LIKE I TOLD YOU BEFORE, THEY WERE INTERVIEWED BY THE NEWSPAPER, GREAT FALLS TRIBUNE. The newspaper called them. The newspaper also spoke with Jim Mitchell another Montana firearms dealer.
Last edited:
IRS Raids Gun Store, Takes 4473s
- Thread starter Grayfox
- Start date
LIKE I TOLD YOU BEFORE, THEY WERE INTERVIEWED BY THE NEWSPAPER, GREAT FALLS TRIBUNE. The newspaper called them. The newspaper also spoke with Jim Mitchell another Montana firearms dealer.
And yet unknown Tom from Highwood Creek Outfitters is being raided by the ATF in 2023, for the same reason that Badger Firearms was raided for in 2015! Seems too coincidental to me that two Firearms dealerships are being raided for virtually the same thing in the same city! There are at least five Firearms dealerships in my immediate area which haven't been raided in the last 50-years, and yet these two were raided in a span of less than 9-years…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
New info: Story Here
Lots of people were getting all bent outta shape because a gun shop was involved. Tons of speculation about government over reach, Biden, dems and whatever.
Turns out its all about tax fraud. "The agents had a search warrant and claimed that Mr. Van Hoose underreported millions of dollars of income from his business, a claim Mr. Hoose vehemently denies."
Current guess is that the 4473s are to prove more sales than actually reported.
So untwist those panties folks. Ain't no over reach or conspiracies here.
the 4473s prove make/model and a traceable ser#. Great way to prove he had the inventory, sold it, and they can estimate the sale price.
That is being answered this morning. The truth is not in dispute. Big hole that all of America has seen now, except maybe the blockheads.
Last edited:
I spent 12 years as a fed doing federal program reviews and audits. If you are working with a statute of limitations, not legitimate warrant is going to allow you to seize documentation outside that statutory scope.
But then again we are seeing regulatory agencies gage in regulatory creep and over reach on a regular basis lately.
You can't have it both ways. You can't be upset over regulatory creep and over reach regarding bump stocks, 80% receivers, pistol braces, FRTs, Form 1 suppressors, or zero tolerance and revocation of FFLs over a spelling error, but be ok with the ATF and IRS attempting to create a case rather than build one with a warrant of excessively broad scope.
I was in the local gun shop the other day and it was busy. About 3/4ths of the 4473s being competed were for transfers, bringing the shop gross earnings of $35 each, on firearms that were not sold by the shop.
Sorry, but I've spent since 1979 constructing, filing, and serving search warrants and training others to do so - I still do. Any item that is evidence of the crime that occasioned the warrant or evidence of other crimes encountered while serving the search warrant can be seized. No matter the 'age.' The person whose property has been searched gets a copy of the warrant and receipt/return for items seized; a trial court judge decides if items were seized that are not evidence, and those will be returned after a hearing.
This is pretty basic constitutional criminal procedure.
The 4473s belong to the BATFE no matter the age; they can take one, all, or none from any licensee. No warrant required.
Last edited:
Benton Quest
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2010
- Messages
- 389
- Reaction score
- 660
I agree. In a warrant for financial crimes, there is typically a scope that covers a date range to include the tax years under investigation and perhaps one prior year to encompass inventory adjustments and whatnot. Typically, papers from periods beyond the scope of the warrant are not seized.
However, 4473s belong to ATF.
There are usually two sides to these stories, and the government does not get to comment until indictment.
All that said, federal search warrants, especially for financial crimes, are not easy to get. There are many layers of review.
The IRS-CI and ATF agents were duly sworn 1811 federal LE. Yes, they carry guns. In the case of the IRS special agents, that has been the case since 1919.
The threat of 87,000 new IRS agents is a specious claim. That was over a 10-year period, and many of them would have been clerical and support personnel. Probably less than 3% would have been armed 1811's.
IRS-CI had had an open job announcement for over a year. It is an almost impossible position to fill given the specific requirements they seek. Their hiring is in no way keeping up with attrition.
Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk
However, 4473s belong to ATF.
There are usually two sides to these stories, and the government does not get to comment until indictment.
All that said, federal search warrants, especially for financial crimes, are not easy to get. There are many layers of review.
The IRS-CI and ATF agents were duly sworn 1811 federal LE. Yes, they carry guns. In the case of the IRS special agents, that has been the case since 1919.
The threat of 87,000 new IRS agents is a specious claim. That was over a 10-year period, and many of them would have been clerical and support personnel. Probably less than 3% would have been armed 1811's.
IRS-CI had had an open job announcement for over a year. It is an almost impossible position to fill given the specific requirements they seek. Their hiring is in no way keeping up with attrition.
Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk
More useless incorrect information.
To quote you, Seems too coincidental to me that two Firearms dealerships are being raided for virtually the same thing in the same city!
Duh! Highwood Creek Outfitters is located in Great Falls, Montana.
Badger Guns was located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
How is this the SAME CITY as your stated claim?
For everyone's sake, please step away.
For other posters following this, in no way am I defending or accusing Highwood Creek Outfitters. I believe the ATF & IRS should do their job. Bad FFL dealers should be shut down and yes, many more are being checked.
I think they look at 4473s to help determine the number of transactions. Small piece of the puzzle.
I will absolutely try and not read ANYTHING into this, it might actually be a state law thing, but the 2 places I have run 95% of my many transfers through want either cash or a check. Can use a debit card, but absolutely no paying with a credit card. I trust both to be 100% on the up and up, but I could see how a less than reputable FFL could be skimming on a huge scale. Unless you cross reference transfers via 4473 and income.
Rpg
Member
Unfortunately, I've encountered more than one LGS/FFL that has "stretched" the rules and gotten in serious trouble. This happens every day.
