After the Michael Cohen Hearing, Congress Has Some Big Questions for Trump’s Tax Lawyer

Sheri Dillon claimed Trump’s taxes were under audit. Trump’s ex-fixer says that’s not the case.

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In 2016, under fire for his refusal to release his tax returns, President Donald Trump contended that an ongoing audit by the Internal Revenue Service prevented him from disclosing these financial records, as every presidential contender had done since 1980. To back up his position, Trump’s campaign released a letter from his tax attorneys, Sheri Dillon and William Nelson, certifying that Trump had been under ā€œcontinuous auditā€ since 2002.

But on Wednesday, during his explosive testimony before the House oversight committee, Michael Cohen, Trump’s onetime personal lawyer and fixer, said he believed no such audit existed. Cohen testified that during the campaign, he had requested proof that Trump was under audit in order to brief the press, but never received any. Cohen said his discussions with Trump led him to believe that Trump’s audit story was a ruse and that Trump was in fact worried that releasing his tax returns would invite IRS scrutiny.

ā€œHe has said to me…that what he didnā€™t want was to have an entire group of think tanks that are tax experts run through his tax return and start ripping it to pieces, and then heā€™ll end up in an audit and heā€™ll ultimately have taxable consequences, penalties, and so on,ā€ Cohen told the committee.

Cohen’s remarks, if true, call into question the letter Dillon and Nelson penned.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the White House would not comment on any part of Cohen’s testimony beyond a statement she issued Wednesday calling it “laughable that anyone would take a convicted liar like Cohen at his word, and pathetic to see him given yet another opportunity to spread his lies.ā€

Dillon, a partner at the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, did not return a request for comment. But she may soon be grilled about her assertion that Trump was under audit, among other claims she has made about Trump financial matters. The House oversight committee on Wednesday requested an interview with Dillon. The House Ways and Means Committee, which has the right to request Trump’s tax returns, may also be interested in Dillon’s response to Cohen’s revelation. 

Earlier this month, oversight committee chair Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) sent a letter to the White House questioning whether Dillon and another Trump attorney, Stefan Passantino, made false claims about Trumpā€™s personal financial disclosure during discussions with government ethics officials.

When Trump submitted his 2017 disclosure to the Office of Government Ethics, he failed to divulge one particular liability: the money he owed Cohen for paying off adult film star Stormy Daniels, a scandal that had recently come to light. According to Cummings’ letter, the committee possesses documents showing that when OGE officials asked about the omission, Trumpā€™s lawyers initially denied that the president owed money to Cohen. Later, after Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani publicly talked about this debt, Cummings noted in his letter, Dillon told the OGE that Trump’s payments to Cohen were for legal work, not the repayment of a debt. 

Dillon was also the lawyer who came up with a plan that would supposedly insulate Trump when he entered the White House from the myriad conflicts of interest posed by his businesses. At a press conference held shortly before his inauguration, Trump introduced Dillon to talk about the issue. Piled behind them were stacks of paper that Trump and his lawyer pointed to as evidence of the legal steps Trump had taken to separate himself from his business interests. But based on what Dillon said at the press conference, Trump would retain complete ownership of his businesses and the ability to withdraw money from them at any time. In other words, his massive conflicts of interest remained. When reporters tried to get a closer look at the paperwork on display, they were shooed away by transition staff, leading some to speculate that the pages were blank. 

Faced with a Democratic-controlled Congress armed with subpoena power, Dillon may now have to be more forthcoming about key matters that Trump has long kept hidden from the public. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate