tax

Yesterday’s tax fraud post triggered multiple calls, bringing to light some critical points about accountability in this industry. One key takeaway? Tax fraud is often considered an “admission through omission” issue—especially when proper filings could easily dismiss the charge, yet those filings never appear.

But it goes deeper than that. In cases like this, where tax fraud or regulatory violations are alleged, investors aren’t off the hook either. In a regulatory discovery, personal liability can extend to those who knowingly benefit from or fund entities involved in misconduct.

For investors, this isn’t just about where they put their money—it’s about the decisions they make after coming on board, especially when lawsuits or regulatory issues are already public.
Did they perform proper due diligence?
Did they knowingly ignore red flags?
Were they complicit in delaying or obstructing accountability?

Regulators and courts don’t look kindly on omissions or evasions. Silence and inaction are not defenses—they’re liabilities. When basic disclosures are avoided, the ripple effects can extend far beyond the company itself, exposing investors, stakeholders, and decision-makers to significant risks.

The lesson here? Transparency and accountability aren’t optional. Whether you’re in the boardroom, investing capital, or overseeing operations, intentional delays and omissions can carry personal consequences. Regulators, courts, and forensic audits don’t stop at the surface—they dig deeper.

What do you think? Should investors and stakeholders be held accountable for enabling misconduct, or does the blame rest solely on the company, ownership, and executives?

CannaConsigliere