In some ways, it's the nature of the business. A significant portion of gun folks are quite skeptical about creating records that might be used to track down their guns. Lots of LGS's share that view and are susceptible to "stretching" the limits.
Most non big box LGS's are relatively shoe string operations. Lots of money can change hands with relatively little staying with the LGS. Folks can get a little desperate to keep the doors open. Reviewing the LGS records may even disclose the first transaction the LGS conducted "off the books" and correlate it with bounced checks and late payments for the shop's regular expenses.
Small LGSs are no different than other small businesses. A little tax evasion can help a corner coffee shop as much as a small LGS. The difference is that there are no special Federal agencies empowered to keep an eye on coffee shops.
We, as a society, have determined that trafficking in guns is the sort of business activity that needs significant supervision and regulation. Coffee shops aren't.
In some ways, it's the nature of the business. A significant portion of gun folks are quite skeptical about creating records that might be used to track down their guns. Lots of LGS's share that view and are susceptible to "stretching" the limits.
Most non big box LGS's are relatively shoe string operations. Lots of money can change hands with relatively little staying with the LGS. Folks can get a little desperate to keep the doors open. Reviewing the LGS records may even disclose the first transaction the LGS conducted "off the books" and correlate it with bounced checks and late payments for the shop's regular expenses.
Small LGSs are no different than other small businesses. A little tax evasion can help a corner coffee shop as much as a small LGS. The difference is that there are no special Federal agencies empowered to keep an eye on coffee shops.
We, as a society, have determined that trafficking in guns is the sort of business activity that needs significant supervision and regulation. Coffee shops aren't.
RPG, well said. I think that's all this is. I'm not a big conspiracy guy.
And yet The Great Falls Tribune felt the need to post the comment of Paperwork thoroughness by Highwood Creek Outfitters and not the "other" unknown unnamed Firearm Dealership In Montana, unless they didn't feel to need to contact any other firearm venders in Montana, because they didn't need too! They had the story they wanted and told it…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
@Secundius;
How long have you held your seat at the High Table with the Council of Contrarians?
How long have you held your seat at the High Table with the Council of Contrarians?
So you're fine with looking in the garage for a stolen car, but are then going to open drawers looking for possible evidence of other crimes? You don't see that as an unreasonable search and seizure?
Saying it's been done that was for decades doesn't make it legal. I've been in and around law enforcement since 1984 and I've observed a lot of practices that won't hold up to judicial scrutiny.
Grabbing 13 years of documents, not limited to just 4473s, for an alleged crime of failing to report income to the IRS, a crime with a 6 years statute of limitations, is something any qualified defense attorney will have thrown out as unreasonable and excessive in scope. Any other evidence they find of other crimes in those documents will also be inadmissible.
Evidence obtained from drug dog searches has been an area of abuse for decades as well, with dogs trained to alert by the actions of an officer in order to obtain probable cause for a search. Sadly the officers' attitudes after tearing apart someone's car on the side of the road after detaining the driver for an hour or more and then leaving them with a mess to clean up is "we didn't arrest the guy so what does he have to complain about?
Let's not even get into civil asset forfeiture.
The problem is that we all want to be pro law enforcement and support the police, and as long as it's not something that impacts us, we don't have any issues when they exceed the limits of the law and Constitution to lean on a "bad guy". But that isn't justice.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,565
- Reaction score
- 6,325
That's what makes the scope of the warrant important. If I were looking for a stolen mini van I would include the keys, the registration and anything else known to have been in the van at the time of the theft in the affidavit. (Particularly describing, as the 4th Amendment puts it) If they weren't in the van, the warrant would allow me to search any part of the rest of the premises that could reasonably contain those items.
Benton Quest
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2010
- Messages
- 389
- Reaction score
- 660
BB57...
The case law to which you refer to is Mapp v. Ohio. If you were specifically looking for a stolen vehicle, and that was the only thing listed in Attachment A, listing with specific particularity items to be seized, then no, you could not look in any area or container that could jot reasonably contain said stolen vehicle.
I guarantee they did not seize financial records beyond the scope of the warrant, which at the most would go back 7 years. All evidence seized by IRS-CI agents is reviewed by a Criminal Tax Attorney to make sure they are within scope. If not, they are immediately returned.
The 4473s are a different story.
Once again, people are quick to jump when only hearing half the story. There is probably more going here than meets the eye.
Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk
The case law to which you refer to is Mapp v. Ohio. If you were specifically looking for a stolen vehicle, and that was the only thing listed in Attachment A, listing with specific particularity items to be seized, then no, you could not look in any area or container that could jot reasonably contain said stolen vehicle.
I guarantee they did not seize financial records beyond the scope of the warrant, which at the most would go back 7 years. All evidence seized by IRS-CI agents is reviewed by a Criminal Tax Attorney to make sure they are within scope. If not, they are immediately returned.
The 4473s are a different story.
Once again, people are quick to jump when only hearing half the story. There is probably more going here than meets the eye.
Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk
You're outside your expertise. If I am inside an office, opening file cabinets searching for records and see cocaine, I can seize it under the 'plain view doctrine.' The way easiest for trial, though, would be to simply keep a LE presence there so the cocaine doesn't disappear and get another warrant for it. What matters is that you are lawfully present properly serving a warrant and saw evidence of a crime while there.
Civil and criminal law are not the same.
But under Texas v. Brown, the illegal nature of the item in plain view must be immediately apparent. If the warrant allows you to search for baseball cards and you find cocaine, you can seize it. But if you find a cigarette lighter you can't seize it on the theory that it's possible to use one for arson.
Similar threads
