If they had to pay out such a huge amount to the IRS, wouldn't this show up in a future financial report?
Not necessarily, if 3ABN wasn't the one that paid it. What if some of the directors paid the IRS a million or two or three? That wouldn't necessarily appear on 3ABN's books.
"What if?" You really need to stop, Mr Pickle.
Let's consider what you are saying here, a director, or more than one ( you apparently didn't hear this part) paid one, or two, or three million dollars to the IRS on behalf of 3ABN, (That's a huge difference in amounts. You apparently didn't even 'hear" how much the huge amount was either? ) and this wouldn't have to appear on any books, or any future financial reports, and the IRS was ok with that? (no documentation, evidence, or support included)
What are you claiming now? That a huge amount of money changed hands and there is no record of when, why or how, or what it was for? No money trail? How then would your sources, or you, know it occurred?
Please tell everyone you are not claiming the IRS accepted a payoff or bribe offered illegally by "some" on the 3ABN board? because that is just too fantastical, Mr Pickle. Especially as it is only based on a vague supposition that you "heard", and ran with.
If that isn't it, and if you aren't just trying to muddy the waters, what in the world are you trying to claim here?
Amended filings would have been required along with the payment of that huge amount. There are none.
Danny_Defender, could you cite where the Internal Revenue Code would require amended filings if a consent decree was signed?
No, Danny_Attacker, I will not. The IRS, themselves, state they have a practice of making wrongdoing and problems public in order to deter others, so I have no idea why you think they would abandon that practice where 3ABN is concerned. IMO your arguments are ridiculous and not even supported by the least little bit of evidence.
It is apparently your *new theory*and *claim* that 3ABN signed a "consent decree" so first of all you need to do the work yourself and support your theory yourself! It is your assertion a "consent decree" was signed. It is your assumption and claim that a "consent decree" requires no amended filings or corrections.
You need to explain why you are claiming this, what it was for and why 3ABN would need to do so,(documented) or what circumstances and statutes, precidents etc, if that occurred, would cause the IRS to hide that from the public and leave errors or fraud or whatever untouched and uncorrected in the governmental records and public filings and on the parties books. Feel free to quote from the Internal Revenue Code yourself. If you get it wrong,
then and only then I will come back and point out your errors, and answer your question.
Have fun!
3D