a $1.5 billion increase in the universal service fund (“USF”); and three smaller increases.

The Missoula Plan presents to the Commission a plan that in effect, raises local rates in the form of huge increases in the subscriber line charge (“SLC”) (an increase of $4.7 billion) and in the Universal Services Fund (a 32% increase or $1.5 billion dollars).

Under the Plan the subscriber line charge for all of the major companies (most of the lines in the State of Florida) may increase to $10.00 in the fourth step of the Plan, and increase by the rate of inflation thereafter. This part of the increase could result in a $3.50 a month increased charge on each Florida local residential customers’ lines.
This increase could cost Florida consumers and the economy of the State of Florida over $25 million a month and over $300 million a year.

Although end users will have to absorb $6.9 billion in additional costs, the Missoula Plan does not require carriers to pass through any of the reductions in ICC rates as reductions in long distance rates. As a result, there is no guarantee or commitment that the $6.0 billion in ICC rates will find their way to customers.

Another great concern is that the Missoula Plan requires a substantial preemption of the authority of states over intrastate ICC rates. Although the Plan is cast as having optional elements, the Plan explicitly allows complete FCC preemption of authority over ICC rates, both interstate and intrastate. There is no basis in law for such an abrogation of power.

Florida has accomplished significant intrastate access reform.
However, these decreases in access charges have been accomplished by placing a heavy burden on residential customers by way of large rate increases. The Missoula Plan, if implemented, would clearly place an additional unjustified, and unconscionable increase on the citizens of the State of Florida.

In conclusion, I ask that you reject the Missoula Plan.

Sincerely,

Charlie Crist