Spies v. United States
317 U.S. 492 (1943)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The felony of willfully attempting to evade or defeat a tax requires an affirmative act of commission beyond the willful omissions of failing to file a return and pay a tax, which are themselves misdemeanors.
Facts:
- Petitioner Spies had sufficient income during 1936 to be legally required to file an income tax return and pay tax.
- Spies failed to file an income tax return for that year.
- Spies also failed to pay the income tax he owed for that year.
- Spies insisted on being paid for certain income in cash.
- He transported this cash to his bank using an armored car.
- Spies deposited the cash into bank accounts held in the names of his family members, not his own name.
- He maintained inadequate and misleading financial records.
Procedural Posture:
- The United States indicted Spies in federal district court (trial court) for the felony of willfully attempting to defeat and evade income tax under § 145(b).
- At trial, Spies requested a jury instruction stating that a conviction for the felony requires more than just finding he willfully failed to file a return and pay the tax. The trial court refused this request.
- The trial court instructed the jury that it could find Spies guilty of the felony if it found he willfully failed to file a return and willfully failed to pay the tax.
- A jury convicted Spies of the felony charge.
- Spies (as appellant) appealed the conviction to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, challenging the jury instruction.
- The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's conviction.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted Spies's petition for a writ of certiorari.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the willful failure to file an income tax return and the willful failure to pay the tax, without any other affirmative act, constitute the felony of willfully attempting to defeat and evade a tax under § 145(b) of the Internal Revenue Code?
Opinions:
Majority - Mr. Justice Jackson
No. The felony of willfully attempting to defeat or evade a tax requires more than the two misdemeanors of willfully failing to file a return and willfully failing to pay the tax. The statutory term 'attempt' implies an affirmative, willful act of commission, not merely a passive omission of a statutory duty. While § 145(a) criminalizes willful omissions (failure to file/pay) as misdemeanors, the felony defined in § 145(b) is the 'capstone' of the tax enforcement system and requires a 'willful and positive attempt' to evade. Examples of such affirmative acts include keeping a double set of books, making false entries, destroying records, or concealing assets. Therefore, a defendant is entitled to a jury instruction that distinguishes between the misdemeanor omissions and the felony, requiring proof of an affirmative act for a felony conviction.
Analysis:
This landmark decision establishes the critical distinction between misdemeanor tax offenses (omissions) and the felony of tax evasion (commissions). By requiring proof of an affirmative act of evasion, the Court prevents prosecutors from bootstrapping two lesser offenses into a more serious felony charge. The opinion provides a non-exhaustive list of such affirmative acts, often called 'badges of fraud,' that has become foundational in tax fraud prosecutions. This framework ensures that the severe penalties for felony tax evasion are reserved for those who take active steps to deceive the government, rather than those who are merely delinquent in their duties.
