Case Explained: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BRANDON L. AUMILLER

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Filed: 2026-07-01 Docket: 1:22-cr-00417-001) The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s denial of Brandon L. Aumiller’s motions to dismiss his indictments for tax evasion under 26 U.S.C. § 7201 and his motion for a judgment of acquittal. The court held that the submission of false IRS Forms 433-A and 433-B, which intentionally omitted undisclosed bank accounts while the IRS was attempting to collect unpaid taxes, constitutes an “affirmative act” of evasion sufficient to satisfy the statute of limitations and the elements of the offense. The court applied the standard that an affirmative act under § 7201 includes any conduct intended to mislead the government or conceal assets to avoid payment of a tax deficiency. Relying on *Spies v. United States* and *United States v. Voigt*, the Third Circuit ruled that filing false financial disclosure forms impedes IRS collection efforts and is not merely simple nonpayment. The court distinguished Aumiller’s case from *United States v. McGill*, noting that unlike a passive failure to report an account, Aumiller affirmatively omitted assets on forms he was specifically required to complete as part of the collections process. Regarding the sufficiency of the indictment, the court applied the standard that an indictment is sufficient if it apprises the defendant of the charges and contains the elements of the offense. The court found the indictments and the accompanying bill of particulars sufficiently identified the submission of false Forms as the affirmative act occurring within the six-year statute of limitations under 26 U.S.C. § 6531(2). Finally, reviewing the evidence de novo in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determined that sufficient evidence existed for a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Aumiller willfully attempted to evade taxes through these affirmative acts. As a result of this decision, the conviction stands and the case is remanded to the District Court for sentencing proceedings. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.