We have another required records opinion, this time from the Second Circuit. In re: Grand Jury Subpoena Dated February 2, 2012 , ___ F.3d ___, 2013 U.S.App. LEXIS 25316 (2d Cir. 12/19/13), here.
I have not studied the opinion but my quick perusal of it saw nothing new in the basic analysis. The opinion is 30 pages and concludes:
The required records exception to the Fifth Amendment privilege against self‐incrimination still exists. The BSA’s requirements at issue here are “essentially regulatory,” the subpoenaed records are “customarily kept,” and the records have “public aspects” sufficient to render the exception applicable. Because Doe cannot lawfully excuse his failure to comply with the subpoena, the district court was within its discretion to impose sanctions for his noncompliance [enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers].
I guess I am little surprised that, given the consistent holdings of the courts of appeals, the courts are still spending significant resources to replow the same ground over and over and over. Of course, each court of appeals has to reach the an independent conclusion, but once it reaches the conclusion, does it have to say basically the same thing at great length in different words when it could incorporate by reference other holdings that are equally as good?
View Jack Townsend's opinion in its entirety on the Federal Tax Crimes blog site.
For additional insight, explore Tax Crimes, authored by Jack Townsend and available at the LexisNexis® Store
Discover the features and benefits of the LexisNexis® Tax Center
For quality Tax & Accounting research resources, visit the LexisNexis® Store
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site