United States of America v. Eickhoff, Jr. et al

Filing 102

ORDER granting 100 Joint Motion by the United States and Damon T. Eisma for Entry of Stipulated Permanent Injunction and Judgment Against Damon T. Eisma. Signed January 18, 2023 by District Judge M. Douglas Harpool. (Clark, Christopher)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
JOHN HUGO EICKHOFF, JR.,
)
RHONDA KAYE EICKHOFF,
)
HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES, LLC,
)
ARIC ELLIOT SCHREINER,
)
COLUMBIA CPA GROUP LLC,
)
JOHN WILLIAM GRAY II, and
)
DAMON THOMAS EISMA, individually )
and d/b/a DAMON T. EISMA
)
ATTORNEY AT LAW,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

Case No. 2:22-cv-04027-MDH

ORDER ENTERING STIPULATED
PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT AGAINST DAMON T. EISMA
Now before the Court is the Joint Motion by the United States and Damon T. Eisma for
Entry of Stipulated Permanent Injunction and Judgment Against Damon T. Eisma (Doc. No.
100). The Court GRANTS the Joint Motion and enters the following Stipulated Permanent
Injunction and Judgment against Defendant Damon T. Eisma:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED that Defendant Damon Thomas Eisma
is PERMANENTLY ENJOINED, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402 and 7408, effective from the
date of entry of this Order, from directly or indirectly:
1.

In exchange for compensation or promise of compensation, advising any individual or
entity that:

Page 1 of 5
Case 2:22-cv-04027-MDH Document 102 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 5

a.

By establishing or through use of a trust, federal law (e.g., 26 U.S.C. § 1015
(“Basis of property acquired by gifts and transfers in trust”) or 26 U.S.C. §
1014 (“Basis of property acquired from a decedent”)) allows a trust to acquire
a stepped-up value basis for the property when the prior owner transfers it to
the trust, unless the property is/was transferred, acquired from, and/or passed
to the trust by the decedent or decedent’s estate as permitted under federal
law;

b.

By establishing a trust under 26 U.S.C. § 664, that trust qualifies as a
charitable organization for federal tax purposes;

c.

By establishing a qualified tax-exempt trust under 26 U.S.C. § 664,
distributions from that trust to noncharitable beneficiaries qualify as taxexempt income for federal income tax purposes;

d.

26 U.S.C. § 72 (“Annuities; certain proceeds of endowment and life insurance
contracts”) supersedes the ordering rules under 26 U.S.C. § 664(b) requiring
noncharitable beneficiaries to report CRAT payments as income, unless
treated as a distribution of nontaxable trust corpus under federal law, on the
taxpayer’s federal income tax return;

e.

When a trust established under 26 U.S.C. § 664 purchases an annuity,
distributions of gains or income by the trust to beneficiaries are
recharacterized from ordinary income or capital gains to distributions of nontaxable trust corpus; and

Page 2 of 5
Case 2:22-cv-04027-MDH Document 102 Filed 01/18/23 Page 2 of 5

f.

A trust established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 664 can purchase an annuity and,
by doing so, payments from that annuity to trust beneficiaries do not need to
be reported as income on federal income tax returns.

2.

In exchange for compensation or promise of compensation, providing tax advice or
any opinion (whether legal or otherwise) to any person or entity concerning any trust
that both:
a.

Qualifies or purports to qualify as a trust under 26 U.S.C. § 664 (“Charitable
Remainder Trusts”), including but not limited to CRATs; and

b.
3.

Was or would potentially be established after entry of this injunction.

In exchange for compensation or the promise of compensation, organizing,
promoting, selling, marketing, or advising others regarding any plan or arrangement
that includes establishing a trust pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 664 after the date of this
injunction.

4.

Preparing, aiding, or assisting in preparing any IRS Form 5227 (Split-Interest Trust
Information Return) or any tax return that requires completion of a Form 5227 for any
individual or entity. This does not include preparing an individual or entity tax return
that includes a K-1 or other similar document received from a trust that was
established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 664 after the date of this injunction, unless
preparing, aiding, or assisting in preparing the tax return would be in violation of
Paragraph 3 above, Paragraph 5 below, or the trust was established in violation of
Paragraph 1(a)-(f) above.

Page 3 of 5
Case 2:22-cv-04027-MDH Document 102 Filed 01/18/23 Page 3 of 5

5.

Preparing, aiding, or assisting in the preparation of federal tax returns or amended
returns or other tax forms resulting from use of a trust that Eisma knows or has reason
to know was established with the assistance of any Defendant in this action.

6.

Representing anyone before the IRS’s Independent Office of Appeals on any tax
matter other than himself (or his spouse, if the tax matter involves his jointly filed tax
return with his spouse) if the matter before the IRS involves contesting IRS findings
that result in a change of taxes owed as a result of a trust established under or subject
to 26 U.S.C. § 664.

7.

Making any statements, written or verbal, or causing or encouraging others to make
any statements, written or verbal, that misrepresent any of the terms of a stipulated
judgment and order of permanent injunction against him in this action.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within thirty (30) days of entry of this order, Eisma

shall file with this Court a declaration, signed by him under penalty of perjury, that he has:
1.

Identified to counsel for the United States in this action, in writing, any customer
(including by name, and if known by Eisma, last known address, telephone, and email) known to Eisma who participated in any trust established under/subject to 26
U.S.C. § 664 with the aid or assistance of any Defendant in this action;

2.

Received and understands any order and judgment of permanent injunction entered
by the Court against him in this action.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States claim for disgorgement (Count IV

of the Amended Complaint) is dismissed with prejudice.

Page 4 of 5
Case 2:22-cv-04027-MDH Document 102 Filed 01/18/23 Page 4 of 5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the District Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce
such injunction and allow the United States to engage in post-judgment discovery to ensure
compliance with the injunction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to enter final judgment pursuant
to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) in favor of the United States and against Defendant Damon T. Eisma
since there is no reason for delay. The Court finds that entry of the Order and Judgment of
Permanent Injunction against Eisma does not bind other parties, except that if the other
Defendants with notice of this injunction take any future action in concert with Eisma for which
Eisma is being enjoined they too are then subject to this injunction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Douglas Harpool
DOUGLAS HARPOOL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Date: January 18, 2023

Page 5 of 5
Case 2:22-cv-04027-MDH Document 102 Filed 01/18/23 Page 5 of 5