WASHINGTON — During a Senate Finance Committee hearing on Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declined to clarify whether President Donald Trump and his relatives will continue receiving protection from IRS audits following the administration’s decision to cancel a controversial $1.776 billion compensation fund that would have aided the president’s supporters.
“There’s continuing litigation, and I’m unable to comment on ongoing litigation,” Bessent responded to lawmakers during the committee session.
The evasive response frustrated Democratic senators seeking clarity from Bessent during a hearing supposedly centered on the Treasury Department’s budget. This came one day after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche appeared to suggest that the settlement’s IRS audit protection provisions would remain active for the Republican president.
Following multiple unsuccessful efforts to obtain a direct answer from Bessent, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., declared, “It’s been very clear you’re dodging this and you’re trying to use it as an excuse. It’s just outrageous on behalf of the American republic.”
A White House representative failed to respond to an Associated Press request regarding the settlement’s current status. The president has not made any public statements about the compensation fund’s elimination.
The administration chose to eliminate the compensation fund plans, which might have included payments to those who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, following widespread bipartisan criticism and intense political opposition that threatened to derail important White House priorities. However, the IRS immunity agreement’s status within the disputed settlement designed to resolve the president’s $10 billion IRS lawsuit remained uncertain, despite Blanche’s Tuesday statement that “nothing has changed” regarding that matter.
A federal judge in Florida supervising the president’s IRS lawsuit, who had previously thrown out the case, reopened it last week and directed the president’s legal team to address accusations that the president dropped his claims to prevent court examination of the agreement.
When initially dismissing the case, Kathleen Williams, the judge overseeing the lawsuit, criticized the Justice Department for insufficient transparency and stated no agency “submitted any settlement documents nor filed any documents ensuring that the settlement was appropriate where there was an outstanding question as to whether an actual case or controversy existed.”
Matt Platkin, a former New Jersey attorney general currently with the law firm Platkin LLP, which represents lawmakers and judges contesting the settlement agreement, described it as “one of the greatest scams in American history.”
He informed The Associated Press that Blanche’s Tuesday testimony regarding plans to eliminate the weaponization fund while granting the president audit immunity “underscores the need for the court to continue its inquiry in Florida.”
Senate members attempted unsuccessfully to question Bessent about the agreement on Wednesday.
“Secretary Bessent owes the committee an explanation of what the Treasury knows about the dirty settlement. That’s because his department was involved from beginning to end,” stated Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.
Wyden questioned Bessent: “Does the IRS audit immunity given to Trump, his family, and his businesses still stand?”
Bessent refused to provide an answer, referencing the ongoing legal matter.
Should audits and investigations into the president’s tax records be dismissed under the settlement, an unknown amount could be eliminated from his obligations to the federal tax agency.
Earlier reporting by the New York Times and ProPublica revealed that a continuing audit of a method the president allegedly employed to evade taxes in previous years might have led to an estimated $100 million assessment if the IRS had discovered violations.
Some Republicans also voiced concerns Wednesday about the proposal to protect the president from IRS oversight.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told reporters outside the chambers, “I don’t think any American should have a deal like that.”
Nina Olson, founder of the Center for Taxpayer Rights, which has filed suit against the administration over IRS disclosures to immigration authorities, characterized the settlement as “the lowest point for the IRS since the 1970s and President Nixon’s efforts to help his friends by trying to stop IRS audits of them and hurting his enemies by urging IRS audits on them.”
