Government's Motion to Disclose Tax Return Information — U.S. v. Merritts

Full text

       Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC          Document 37         Filed 12/02/25     Page 1 of 5




                           UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                     :
                                             :
               v.                            :       Case No. 25-cr-00076-JMC
                                             :
CORTNEY MERRITTS,                            :
                                             :
                      Defendant.             :


    UNITED STATES’ MOTION TO DISCLOSE TAX RETURN AND TAX RETURN
           INFORMATION NUNC PRO TUNC TO NOVEMBER 26, 2025

       The United States of America respectfully moves the Court for an Order allowing the

Government to disclose a tax return and tax return information consisting of Exhibits D1 and D2

to the United States’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion in Limine to Prohibit the Government

from Attributing the Act of Production of Corporate Records to Merritts (ECF No. 35). In support

of this motion, the United States submits the following:

    1. On December 2, 2025, the United States filed its Opposition to Defendant’s Motion in

Limine to Prohibit the Government from Attributing the Act of Production of Corporate Records

to Merritts (ECF No. 35) (“Government’s Opposition”).1




1
  The Government’s Opposition was initially filed on November 26, 2025, as ECF No. 31, with
Exhibits D1 and D2 attached on the public docket. Upon the Government’s recognition (absent
prior defense notification) that such exhibits should have been filed under seal until an order of
this Court authorized disclosure, on December 1, 2025, at 4:39 p.m., the Government contacted
the Clerk’s Office to request these exhibits be placed under seal. According to the Clerk’s Office,
as of December 2, 2025, at 8:00 a.m., ECF No. 31 (in its entirety) has been placed under seal.
Based on further conversations with the Clerk’s Office, the previously-filed version of ECF No.
31 will be removed from the docket as entered in error.

The Government has now re-filed the Government’s Opposition, along with a Motion to Seal
Exhibits D1 and D2. If the Government’s Motion to Seal is granted, then Exhibits D1 and D2 will
remain under seal unless or until the Court grants this Motion for Disclosure.
        Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC            Document 37         Filed 12/02/25      Page 2 of 5




    2. The United States obtained Exhibits D1 and D2 pursuant to an ex parte order under 26

U.S.C. § 6103(i)(1), directing the Internal Revenue Service to disclose tax returns2 and tax return

information.3 Exhibit D1 is a Certificate of Lack of Record for Vetted Couriers and Logistics.

Exhibit D2 consists of information about what years Defendant Merritts filed or did not file tax

returns, and a copy of his individual Form 1040 federal tax return for tax year 2019. (Both exhibits

have been redacted to remove EIN, SSN, and street address information.)

    3. Tax returns and tax return information obtained pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i)(1) are

confidential by default but may be disclosed in any judicial proceeding pertaining to enforcement

of a specifically designated Federal criminal statute (not involving tax administration) to which

the United States is a party “if the court finds that such return [ ] is probative of a matter in issue

relevant in establishing the commission of a crime or the guilt or liability of a party.” 26 U.S.C. §

6103(i)(4)(A)(i). Because of the default confidentiality applicable to tax returns and tax return

information, the United States today filed a motion to place Exhibits D1 and D2 to the

Government’s Opposition under seal (ECF No. 36).




2
  The term “return” means “any tax or information return, declaration of estimated tax, or claim
for refund required by, or provided for or permitted under, the provisions of this title which is filed
with the Secretary by, on behalf of, or with respect to any person, and any amendment or
supplement thereto, including supporting schedules, attachments, or lists which are supplemental
to, or part of, the return so filed.” 26 U.S.C. § 6103(b)(1).
3
  As is relevant here, the term “return information” means “a taxpayer’s identity, the nature, source,
or amount of his income, payments, receipts, deductions, exemptions, credits, assets, liabilities,
net worth, tax liability, tax withheld, deficiencies, overassessments, or tax payments, whether the
taxpayer's return was, is being, or will be examined or subject to other investigation or processing,
or any other data, received by, recorded by, prepared by, furnished to, or collected by the Secretary
with respect to a return or with respect to the determination of the existence, or possible existence,
of liability (or the amount thereof) of any person under this title for any tax, penalty, interest, fine,
forfeiture, or other imposition, or offense.” 26 U.S.C. § 6103(b)(2)(A).
                                                   2
        Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC          Document 37        Filed 12/02/25      Page 3 of 5




    4. The Defendant is charged with two counts of wire fraud and is proceeding to trial on

January 12, 2026. As elaborated in the Government’s Opposition, the tax return and tax return

information are “probative of a matter in issue relevant in establishing the Defendant’s guilt.”

    5. First, these exhibits support the United States’s assertion that documents the Defendant

produced in response to the Vetted subpoena are properly attributable to him. They show that the

Defendant was a sole proprietor of Vetted, and thus not acting in a representative capacity, when

he produced documents that do not support the amount of income he claimed on his loan

applications. The Defendant’s inability to produce records corroborating the revenue he claimed

on his loan applications is directly probative of the intentional falsity of the statements made, or

caused to be made, on the loan applications.

    6. Second, at trial, the same tax return and tax return information will be probative of the fact

that the despite owning and operating only one business, the Defendant falsely claimed differing

amounts of income in different documents (or failed to file any statements concerning his income)

depending on how it inured to his benefit. Such evidence is directly relevant to showing the

intentional falsity of the statements he made, or caused to be made, on the loan applications.4

    7. Given the probative nature of exhibits D1 and D2 in this criminal proceeding, their

disclosure (redacted of EIN and SSN information) is consistent with congressional policy favoring

the confidentiality of returns and return information.



4
  For example, when the Defendant submitted an EIDL application for a sole proprietorship
transportation business operating as “Vetted Courier and Logistics,” he claimed he had generated
$32,000 in revenue between January 30, 2019, and January 30, 2020. Approximately three months
later, after receiving $14,500 EIDL disbursements, the Defendant submitted (or caused to be
submitted) another EIDL application for a transportation business. This time he claimed to operate
the business under the name “Cortney Merritts,” and he claimed he had generated $53,000 in
revenue between January 30, 2019, and January 30, 2020. The amount of gross revenue he claimed
was one of the key factors the SBA used to determine the appropriate EIDL amount.


                                                 3
        Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC          Document 37        Filed 12/02/25      Page 4 of 5




    8. Should the Court grant this motion, the Government requests that it be granted nunc pro

tunc to November 26, 2025, the date that the documents were initially placed on the public docket

in connection with ECF No. 31. The exhibits filed under seal in connection with ECF No. 35 on

December 2, 2025, are identical, except that: (1) Exhibit D1 has been further redacted to hide the

address number associated with Vetted’s otherwise redacted street name; and (2) Exhibit D2 has

been further redacted to hide the Defendant’s street address and social security number. (In each

case, these prior redaction failures were wholly inadvertent.)

    9. The Defendant consented to the same type of tax return and tax return information being

described publicly in a joint court filing. See Joint Pretrial Statement Attachment No. 4 (ECF No.

34-4) at 16-17.

    10. Counsel for the Defendant opposes the relief sought by this motion.5




5
  Notably, “‘[N]o court has held that a § 6103 violation warrants dismissal or suppression.’; cf. 26
U.S.C. § 7431 (providing civil remedy for unauthorized disclosures under § 6103).” United States
v. Biden, 728 F. Supp. 3d 1054, 1098 (C.D. Cal. 2024), appeal dismissed, No. 24-2333, 2024 WL
2745125 (9th Cir. May 14, 2024).


                                                 4
        Case 1:25-cr-00076-JMC           Document 37        Filed 12/02/25       Page 5 of 5




    WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order that

permits the Government: (1) to disclose Exhibits D1 and D2 (redacted of SSN and EIN

information) in connection with the pretrial litigation in this matter, and (2) to disclose the tax

return contained in Exhibit D2 at trial; and (3) to disclose the lack-of-records information

contained in Exhibits D1 and D2 at trial (whether in the same form or in the form of IRS Form

3050s or testimony). 6



                                               Respectfully submitted,

                                               JEANINE FERRIS PIRRO
                                               UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

                                       By:             /s/ Emily A. Miller
                                               EMILY A. MILLER (D.C. Bar No. 462077)
                                               Assistant United States Attorney
                                               United States Attorney’s Office
                                               District of Columbia
                                               601 D Street NW
                                               Washington, DC 20530
                                               Office: (202) 252-6988




6
  As explained in the Joint Pretrial Statement (ECF No. 34, Attachment No. 4, at 16-17), in place
of the lack-of-record return information in Exhibits D1 and D2, and only if the Defendant agrees,
at trial the Government will introduce: (1) an IRS Form 3050 certification of lack of record
showing that the Defendant made no other tax filings in his name during the relevant time period
(exhibit to be provided after it is obtained), and (2) an IRS Form 3050 certification of lack of record
showing that the Defendant made no tax filings in the name of his moving company (Vetted)
during the relevant time period (Trial Exhibit 34). If the Defendant does not stipulate to the
introduction of certificates of no record, however, the Government will call a witness from the IRS
who performed the relevant searches to testify to the substance thereof.


                                                  5


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.dcd.278640.37.0.pdf

Size

160,786 bytes

SHA-256

9e1fe3bbb011a4b072083cce381105611eb50113ce2a2049c711279f7081e7ad

Our copy

gov.uscourts.dcd.278640.37.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)