Share

The IRS Wants Millions Of Dollars From Wesley Snipes

HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA – JULY 29: Wesley Snipes attends a book signing for “Talon Of God” at Barnes Noble on July 29, 2017 in Huntington Beach, California. (Photo by Joe Scarnici/Getty Images)

Actor Wesley Snipes is back in money trouble with the IRS after the revenue service asked for payment to the tune of $9.5 million dollars.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the IRS attempted to collect a total debt of $23 million dollars to which he countered an offer-in-compromise (OIC) of $850,00. Snipes’ counter would have allowed him to settle the debt and have the lien against his home withdrawn.

The lien was issued in 2013, a few months after the actor was released from prison after serving three years from his tax crime conviction.

The outlet reports that on Thursday the IRS rejected the offer, leaving him with his original bill of $9.5 million. In response, the actor filed a petition to appeal the decision, citing financial hardship.

Tax court Judge Kathleen Kerrigan said Snipes failed to prove that he is not financially able to pay the $9.5 bill, while Snipes says his financial advisor took out loans and rid of assets without his knowledge.

A hired settlement officer investigated the actor’s finances and determined $17.5 million was a reasonable amount that could be collected.

Snipes still reportedly tried to fight back. He went on to claim that his financial adviser had taken out loans and disposed of assets without him knowing and produced an affidavit from the adviser admitting to his misconduct, but the actor was unable to provide any documentation with proof of the diversion of his assets.

Snipes has reportedly refused to budge from his original offer.

“Given the disparity between petitioner’s $842,061 OIC and the settlement officer’s calculation of $9,581,027 as his RCP, as well as petitioner’s inability to credibly document his assets, the settlement officer and her manager had ample justification to reject the offer,” Judge Kerrigan said in a statement. “Accordingly, we conclude that the settlement officer did not abuse her discretion in determining that acceptance of petitioner’s OIC was not in the best interest of the United States.”