U.S. Code » Title 26 » Subtitle Subtitle E— Alcohol, Tobacco, and Certain Other Excise Taxes › Chapter CHAPTER 51— DISTILLED SPIRITS, WINES, AND BEER › Subchapter Subchapter J— Penalties, Seizures, and Forfeitures Relating to Liquors › Part PART I— PENALTY, SEIZURE, AND FORFEITURE PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO DISTILLING, RECTIFYING, AND DISTILLED AND RECTIFIED PRODUCTS

26 U.S.C. § 5602

Penalty for tax fraud by distiller

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whenever any person engaged in or carrying on the business of a distiller defrauds, attempts to defraud, or engages in such business with intent to defraud the United States of the tax on the spirits distilled by him, or of any part thereof, he shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. No discontinuance or nolle prosequi of any prosecution under this section shall be allowed without the permission in writing of the Attorney General.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1963–2015 · leading case: United States v. Encarnacion-Ruiz, 787 F.3d 581 (1st Cir. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Encarnacion-Ruiz, 787 F.3d 581 (1st Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “§ 1341 (proscribing, inter alia, the mailing of a letter for the purpose of executing a scheme to defraud); 26 U.S.C. § 5602 (proscribing the operation of a distilling business to defraud the government of liquor taxes).”
United States v. Gainey, 380 U.S. 63 (1965). · cites it 2× “[8] Count three of the indictment charged Gainey with carrying on the business of a distiller with intent to defraud the United States of taxes, a violation of 26 U. S. C. § 5602 (1958 ed.). The Court of Appeals, holding that the record showed "no evidence whatever of intent to…”
Robert F. O'Neal v. United States, 411 F.2d 131 (5th Cir. 1969). “§§ 5173 and 5601(a); in Count 3 with engaging in and carrying on the business of a distiller with intent to defraud the United States of the tax on spirits distilled by him, in violation of 26 U.S. C. § 5602; in Count 4 with working in a distillery for the production of spirits…”
Roy Lee Barrett v. United States, 322 F.2d 292 (5th Cir. 1963). “26 U.S.C.A. § 5602 . Count Four charges the defendants with “work[ing] in a distillery for the production of spiritous liquors upon which no sign was placed and kept, showing the name of the person engaged in the distilling and denoting the business.”
Brady Wilson, Bernard Wilson & Walter Russaw, Jr. v. United States, 320 F.2d 493 (5th Cir. 1963). · cites it 2× “The trial court held that there was insufficient evidence to warrant charging the jury as to certain offenses and limited its instructions to charges of conspiracy to carry on the business of a distiller, 26 U.S.C. § 5602 ; conspiracy to possess distilling apparatus, 26 U.”
Lee Gilliland v. United States, 385 F.2d 912 (5th Cir. 1967). “§§ 5173 , 5601(a); carrying on the business of a distiller with intent to defraud the United States, 26 U.S.C.A. § 5602 ; and working at a still where no sign was placed and kept, 26 U.”
Sam Tate Davis v. United States, 385 F.2d 919 (5th Cir. 1967). “§ 5173 and § 5601(a); Count 4, carrying on the business of distiller with intent to defraud, 26 U.S.C. § 5602 ; Count 5 did not include the appellants; Count 6, delivering raw materials to an unregistered distillery, 26 U.”
United States v. Erie Jones Garrick, 399 F.2d 685 (4th Cir. 1968). “§ 5601 (a) (1), 26 U.S.C. § 5602 , 18 U.S.C. § 2 , and 26 U.”
United States v. Pete Arendale, 444 F.2d 1260 (5th Cir. 1971). “§ 371 , carrying on the business of a distiller with the intent to defraud the United States of the tax imposed on distillers, 26 U.S.C. § 5602 , and possession of untaxed liquor, 26 U.”
United States v. Augustus Hunt, 419 F.2d 1 (3d Cir. 1970). “§ 5601 (a) (7); engaging in such a business with intent to defraud the United States of tax in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5602 ; and violating 26 U.S.C.”
Augustus Hunt v. United States, 456 F.2d 582 (3d Cir. 1972). “§ 5601 (a) (2) and (4), respectively ; fermenting mash fit for distillation on premises other than an authorized distillery in violation of 26 U.”
United States v. Cleveland Johns, 438 F.2d 639 (5th Cir. 1971). · cites it 2× “PER CURIAM: Appellant, Cleveland Johns, is appealing from convictions for carrying on a business of distilling with intent to defraud the United States of taxes in violation of 26 U.S.C.A. § 5602 , possession of distilled spirits in violation of 26 U.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.