United States v. Jeffrey Wirth
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13201
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Wirth appeals a district court restitution order of $6,457,500 for unpaid taxes 2003–2005.
- Wirth pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud; plea acknowledged personal expenditures funded with company money and misreporting income.
- IRS civil audit began in 2007, expanded to criminal investigation; restitution hearing held September 14, 2012.
- District court relied on IRS Agent Bosshart’s calculations and expert Oakes to determine loss and adjusted basis, depreciation, and debt treatment.
- Court found the accounting disarray and Wirth’s bookkeeping as justification for substantial loss and approved a schedule of payments.
- Wirth argues errors in calculation, scope beyond plea, sufficiency of evidence, and complexity; court affirms restitution order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bosshart’s calculations are supported? | Wirth: Bosshart relied on unsupported assumptions. | Wirth: Bosshart’s methods credibly supported by records and testimony. | No clear error; calculations supported. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for actual loss? | Wirth: evidence insufficient, exhibits vague. | Wirth: government proved loss by testimony and exhibits. | Preponderance of evidence supports loss. |
| Conduct outside plea included in restitution? | Wirth: boating expenses not within stipulated conduct. | Bosshart: boating expenses were within broad scheme to defraud. | Within scope; no error. |
| Restitution payment schedule proper? | Wirth: no practical effect, failed scheduling. | MVRA permits scheduling; appropriate given finances. | Schedule established and reasonable. |
| Complexity exception invoked? | Wirth: complexity exception should apply to reduce burden. | Complexity not warranted; case straightforward. | District court did not abuse discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Alexandre? (example), 679 F.3d 721 (8th Cir. 2012) (MVRA loss standard; actual loss governs restitution cap)
- United States v. Frazier, 651 F.3d 899 (8th Cir. 2011) (burden to prove restitution by preponderance of the evidence)
- United States v. Ellefsen, 655 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 2011) (restitution proven by summary documents and agent testimony)
- United States v. Gregoire, 638 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2011) (abuse of discretion standard for restitution decisions)
- United States v. Tucker, 217 F.3d 960 (8th Cir. 2000) (tax restitution collection interplay with IRS collection)