United States District Court, D. New Jersey
RICHARD E. ZUCKERMAN STEPHEN S. HO Counsel for the United
States of America
ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION [DE
considered the United States' motion for a default
judgment, any opposition thereto, the entire record of this
proceeding, and for good cause shown, the Court makes the
following findings of fact and conclusions of law and enters
this permanent injunction, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 55 and 65, and 26 U.S.C. § 7407.
Defendants Bertha Babey Cajuste ("Cajuste"), also
known as Bertha Benoit; Empires VIP Financial, Inc.
("VIP Financial"), also known as Empires VIP; and
Empires VIP Firm, Inc. ("VIP Firm"), also known as
Empires VIP, prepare federal income tax returns for customers
located in and around East Orange, New Jersey.
Cajuste, VIP Financial, and VIP Firm, are tax return
preparers within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(36)
because they prepare, and/or employ one or more persons to
prepare, tax returns for others for compensation.
Cajuste owns or operates VIP Financial and VIP Firm
(collectively, "Empires VIP").
Return Preparation Businesses
IRS estimates that Cajuste, individually and through her
businesses, has prepared over 4, 000 federal income tax
returns for the 2011 through 2017 tax filing seasons.
Wrongful Tax Preparation Practices
Cajuste, individually and through her businesses (including
VIP Financial and VIP Firm), continually and repeatedly
prepared federal income tax returns which willfully
understated her customers' federal income tax liabilities
and claimed inflated tax refunds for them through a variety
specifically, Cajuste, individually and through her
businesses (including VIP Financial and VIP Firm), prepared
false federal income tax returns for her customers that:
a. Claimed false or overstated Schedule A deductions,
including unreimbursed employee business expenses;
b. Reported false Schedule C businesses and business losses;
c. Claimed false education credits.
Defendants continually and repeatedly engaged in conduct that
violated 26 U.S.C. § 6695(g) by failing to exercise
diligence in determining their customers' eligibility
for, or amounts of, tax credits such as the ...