SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 16
RECEIVED 
SEP 2 4 2014 
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1 
AT 8:30 M 
WILLIAM T. WALSH, CLERK 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
v. 
MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO, 
a/k/a "The Situation" 
Criminal No. 14- 5s·s-- 5-hvJ 
18 u.s.c. § 371 
26 u.s.c. §§ 7206(1) & 7203 
I N D I C T M E N T 
The Grand Jury in and for the District of New Jersey, sitting 
at Newark, charges: 
COUNT 1 
(Conspiracy to Defraud the United States) 
Introduction 
1. At all times relevant to Count 1 of this Indictment: 
A. Defendant MARC SORRENTINO was a resident of Monmouth 
County, New Jersey, was self-employed and received income. 
B. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation," 
was a resident of Ocean County, New Jersey, and was a reality 
television personality who gained fame on the television show "The 
Jersey Shore," which first appeared on the MTV network in or about 
December 2009. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO was self-employed and 
received income.
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 2 of 16 PageID: 2 
The Business Entities 
C. MPS Entertainment, LLC ( "MPS") was a limited liability 
company existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey that was 
formed in or about January 2010. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO held ownership interests in MPS of 20 percent and 
80 percent, respectively. MPS was purportedly engaged in the 
business of exploiting defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO's celebrity 
status through various means, including but not limited to personal 
and television appearances, product endorsements, and sales of 
various consumer products. 
D. Situation Nation, Inc. ("SitNat") was a limited 
liability company existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey 
that was formed in or about November 2010. Defendant MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO held a 100 percent ownership interest in SitNat. 
E. Situation Productions, Inc., Situation Capital 
Investments, LLC, and GTL Management, Inc. ("Other Sorrentino 
Businesses") were additional business entities established by 
defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
F. MPS was established as a partnership and SitNat was 
established as an S-Corporation under the Internal Revenue Code. 
Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") regulations, neither 
MPS nor SitNat themselves incurred tax liabilities for the net income 
they earned for a given tax year. Instead, the tax liabilities for 
net income earned or loss incurred by MPS and SitNat flowed through 
2
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 3 of 16 PageID: 3 
to the owners, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO, 
and these tax liabilities were required to be reported on the owners' 
U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, Form 1040. MPS was required to 
annually file a U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065, and SitNat 
was required to annually file a U.S. S-Corporation Tax Return, Form 
1120S with the IRS. Among other things, these forms enabled the IRS 
to identify any income required to be reported on the personal income 
tax returns of the owners of MPS and SitNat. 
G. A certified public accounting firm (the "Accounting 
Firm"), with offices in Staten Island, New York, was engaged in the 
business of preparing income tax returns for clients. 
Sources of Income 
H. MPS, SitNat, and defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO received income from a variety of sources, 
including personal and television appearances by defendant MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO, a partnership interest in a vodka company, ownership of 
an online clothing business, publication of an autobiography and a 
comic book featuring defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO as a superhero, 
and endorsements of products such as vitamins, DVDs, clothing lines, 
jewelry, tuxedos, and sunglasses. 
The Bank Accounts 
I. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO had personal bank 
accounts which were at all times under his control. At various 
times, some of these bank accounts were also under the control of 
3
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 4 of 16 PageID: 4 
defendant MARC SORRENTINO. 
J. MPS had business bank accounts which were at all times 
under the control of defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO. 
K. SitNat had business bank accounts which were at all 
times under the control of defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/ or MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO. 
L. The Other Sorrentino Businesses had bank accounts 
which were at all times under the control of defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
M. Income from the operation of MPS and SitNat was 
deposited into the various bank accounts described above. 
Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO continually 
commingled monies among the bank accounts and used the monies from 
the bank accounts to pay for personal items, such as high-end luxury 
vehicles and clothing. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO also withdrew cash from the bank accounts. 
4
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 5 of 16 PageID: 5 
The Conspiracy 
2. From in or about January 2010 through in or about November 
2013, in Monmouth and Ocean Counties, in the District of New Jersey 
and elsewhere, defendants 
MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO, 
a/k/a "The Situation," 
did knowingly and intentionally conspire and agree with each other 
and others to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing, 
obstructing, and defeating, through deceitful and dishonest means, 
the lawful functions of the IRS, a constituent agency of the United 
States Department of the Treasury, to ascertain, compute, assess, 
and collect federal income taxes. 
Object of the Conspiracy 
3. The object of the conspiracy was to impede, impair, 
obstruct, and defeat, through deceitful and dishonest means, the 
lawful functions of the IRS, a constituent agency of the United States 
Department of the Treasury, to ascertain, compute, assess, and 
collect federal income. 
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy 
4. It was part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO earned approximately $8. 9 million 
in gross income on which they failed to pay all federal income taxes 
due and owing. 
5. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 
5
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 6 of 16 PageID: 6 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be 
submitted to the IRS false and fraudulent Forms 1065 and 1120S related 
