Two Sets of Books Aren’t Better than One

I’ve found that the one set of books I keep is plenty. Why would I want (or need) a second set of records showing my income and expenses? Of course, I don’t have a Bozo mind, and I don’t think I need to duplicate my efforts. (One time where you should keep a second set of books is when you change computer software. You want to run both software to make sure they both come up with the same amount of income.)

From New York comes word of a group of grocery stores in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut that used two sets of books. They weren’t changing computer systems, though. Instead, the first set of books showed their accurate income and expenses; the second set of books allegedly didn’t include all of the income. The owners allegedly skimmed cash and used it for their personal use according to this story. The tax returns allegedly used the books that didn’t show all the income. Unfortunately for those allegedly involved in the scheme, the IRS apparently discovered that two sets of books were being kept for all the wrong reasons. Nine individuals face various charges including tax evasion, conspiracy, and obstructing the IRS. Given that the alleged tax fraud involves $56 million, those charged are looking at lengthy stays at ClubFed if convicted.

For one of those indicted, Adam Arici, this isn’t his first indictment. Mr. Arici and his attorney were indicted last December for allegedly violating the US-Cuba trade embargo and for witness tampering.

One Response to “Two Sets of Books Aren’t Better than One”

  1. […] Fox, Two Sets of Books Aren’t Better than One.  At least when  one set doesn’t include the skimmed […]

Leave a Reply