Tom Goldstein Claims Overpayment of 2016 Taxes in Fraud Trial

SCOTUSblog co-founder Tom Goldstein told jurors he never cheated on his taxes, in his first day of testimony in his tax fraud trial.

Contrary to the government’s claim that he underreported his gambling winnings on his 2016 tax return, Goldstein told jurors he actually overstated them by the full amount that he reported: $2.7 million. What he should have reported was zero gambling winnings, he said.

Goldstein is charged with one count of tax evasion, eight counts of aiding and abetting in the preparation of false and fraudulent tax returns, four counts of willful failure to pay taxes, and three counts of making a false statement on a loan application. The government rested Tuesday following 12 days of evidence in his trial in the US District Court for the District of Maryland.

On the witness stand, Goldstein walked though what the government has claimed was a secret gambling ledger—even though he once asked one of his office managers to dig it up and email it to him—to point out the mistakes he made in accounting for his wins and losses in 2016. He also explained how they happened.

Part of the problem is that he was rushed, Goldstein said, and also that he was working mostly from bank statements, which don’t contain complete information about transfers.

There were five categories of mistakes on his 2016 return—some of them favored the IRS by increasing his income, and some of them favored Goldstein by decreasing his income, he said. On balance the mistakes favored the IRS more, to the tune of about $4.7 million, Goldstein said.

Outside Accountant

Goldstein also testified about his interactions with his outside tax accountant at GRF CPAs & Advisors, Walter Deyhle, in the course of preparing his 2016 taxes.

Goldstein reached out to Deyhle to set up a meeting in early 2017 because he knew reporting his gambling would complicate his return, and he’d never had to do it before, he said. Still, it wasn’t until October, about a week before Goldstein’s return was due, that he circled back to get the details he needed, Goldstein testified.

At the time, Goldstein said, he was in California, working on a brief for the respondent in the US Supreme Court case Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund. He didn’t respond until the day before his return was due, presumably because he wanted to wrap up the brief first, he said.

Goldstein acknowledged that any errors on his return were his responsibility and said being busy isn’t an excuse. But he never intended to intentionally mislead his accountants about his gambling income, he said.

Jurors also heard that Goldstein, over the life of his gambling, has lost a lot of money. He said he’s down “about $10 million.”

Goldstein admitted to understating his debt when he applied for a mortgage in 2021, saying it was because he wanted to hide the scope of his gambling debts to his wife. Still, he and his lawyers hinted at having a legal defense to those charges.

Acquittal Motion

Before Goldstein took the stand, Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby heard argument on his motion for acquittal.

Griggsby denied the motion without prejudice, saying the defense could renew it later. She said her inclination was to let the charges go to the jury so it can consider credibility and weigh the case.

Griggsby deferred ruling on the correct standard for willfulness. The parties agree that willfulness means the voluntarily and intentional violation of a known legal duty, but they disagree over the precise definition of “known legal duty.”

That definition is particularly relevant to the allegations that Goldstein willfully failed to pay his taxes when they were due.

The defense says the government must prove that Goldstein knew it was a criminal offense not to pay his taxes on the day they were due—not merely a civil violation that might cost him. Goldstein is arguing that many people pay their taxes late and aren’t criminally prosecuted.

The government has argued all he needed to know was that he violated a legal duty. Whether the consequences were criminal or civil is of no importance, the prosecution said.

Goldstein is represented by Munger Tolles & Oldson LLP. He will resume his direct testimony Thursday.

The case is United States v. Goldstein, D. Md., No. 8:25-cr-00006, trial held 2/11/26.