to their business entities by understating the gross receipts of the 
businesses and by claiming false and/or inflated business 
expenditures, as well as disallowed expenses. 
6. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be 
submitted to the IRS false and fraudulent individual tax returns by 
failing to report all income they received. 
7. It was further part of the conspiracy that on at least one 
occasion, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO attempted to evade bank 
currency reporting requirements. 
8. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO entered 
into numerous contracts with booking agencies for the purpose of 
defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO making personal appearances at various 
venues, including nightclubs, bars, and liquor stores, in exchange 
for a booking fee. The booking fee typically ranged from $1,500 to 
$48,000 per appearance. Generally, a substantial portion of the 
booking fee would be paid in cash directly to defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO by the venue on the date of the 
appearance. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO 
deposited some of the aforementioned cash that they received into 
the bank accounts controlled by the defendants. 
9. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 
6
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 7 of 16 PageID: 7 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENINO did not declare all of the 
aforementioned cash that they received (which amounted to 
approximately $184 1 000 in tax year 2010 1 $154 1 000 in tax year 2011 1 
and $31 1 000 in tax year 2012) as income. 
10. It was further part of the conspiracy that prior to in or 
about November 2010 1 defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO had payments from production companies for services 
performed by defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO paid to MPS 1 whereupon the 
production companies issued Forms 1099 to MPS. 
11. It was further part of the conspiracy that shortly after 
SitNat was formed in November 2010 1 defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO had payments from production companies paid to 
SitNat instead of MPS. Because SitNat was established as an 
S-Corporationl and payments from one corporation to another do not 
require the issuance of Forms 1099 1 the production companies did not 
issue Forms 1099 to SitNat. Not all of these payments from 
production companies to SitNat were reported as income. 
12. It was further part of the conspiracy that in or about 2011 1 
defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO utilized the 
Accounting Firm to assist them in preparing their personal and 
business tax returns for tax year 2010 1 and subsequently utilized 
the Accounting Firm to assist them in preparing their personal and 
business tax returns for tax years 2011 and 2012. 
7
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 8 of 16 PageID: 8 
13. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO provided information and records 
to the Accounting Firm in connection with the Accounting Firm's 
preparation of the aforementioned tax returns. However, in order 
to reduce their reported income and, therefore, the amount of tax 
that they would have to pay to the IRS, defendants MARC SORRENTINO 
and MICHAEL SORRENTINO: (a) intentionally failed to inform the 
Accounting Firm about the true income amount received from the 
operation of MPS and SitNat and (b) provided the Accounting Firm with 
a list of false and/or inflated business expenses that defendants 
MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO claimed to have incurred from 
the operation of MPS and SitNat. These false and/or inflated 
business expenses included, among other things, payments for several 
high-end vehicles, purchases of high-end clothing, and personal 
grooming expenses that were disguised as legitimate business 
expenses. 
14. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendant 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO did not file a federal income tax return Form 1040 
for calendar year 2011. 
15. It was further part of the conspiracy that on or about 
November 13, 2013, in response to federal Grand Jury subpoenas dated 
October 9, 2013, MPS and SitNat produced QuickBooks software 
containing books and records for tax year 2012. However, after the 
Grand Jury subpoenas were served upon MPS and SitNat, but prior to 
8
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 9 of 16 PageID: 9 
MPS and SitNat producing the books and records, numerous journal 
entries in the QuickBooks books and records were altered. 
Specifically, on or about November 6, 2013, journal entries that had 
originally been entered as taxable payments to defendant MARC 
SORRENTINO were altered and reclassified as non-taxable payments to 
defendant MARC SORRENTINO. 
Overt Acts 
16. In furtherance of the conspiracy and in order to effect 
its object, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO did 
commit the following overt acts, among others, in the District of 
New Jersey and elsewhere: 
a. Tax Year 2010 - Business Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2011, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO knowingly provided false information to the Accounting 
Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare a 
U.S. Partnership Return, Form 1065 to be filed with the IRS on behalf 
of MPS for tax year 2010. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO knew that this false information substantially 
understated the gross receipts and substantially overstated the true 
business expenses of MPS. The Accounting Firm then prepared a tax 
return for MPS which understated the gross receipts and which also 
claimed approximately $1,178,128 in business expenses. The false 
and/or inflated business expenses included, among other items, 
9
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 10 of 16 PageID: 10 
expenses for luxury cars, clothing, and distributions to defendants 
MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
ii. In or about June 2011, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065 for MPS for tax year 2010, 
knowing that it was materially false. 
b. Tax Year 2010 - Personal Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2011, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the 
Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to 
prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
ii. In or about June 2011, defendant MARC SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2010, 
knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS on 
Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration 
that it was made under the penalties of perjury. 
iii. In or about June 2011, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2010, 
knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS on 
Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration 
that it was made under the penalties of perjury. 
10
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 11 of 16 PageID: 11 
c. Tax Year 2011 - Business Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2012, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the 
Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to 
prepare U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S to be filed with the 
Internal Revenue Service on behalf of MPS and SitNat for tax year 
2011. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knew that 
this false information substantially understated the gross receipts 
and substantially overstated the true business expenses of MPS and 
SitNat. The Accounting Firm then prepared tax returns for MPS and 
SitNat which understated the gross receipts and which also claimed 
approximately $3,925,975 in business expenses. The false and/or 
inflated business expenses included, among other items, expenses for 
luxury cars, clothing, and distributions to defendants MARC 
SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
ii. In or about August 2012, defendant MARC SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065 for MPS for tax year 2011, 
knowing that it was materially false. 
iii. In or about February 2012, defendant MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false 
and fraudulent U.S. Tax Return, Form 1120S for SitNat for tax year 
2011, knowing that it was materially false. 
11
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 12 of 16 PageID: 12 
d. Tax Year 2011 - Personal Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2012, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the 
Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to 
prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
ii. In or about August 2012, defendant MARC SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2011 knowing 
that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS and SitNat 
on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written 
declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. 
e. Tax Year 2012 - Business Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the 
Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to 
prepare U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S to be filed with the 
Internal Revenue Service on behalf of MPS and SitNat for tax year 
2012. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knew that 
this false information substantially understated the gross receipts 
of MPS and SitNat. The Accounting Firm then prepared tax returns 
for MPS and SitNat which understated the gross receipts. 
ii. In or about September 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO 
and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the 
12
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 13 of 16 PageID: 13 
IRS false and fraudulent U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S for 
MPS and SitNat for tax year 2012, knowing that they were materially 
false. 
f. Tax Year 2012 - Personal Tax Returns 
i. In or about 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the 
Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to 
prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO. 
ii. In or about April 2013, defendant MARC SORRENTINO 
submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent 
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2012 knowing 
that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS and SitNat 
on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written 
declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. 
iii. In or about September 2013, defendant MICHAEL 
SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false 
and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax 
year 2012 knowing that it falsely reported the income he received 
from MPS and SitNat on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified 
by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of 
perjury. 
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. 
13
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 14 of 16 PageID: 14 
COUNTS 2-6 
(Filing False Tax Returns) 
1. Paragraphs 1 and 4 through 16 of Count 1 of this Indictment 
are hereby realleged and incorporated as if set forth in full herein. 
2. On or about the dates set forth below, in the District of 
New Jersey and elsewhere, the defendants set forth below did 
willfully make and subscribe IRS U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, 
Forms 104 0, as described in paragraph 16 of Count 1 this Indictment, 
which were verified by written declarations that they were made under 
the penalties of perjury, and which they did not believe to be true 
and correct as to every material matter, as described in paragraph 
6 of Count 1 of this Indictment, as follows: 
COUNT DEFENDANT TAX YEAR APPROXIMATE DATE 
RETURN FILED 
2 MARC SORRENTINO 2010 July 5, 2011 
3 MICHAEL SORRENTINO 2010 July 5, 2011 
4 MARC SORRENTINO 2011 August 23, 2012 
5 MARC SORRENTINO 2012 April 15, 2013 
6 MICHAEL SORRENTINO 2012 September 13, 2013 
In violation of Title 26, United States Code, Section 
7206 (1). 
14
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 15 of 16 PageID: 15 
COUNT 7 
(Failure to Make Tax Return) 
1. Paragraphs 1 and 4 through 16 of Count 1 of this Indictment 
are hereby realleged and incorporated as if set forth in full herein. 
2. During the calendar year 2011, MICHAEL SORRENTINO had and 
received gross income of approximately $1,995,757, which was derived 
from the operation of his business entities. 
3. Having received this income, MICHAEL SORRENTINO was 
required by law, following the close of calendar year 2011, and on 
or before April 16, 2012, to make an income tax return to the IRS 
stating specifically the items of his gross income and any deductions 
and credits to which he was entitled. 
4. On or about April 16, 2012, in the District of New Jersey 
and elsewhere, defendant 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO, 
a/k/a "The Situation," 
knowing and believing the foregoing facts, did willfully fail to make 
an income tax return to the IRS. 
In violation of Title 26, United States Code, Section 7203. 
A TRUE BILL 
ltaJ 1?/i4i~ Fd:iEPERSOiJ 
PAUL J. FISyiMAN 
United States Attorney 
15
Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 16 of 16 PageID: 16 
CASE NUMBER: !J( ~ ~~~~- s 5' yr- 5{) tt/ 
------- 
United States District Court 
District of New Jersey 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
v. 
MARC SORRENTINO and 
MICHAEL SORRENTINO, 
a/k/a "The Situation" 
INDICTMENT FOR 
18 u.s.c. § 371 
26 u.s.c. §§ 7206(1) & 7203 
A True Bill, 
..------------ r 
Foreperson 
PAUL J. FISHMAN 
U.S. ATTORNEY 
NEWARK I NEW JERSEY 
EVAN WEITZ 
ASSISTANT U. S. ATTORNEY 
973-645-2740 
USA-48AD 8 
(Ed. 1/97)

More Related Content

Similar to Test DOC

Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...
Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...
Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...Advisors4Advisors
 
LEGAL NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE ICJ-ICC
 
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jailBruce Givner
 
Principal Reduction
Principal ReductionPrincipal Reduction
Principal Reductionabeser
 
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4Quickdinero_Inc
 
SEC vs. Stratton Oakmont
SEC vs. Stratton OakmontSEC vs. Stratton Oakmont
SEC vs. Stratton OakmontStacey Troup
 
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft Note
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft NoteWriting Sample - Tax Identity Theft Note
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft NoteChris Sleeper
 
225757051 banking-cases-part-2
225757051 banking-cases-part-2225757051 banking-cases-part-2
225757051 banking-cases-part-2homeworkping10
 
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdf
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdfSettlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdf
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdfjamesmaredmond
 
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...Anatol Alizar
 
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory Conference
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory ConferenceForeign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory Conference
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory ConferenceHyperwallet
 
Geographic Targeting Orders
Geographic Targeting OrdersGeographic Targeting Orders
Geographic Targeting OrdersGabriele Masetti
 
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press Release
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press ReleaseUSAO DC AdSurfDaily Press Release
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press ReleaseQuynh Ha Skiven
 

Similar to Test DOC (20)

Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...
Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...
Illinois Complaint Against Financial Advisor Charged With Falsely Advertising...
 
LEGAL NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE
LEGAL NOTICE
 
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jail
 
Principal Reduction
Principal ReductionPrincipal Reduction
Principal Reduction
 
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4
Quickdinero Compliance Training Module 4
 
The FATCA Hurricane Hits Ground
The FATCA Hurricane Hits GroundThe FATCA Hurricane Hits Ground
The FATCA Hurricane Hits Ground
 
SEC vs. Stratton Oakmont
SEC vs. Stratton OakmontSEC vs. Stratton Oakmont
SEC vs. Stratton Oakmont
 
Nadelcomplaint
NadelcomplaintNadelcomplaint
Nadelcomplaint
 
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft Note
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft NoteWriting Sample - Tax Identity Theft Note
Writing Sample - Tax Identity Theft Note
 
De risking 101
De risking 101De risking 101
De risking 101
 
225757051 banking-cases-part-2
225757051 banking-cases-part-2225757051 banking-cases-part-2
225757051 banking-cases-part-2
 
SEC v Guy Gentile
SEC v Guy GentileSEC v Guy Gentile
SEC v Guy Gentile
 
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdf
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdfSettlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdf
Settlement Agreement Executed by all parties.pdf
 
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...
Два федеральных агента, которые вели дело Silk Road, обвиняются в краже битко...
 
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory Conference
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory ConferenceForeign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory Conference
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - DSA Global Regulatory Conference
 
Geographic Targeting Orders
Geographic Targeting OrdersGeographic Targeting Orders
Geographic Targeting Orders
 
Citizenship Status v. Tax Status, ForM #10.011
Citizenship Status v. Tax Status, ForM #10.011Citizenship Status v. Tax Status, ForM #10.011
Citizenship Status v. Tax Status, ForM #10.011
 
Money laundering
Money launderingMoney laundering
Money laundering
 
Money laundering
Money launderingMoney laundering
Money laundering
 
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press Release
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press ReleaseUSAO DC AdSurfDaily Press Release
USAO DC AdSurfDaily Press Release
 

Recently uploaded

Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKING
Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKINGOffences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKING
Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKINGPRAKHARGUPTA419620
 
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in India
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in IndiaArbitration, mediation and conciliation in India
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in IndiaNafiaNazim
 
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书Fs Las
 
如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书
 如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书 如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书
如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书Fir sss
 
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126Oishi8
 
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad Visa
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad VisaHow You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad Visa
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad VisaBridgeWest.eu
 
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书Fir L
 
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 sedition
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 seditionTrial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 sedition
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 seditionNilamPadekar1
 
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdf
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdfWhy Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdf
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdfMilind Agarwal
 
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一st Las
 
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书FS LS
 
一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
 一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书 一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书SS A
 
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to Service
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to ServiceCleades Robinson's Commitment to Service
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to ServiceCleades Robinson
 
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.ppt
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.pptFINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.ppt
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.pptjudeplata
 
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptx
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptxA Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptx
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptxPKrishna18
 
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptx
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptxTest Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptx
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptxsrikarna235
 
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax Rates
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax RatesKey Factors That Influence Property Tax Rates
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax RatesHome Tax Saver
 
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书Fs Las
 
如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书
 如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书 如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书Sir Lt
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKING
Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKINGOffences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKING
Offences against property (TRESPASS, BREAKING
 
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in India
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in IndiaArbitration, mediation and conciliation in India
Arbitration, mediation and conciliation in India
 
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(USF文凭证书)美国旧金山大学毕业证学位证书
 
如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书
 如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书 如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书
如何办理威斯康星大学密尔沃基分校毕业证学位证书
 
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126
Indemnity Guarantee Section 124 125 and 126
 
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad Visa
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad VisaHow You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad Visa
How You Can Get a Turkish Digital Nomad Visa
 
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书
如何办理普利茅斯大学毕业证(本硕)Plymouth学位证书
 
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 sedition
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 seditionTrial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 sedition
Trial Tilak t 1897,1909, and 1916 sedition
 
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdf
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdfWhy Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdf
Why Every Business Should Invest in a Social Media Fraud Analyst.pdf
 
Russian Call Girls Rohini Sector 7 💓 Delhi 9999965857 @Sabina Modi VVIP MODEL...
Russian Call Girls Rohini Sector 7 💓 Delhi 9999965857 @Sabina Modi VVIP MODEL...Russian Call Girls Rohini Sector 7 💓 Delhi 9999965857 @Sabina Modi VVIP MODEL...
Russian Call Girls Rohini Sector 7 💓 Delhi 9999965857 @Sabina Modi VVIP MODEL...
 
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一
定制(BU文凭证书)美国波士顿大学毕业证成绩单原版一比一
 
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书
如何办理密德萨斯大学毕业证(本硕)Middlesex学位证书
 
一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
 一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书 一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
一比一原版旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
 
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to Service
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to ServiceCleades Robinson's Commitment to Service
Cleades Robinson's Commitment to Service
 
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.ppt
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.pptFINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.ppt
FINALTRUEENFORCEMENT OF BARANGAY SETTLEMENT.ppt
 
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptx
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptxA Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptx
A Short-ppt on new gst laws in india.pptx
 
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptx
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptxTest Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptx
Test Identification Parade & Dying Declaration.pptx
 
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax Rates
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax RatesKey Factors That Influence Property Tax Rates
Key Factors That Influence Property Tax Rates
 
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(SFSta文凭证书)美国旧金山州立大学毕业证学位证书
 
如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书
 如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书 如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书
如何办理(MSU文凭证书)密歇根州立大学毕业证学位证书
 

Test DOC

  • 1. RECEIVED SEP 2 4 2014 Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1 AT 8:30 M WILLIAM T. WALSH, CLERK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation" Criminal No. 14- 5s·s-- 5-hvJ 18 u.s.c. § 371 26 u.s.c. §§ 7206(1) & 7203 I N D I C T M E N T The Grand Jury in and for the District of New Jersey, sitting at Newark, charges: COUNT 1 (Conspiracy to Defraud the United States) Introduction 1. At all times relevant to Count 1 of this Indictment: A. Defendant MARC SORRENTINO was a resident of Monmouth County, New Jersey, was self-employed and received income. B. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation," was a resident of Ocean County, New Jersey, and was a reality television personality who gained fame on the television show "The Jersey Shore," which first appeared on the MTV network in or about December 2009. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO was self-employed and received income.
  • 2. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 2 of 16 PageID: 2 The Business Entities C. MPS Entertainment, LLC ( "MPS") was a limited liability company existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey that was formed in or about January 2010. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO held ownership interests in MPS of 20 percent and 80 percent, respectively. MPS was purportedly engaged in the business of exploiting defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO's celebrity status through various means, including but not limited to personal and television appearances, product endorsements, and sales of various consumer products. D. Situation Nation, Inc. ("SitNat") was a limited liability company existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey that was formed in or about November 2010. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO held a 100 percent ownership interest in SitNat. E. Situation Productions, Inc., Situation Capital Investments, LLC, and GTL Management, Inc. ("Other Sorrentino Businesses") were additional business entities established by defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. F. MPS was established as a partnership and SitNat was established as an S-Corporation under the Internal Revenue Code. Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") regulations, neither MPS nor SitNat themselves incurred tax liabilities for the net income they earned for a given tax year. Instead, the tax liabilities for net income earned or loss incurred by MPS and SitNat flowed through 2
  • 3. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 3 of 16 PageID: 3 to the owners, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO, and these tax liabilities were required to be reported on the owners' U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, Form 1040. MPS was required to annually file a U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065, and SitNat was required to annually file a U.S. S-Corporation Tax Return, Form 1120S with the IRS. Among other things, these forms enabled the IRS to identify any income required to be reported on the personal income tax returns of the owners of MPS and SitNat. G. A certified public accounting firm (the "Accounting Firm"), with offices in Staten Island, New York, was engaged in the business of preparing income tax returns for clients. Sources of Income H. MPS, SitNat, and defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO received income from a variety of sources, including personal and television appearances by defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a partnership interest in a vodka company, ownership of an online clothing business, publication of an autobiography and a comic book featuring defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO as a superhero, and endorsements of products such as vitamins, DVDs, clothing lines, jewelry, tuxedos, and sunglasses. The Bank Accounts I. Defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO had personal bank accounts which were at all times under his control. At various times, some of these bank accounts were also under the control of 3
  • 4. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 4 of 16 PageID: 4 defendant MARC SORRENTINO. J. MPS had business bank accounts which were at all times under the control of defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. K. SitNat had business bank accounts which were at all times under the control of defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/ or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. L. The Other Sorrentino Businesses had bank accounts which were at all times under the control of defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO. M. Income from the operation of MPS and SitNat was deposited into the various bank accounts described above. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO continually commingled monies among the bank accounts and used the monies from the bank accounts to pay for personal items, such as high-end luxury vehicles and clothing. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO also withdrew cash from the bank accounts. 4
  • 5. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 5 of 16 PageID: 5 The Conspiracy 2. From in or about January 2010 through in or about November 2013, in Monmouth and Ocean Counties, in the District of New Jersey and elsewhere, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation," did knowingly and intentionally conspire and agree with each other and others to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating, through deceitful and dishonest means, the lawful functions of the IRS, a constituent agency of the United States Department of the Treasury, to ascertain, compute, assess, and collect federal income taxes. Object of the Conspiracy 3. The object of the conspiracy was to impede, impair, obstruct, and defeat, through deceitful and dishonest means, the lawful functions of the IRS, a constituent agency of the United States Department of the Treasury, to ascertain, compute, assess, and collect federal income. Manner and Means of the Conspiracy 4. It was part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO earned approximately $8. 9 million in gross income on which they failed to pay all federal income taxes due and owing. 5. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 5
  • 6. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 6 of 16 PageID: 6 SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS false and fraudulent Forms 1065 and 1120S related to their business entities by understating the gross receipts of the businesses and by claiming false and/or inflated business expenditures, as well as disallowed expenses. 6. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS false and fraudulent individual tax returns by failing to report all income they received. 7. It was further part of the conspiracy that on at least one occasion, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO attempted to evade bank currency reporting requirements. 8. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO entered into numerous contracts with booking agencies for the purpose of defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO making personal appearances at various venues, including nightclubs, bars, and liquor stores, in exchange for a booking fee. The booking fee typically ranged from $1,500 to $48,000 per appearance. Generally, a substantial portion of the booking fee would be paid in cash directly to defendants MARC SORRENTINO and/or MICHAEL SORRENTINO by the venue on the date of the appearance. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO deposited some of the aforementioned cash that they received into the bank accounts controlled by the defendants. 9. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC 6
  • 7. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 7 of 16 PageID: 7 SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENINO did not declare all of the aforementioned cash that they received (which amounted to approximately $184 1 000 in tax year 2010 1 $154 1 000 in tax year 2011 1 and $31 1 000 in tax year 2012) as income. 10. It was further part of the conspiracy that prior to in or about November 2010 1 defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO had payments from production companies for services performed by defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO paid to MPS 1 whereupon the production companies issued Forms 1099 to MPS. 11. It was further part of the conspiracy that shortly after SitNat was formed in November 2010 1 defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO had payments from production companies paid to SitNat instead of MPS. Because SitNat was established as an S-Corporationl and payments from one corporation to another do not require the issuance of Forms 1099 1 the production companies did not issue Forms 1099 to SitNat. Not all of these payments from production companies to SitNat were reported as income. 12. It was further part of the conspiracy that in or about 2011 1 defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO utilized the Accounting Firm to assist them in preparing their personal and business tax returns for tax year 2010 1 and subsequently utilized the Accounting Firm to assist them in preparing their personal and business tax returns for tax years 2011 and 2012. 7
  • 8. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 8 of 16 PageID: 8 13. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO provided information and records to the Accounting Firm in connection with the Accounting Firm's preparation of the aforementioned tax returns. However, in order to reduce their reported income and, therefore, the amount of tax that they would have to pay to the IRS, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO: (a) intentionally failed to inform the Accounting Firm about the true income amount received from the operation of MPS and SitNat and (b) provided the Accounting Firm with a list of false and/or inflated business expenses that defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO claimed to have incurred from the operation of MPS and SitNat. These false and/or inflated business expenses included, among other things, payments for several high-end vehicles, purchases of high-end clothing, and personal grooming expenses that were disguised as legitimate business expenses. 14. It was further part of the conspiracy that defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO did not file a federal income tax return Form 1040 for calendar year 2011. 15. It was further part of the conspiracy that on or about November 13, 2013, in response to federal Grand Jury subpoenas dated October 9, 2013, MPS and SitNat produced QuickBooks software containing books and records for tax year 2012. However, after the Grand Jury subpoenas were served upon MPS and SitNat, but prior to 8
  • 9. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 9 of 16 PageID: 9 MPS and SitNat producing the books and records, numerous journal entries in the QuickBooks books and records were altered. Specifically, on or about November 6, 2013, journal entries that had originally been entered as taxable payments to defendant MARC SORRENTINO were altered and reclassified as non-taxable payments to defendant MARC SORRENTINO. Overt Acts 16. In furtherance of the conspiracy and in order to effect its object, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO did commit the following overt acts, among others, in the District of New Jersey and elsewhere: a. Tax Year 2010 - Business Tax Returns i. In or about 2011, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knowingly provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare a U.S. Partnership Return, Form 1065 to be filed with the IRS on behalf of MPS for tax year 2010. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knew that this false information substantially understated the gross receipts and substantially overstated the true business expenses of MPS. The Accounting Firm then prepared a tax return for MPS which understated the gross receipts and which also claimed approximately $1,178,128 in business expenses. The false and/or inflated business expenses included, among other items, 9
  • 10. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 10 of 16 PageID: 10 expenses for luxury cars, clothing, and distributions to defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. ii. In or about June 2011, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065 for MPS for tax year 2010, knowing that it was materially false. b. Tax Year 2010 - Personal Tax Returns i. In or about 2011, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. ii. In or about June 2011, defendant MARC SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2010, knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. iii. In or about June 2011, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2010, knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. 10
