WASHINGTON – The Justice Department agreement with President Donald Trump over his leaked tax returns includes a guarantee that the tax agency will no longer pursue any claims over tax liabilities it may have against Trump, his family members and his companies.
The nine-page settlement agreement made public by the Justice Department May 18, set up a $1.776 billion fund for “victims of lawfare and weaponization,” did not include any mention of the government’s efforts to go after Trump, his family and his companies over longstanding tax disputes.
On May 19, DOJ posted a separate one-page document on its website – signed by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche – with the new details. It includes what appears to be an all-inclusive release in which the Internal Revenue Service is “FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED” from “prosecuting or pursuing” any and all efforts to determine if Trump and the other parties are liable for non- or under-payment of taxes, interest, attorney’s fees or expenses incurred by the government.
Trump sued the IRS in January for $10 billion, alleging the agency failed to prevent a contractor leaking his returns. Trump had said as early as 2014 that he would release the returns to the public if he ran for president, sometimes adding stipulations or changing explanations.
Democrats blast payout at Blanche hearing
“This won’t stand up in court; this is corruption with a capital C and ultimately, the American people won’t tolerate this,” Paul Pelletier, a former senior Justice Department tax and white-collar crime prosecutor who represented the IRS told USA TODAY. “And the next administration can easily reverse it.”
In September 2020, as Trump was campaigning for reelection, The New York Times published a bombshell report that he had paid only $750 in federal income taxes each in 2016 and 2017.
Also hanging over Trump at the time, the Times reported, was a decade-long audit battle with the IRS over the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund that he claimed, and received, after declaring huge losses.
Some tax experts questioned the propriety and legality of the agreement, which did not include the signature of anyone from the Department of Treasury or IRS
“An adverse ruling,” the newspaper wrote, “could cost him more than $100 million.”
Democrats blast payout at Blanche hearing
Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, told Blanche he considers the fund “an outrageous, unprecedented slush fund that you set up” to settle Trump’s lawsuit.
Like other Democrats, Van Hollen noted that Blanche had been Trump’s personal defense lawyer in several of his criminal cases. 
“It’s not limited to Republicans,” Blanche told members of the subcommittee, which oversees spending for the Justice Department. “There’s no limitation on the claims.”
“Simple question, will individuals who assaulted Capitol Hill police officers be eligible for this fund?” Van Hollen asked at one point.”Anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they’re a victim of weaponization,” Blanche replied.
“Are there going to be rules that say that if you’ve assaulted a Capitol Hill police officer or committed a violent crime, you will not be eligible? Why not make that a rule?” Van Hollen asked Blanche.
Blanche was sharply criticized by Senate Democrats, who said the fund is geared toward benefiting Trump’s political allies with taxpayer dollars, during his appearance at a hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies on May 19
“You’re appointing four of the five members, aren’t you, Mr. Attorney General?” Van Hollen said.
“I am appointing all five members,” Blanche replied.
“I don’t think it’s the attorney general’s job to encourage commissioners to do or not do anything,” Blanche said.
Blanche argued the fund is nonpartisan
Later, Blanche said anyone, even President Biden’s son Hunter, could apply for compensation under the new fund. He also said anyone brought before the various grand juries in Trump’s criminal cases – including his Mar-a-Lago gardeners and Secret Service agents – were good candidates for compensation because of the “weaponization” they endured.
