Case File
efta-02651698DOJ Data Set 11OtherEFTA02651698
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02651698
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
Extracted Text (OCR)
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From:
jeffrey E. <[email protected]>
Sent:
Sunday, April 30, 2017 4:21 PM
To:
Brad Wechsler
Cc:
Tom Turrin; Barry Cohen; Leon Black
Subject:
Re:
try to tie down other notices to other execs. =C2* either way torn is showing loss of approx 880,.=A0 and the irs a
gain of the same amount. possible coincidence..=A0 my choice is to write the alternate letter with many edits.=C2*.
detaling the fact that we have available all the records4>=A0 that tie to the return if she wants to review. =C2.3/ I
would like an opinion from e and y, if this =quot; adjustment " means we will have to acknowldge in the futu=e an
error on audit. ?
I will consider the options=C2* but i am hesitant to admit a approx 1 million dollar mistake.=C240
with the concern of what it means for future years. .4F=A0 I m still very unclear of why it has taken so long to tie
n=mbers. I am really only interested in the 54 m vs 53.
O
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 11:33 AM, <
> wrote:
Guys-can I just mention an= confirm some things:
1. As an fyi, but as I believe you know, Ftl is pulling together the back-up=and presentation on the other items of
BRH income highlighted in the origi=al IRS notice this week end. Hopefully we will not have to submit.
2. As we all know I aint no tax guy but I read the assessment letter very c=refully and my "uninformed" view is
exactly torn and jeffrey'= first reaction (which may or may not have changed), ie, that the IRS4F=A0 found/acknowledges
378,805,695 of what they believe should be 379,707,3=1 or a delta of 884,006. (They also found a delta of 17,680 in
itemized de=uctions.) Definitionally, these numbers have to include BRH numbers and as=jeffrey said to me, they
answered the question they posed in the initial n=tice.
3. In that context, my personal view is that torn tries to reach out by phon= monday (after he and jeffrey touch
base today or tomorrow morn to coordin=te) to confirm that the 360k assessment is the show stopper.
4. On a parallel basis, I'd have jeffrey and tom edit the "a=ternate response letter" which, again, would set out
our belief=that the "assessment" ends this process, at least for 2012. If w= don't hear back from the agent then we
should submit in writing our u=derstanding of the notice and assessment.
5. As an aside, if leon's brh assessment is 884,006 it wld be nice to s=e if that foots with the overall assessment
to the other BRH partners and =ross-check to ownership %'s; although at the end of the day I'm no= certain that's
critical.
Thgts? I'm reachable by email or cell phone. Best, b
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
conversation-id 45882 date-last-viewed 0 date-received 1493569287 flags 8590195713 gmail-label-ids 7 6 remote-id
709624
EFTA_R1_01894058
EFTA02651698
Technical Artifacts (3)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Related Documents (6)
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01392864
0p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown
EFTA02651525
2p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01743111
0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]>
2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown
From: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]>
3p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown
EFTA02514032
2p
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.