It’s near enough thirty-five years since President Reagan left office, but his famous catchphrase lives on. “The seven most dangerous words in our language” are first set forth at the head hereof. IRS finds this out today once again, as Judge Morrison quashes beyond resuscitation IRS’ subpoena to one Steven Perlstein.

The case is Kirk Stevens & Shannon Stevens, Docket No. 2824-20, filed 5/4/23.

I’ve no idea who Mr. Perlstein might be, or what role, if any, he plays in Kirk’s & Shannon’s drama, nor does Judge Morrison tell us. But Kirk & Shannon definitely want Mr. Perlstein sequestered, impounded, and removed far from the clutches of the agents of the fisc.

“Petitioners seek an order from the Court quashing the subpoena. Petitioners seek other relief, to wit: finding that the Perlstein subpoena is invalid;  prohibiting respondent from further communications with Perlstein; prohibiting respondent from communicating that it might issue a subpoena to any foreign person or preparing and providing a subpoena to any foreign person; requiring respondent to answer the questions set forth in paragraph 24 of the motion and any other questions that the Court determines are necessary to evaluate respondent’s actions; and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.” Order, at p. 1.

And that’s just for starters.

“… petitioners additionally request the Court exclude and prevent respondent from using in any manner in this case Perlstein’s informal interview, 148 pages of documents obtained by respondent from by Perlstein and described in the Reply (and any other statements, documents or information respondent might have obtained from Perlstein); and exclude the report of respondent’s expert, Dr. Levy,  because of its alleged extensive reliance on the allegedly improperly obtained interview from Perlstein.” Order, at p. 2.

Sounds like Mr. Perlstein spilled enough beans to put Heinz out of business.

IRS folds. They just wanted to help.

“Respondent concedes that the subpoena is unenforceable and claims that it was issued only so that Perlstein’s cost of traveling to the place of trial would qualify for reimbursement by respondent under respondent’s internal policies.” Order, at p. 1.

Makes sense, because Mr. Perlstein is residing in Israel, and place of trial is San Francisco, CA. Perlstein could blow all his frequent flyer miles and then some.

Howbeit, subpoena quashed, ruling reserved on the rest of the relief sought.