  • 11. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 11 of 16 PageID: 11 c. Tax Year 2011 - Business Tax Returns i. In or about 2012, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S to be filed with the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of MPS and SitNat for tax year 2011. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knew that this false information substantially understated the gross receipts and substantially overstated the true business expenses of MPS and SitNat. The Accounting Firm then prepared tax returns for MPS and SitNat which understated the gross receipts and which also claimed approximately $3,925,975 in business expenses. The false and/or inflated business expenses included, among other items, expenses for luxury cars, clothing, and distributions to defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. ii. In or about August 2012, defendant MARC SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Partnership Tax Return, Form 1065 for MPS for tax year 2011, knowing that it was materially false. iii. In or about February 2012, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Tax Return, Form 1120S for SitNat for tax year 2011, knowing that it was materially false. 11
  • 12. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 12 of 16 PageID: 12 d. Tax Year 2011 - Personal Tax Returns i. In or about 2012, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. ii. In or about August 2012, defendant MARC SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2011 knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS and SitNat on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. e. Tax Year 2012 - Business Tax Returns i. In or about 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S to be filed with the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of MPS and SitNat for tax year 2012. Defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO knew that this false information substantially understated the gross receipts of MPS and SitNat. The Accounting Firm then prepared tax returns for MPS and SitNat which understated the gross receipts. ii. In or about September 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the 12
  • 13. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 13 of 16 PageID: 13 IRS false and fraudulent U.S. Tax Returns, Forms 1065 and 1120S for MPS and SitNat for tax year 2012, knowing that they were materially false. f. Tax Year 2012 - Personal Tax Returns i. In or about 2013, defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO intentionally provided false information to the Accounting Firm knowing it would be used by the Accounting Firm to prepare personal tax returns for defendants MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO. ii. In or about April 2013, defendant MARC SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2012 knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS and SitNat on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. iii. In or about September 2013, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO submitted and caused to be submitted to the IRS a false and fraudulent U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040 for tax year 2012 knowing that it falsely reported the income he received from MPS and SitNat on Schedule K-1. The tax return was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury. All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. 13
  • 14. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 14 of 16 PageID: 14 COUNTS 2-6 (Filing False Tax Returns) 1. Paragraphs 1 and 4 through 16 of Count 1 of this Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated as if set forth in full herein. 2. On or about the dates set forth below, in the District of New Jersey and elsewhere, the defendants set forth below did willfully make and subscribe IRS U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, Forms 104 0, as described in paragraph 16 of Count 1 this Indictment, which were verified by written declarations that they were made under the penalties of perjury, and which they did not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter, as described in paragraph 6 of Count 1 of this Indictment, as follows: COUNT DEFENDANT TAX YEAR APPROXIMATE DATE RETURN FILED 2 MARC SORRENTINO 2010 July 5, 2011 3 MICHAEL SORRENTINO 2010 July 5, 2011 4 MARC SORRENTINO 2011 August 23, 2012 5 MARC SORRENTINO 2012 April 15, 2013 6 MICHAEL SORRENTINO 2012 September 13, 2013 In violation of Title 26, United States Code, Section 7206 (1). 14
  • 15. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 15 of 16 PageID: 15 COUNT 7 (Failure to Make Tax Return) 1. Paragraphs 1 and 4 through 16 of Count 1 of this Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated as if set forth in full herein. 2. During the calendar year 2011, MICHAEL SORRENTINO had and received gross income of approximately $1,995,757, which was derived from the operation of his business entities. 3. Having received this income, MICHAEL SORRENTINO was required by law, following the close of calendar year 2011, and on or before April 16, 2012, to make an income tax return to the IRS stating specifically the items of his gross income and any deductions and credits to which he was entitled. 4. On or about April 16, 2012, in the District of New Jersey and elsewhere, defendant MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation," knowing and believing the foregoing facts, did willfully fail to make an income tax return to the IRS. In violation of Title 26, United States Code, Section 7203. A TRUE BILL ltaJ 1?/i4i~ Fd:iEPERSOiJ PAUL J. FISyiMAN United States Attorney 15
  • 16. Case 2:14-cr-00558-SDW Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 Page 16 of 16 PageID: 16 CASE NUMBER: !J( ~ ~~~~- s 5' yr- 5{) tt/ ------- United States District Court District of New Jersey UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARC SORRENTINO and MICHAEL SORRENTINO, a/k/a "The Situation" INDICTMENT FOR 18 u.s.c. § 371 26 u.s.c. §§ 7206(1) & 7203 A True Bill, ..------------ r Foreperson PAUL J. FISHMAN U.S. ATTORNEY NEWARK I NEW JERSEY EVAN WEITZ ASSISTANT U. S. ATTORNEY 973-645-2740 USA-48AD 8 (Ed. 1/97)