to porn stars as a business legal expense. I will have to remember that, in case I am ever stupid, immoral and heartless enough to do such a thing.
to porn stars as a business legal expense. I will have to remember that, in case I am ever stupid, immoral and heartless enough to do such a thing.
With respect to the wisdom of making hush money payments, that is for each of us to decide. But in terms of deductions, I think it is pretty easy to construct a scenario where such payments might be deductible. A good, if not exactly reputable lawyer can help with that.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is not so much making the payments as it is properly reporting them. In a public company, it is a bad idea to lie to the board and/or shareholders about them. In a political context, it is a really bad idea to conceal to not properly report them under campaign finance laws.
Mr. Trump raises an interesting question which I haven't thought about much, and it is a surprisingly obvious one. Can state officials enforce violation of federal criminal laws? In thinking about it, I don't see why not. After all, a crime is a crime, and absent some specific jurisdictional statute, I don't see why a state prosecutor can't prosecute.
In the Trump trial, as I understand it, there is a different issue. Basically, the prosecutor is using the alleged violation of the federal law to ramp up what would ordinarily be a misdemeanor under state law to a felony. This theory, I hear is novel. But in terms of fairness, I don't see the problem. If someone commitsa felony, he should be on notice, that the law isn't going to view him favorably. The doesn't get to choose how that disfavor is expressed. Although the defendant is entitled to a presumption of innocence, that shouldn't be interpreted as saying the law is on his side.
--Hiram
Apparently there is NY campaign laws in question.
ReplyDelete"At the center of the case are payments totaling $130,000 to Daniels, made by Cohen in the closing weeks of the 2016 election campaign. Cohen admitted in his plea deal the payments were aimed at buying Daniels’ silence about an affair she says she had with Trump a decade earlier.
Trump faces 34 felony counts, and he could face a maximum of four years in prison if convicted. But Merchan also could sentence him to probation without prison time.
Legal experts have noted a major challenge facing Bragg: In New York state, falsifying business records on its own is a misdemeanor, not a felony. But it becomes a felony if the falsification was done to conceal another crime.
Bragg alleges that Trump intended to conceal state and federal campaign finance violations. The payments, prosecutors allege, were illegal and unreported donations to Trump’s campaign, because if Daniels’ story became public, it could have damaged Trump’s image when voters went to the polls.
Bragg also alleges that Trump intended to conceal a tax crime stemming from how Cohen was reimbursed for the payments to Daniels.
Prosecutors don’t need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed these alleged underlying crimes. But they do need to show that Trump intended to conceal them — something defense lawyers are expected to strongly contest."
My guess is that they will have to prove the underlying crimes beyond a reasonable doubt too.
ReplyDelete--Hiram
I should note that conspiracy to commit a crime doesn't require that the underlying be committed or even attempted. By that logic, conspiracy to commit campaign fraud, doesn't require that the fraud actually be committed, and since it doesn't have to have been committed, it doesn't have to be proven, and certainly not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
ReplyDelete--Hiram
I find it odd that they are not discussing tax fraud.
ReplyDeleteI mean I assume the "legal fees" were deducted...
And I guessing hush payments are not a legal "business expense"?