Justice Department Addendum Bars IRS From Auditing Trump Tax Returns Amid Controversial $1.7 Billion Fund

Washington, D.C. — The U.S. Department of Justice has quietly amended a controversial agreement establishing a $1.776 billion compensation fund, inserting a provision that permanently bars the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from auditing former President Donald Trump, his family, and associated business entities.

The addendum, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and published on the Department’s website, states that the government is “forever barred” from examining any tax filings submitted by Trump-related individuals and companies prior to the agreement.
The amendment follows the administration’s announcement of the compensation fund, which was created after Trump agreed to withdraw a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and other federal entities. Reports indicate that IRS officials had advised against settling the case, raising concerns about possible political interference in the decision.

The fund itself has drawn significant criticism for its lack of transparency and oversight. It will be administered by a five-member panel whose members serve at the discretion of the president and can be dismissed at will. The agreement does not require public disclosure of recipients or the criteria used for disbursement.
During a Senate hearing, lawmakers sharply questioned the legality and ethics of the arrangement. Senator Chris Van Hollen described the fund as “an outrageous, unprecedented slush fund,” citing its broad scope and lack of accountability.

Blanche confirmed under questioning that there are no restrictions on who may apply for compensation, including individuals convicted in connection with the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. While he stated that Trump and his sons would not receive payouts, the agreement does not explicitly prohibit them from filing claims.

The agreement outlines that the fund will submit quarterly confidential reports to the attorney general detailing payouts and recipients. However, Blanche asserted that information would eventually become public through reporting mechanisms and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, despite language indicating confidentiality.

The development has intensified scrutiny over the agreement, with critics warning that it raises serious questions about governance, transparency, and the rule of law.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨. — ✦—