Kimberly Gaetano v. United States, 20-2182

The IRS issued summonses to nine financial institutions seeking records from Jan. 1, 2015 through Nov. 1, 2019 as part of a criminal investigation of Kimberly Basehart‑Gaetano and Richard Gaetano.
Appellants petitioned in the Eastern District of Michigan to quash the summonses; the government moved to dismiss and to enforce the summonses.
The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, dismissed the petition, and ordered enforcement; appellants appealed.
Appellants’ core contention: because no tax period ends on Nov. 1, 2019, the summonses lack a legitimate purpose and seek irrelevant records.
The government relied on the issuing agent’s declaration that the summonses sought to determine understatement for tax years 2015–2018 and quarterly filings for 2019, and that records beyond the close of investigated periods could shed light on prior returns; the Sixth Circuit affirmed enforcement because noncontemporaneous records can be relevant and appellants failed to rebut the government’s prima facie case.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the summonses served a legitimate investigatory purpose given the end date of Nov. 1, 2019	Gaetano: No tax period ends on Nov. 1, 2019, so summons lacks legitimate purpose	IRS: Agent’s declaration shows investigation into 2015–2018 and 2019 quarters; records after a period may illuminate prior returns	Court: Government made prima facie showing of legitimate purpose; enforcement proper
Whether records dated outside the designated tax periods are relevant to the investigation	Gaetano: Records outside the tax periods are not relevant	IRS: Relevance standard is low; pre‑ or post‑period records can shed light on accuracy, sources, and taxpayer knowledge	Court: Relevance threshold satisfied; noncontemporaneous records may be relevant and summons may include such dates

United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48 (1964) (establishes prima facie elements for enforcement of an IRS summons)
United States v. Arthur Young & Co., 465 U.S. 805 (1984) (explains low relevance standard for IRS summonses)
Monumental Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 440 F.3d 729 (6th Cir. 2006) (standard of review and burden shifting after government’s prima facie showing)
Byers v. United States, IRS, 963 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2020) (third‑party summons notice and intervention rights; same standards apply)
United States v. Will, 671 F.2d 963 (6th Cir. 1982) (discusses government’s use of agent affidavit to make prima facie showing)
La Mura v. United States, 765 F.2d 974 (11th Cir. 1985) (recognizes that records before or after the investigated period can be relevant)