ShareThis Page
Allegheny

U.S. Attorney: Pittsburgh man ran large-scale tax-fraud scheme from behind bars

Patrick Varine
| Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2018, 6:21 p.m.
A Pittsburgh man, 28-year-old Sean Brooks, was convicted of running a tax-fraud scheme from behind bars and will serve three years as well as pay $250,000 to the Internal Revenue Service.
A Pittsburgh man, 28-year-old Sean Brooks, was convicted of running a tax-fraud scheme from behind bars and will serve three years as well as pay $250,000 to the Internal Revenue Service.

A Pittsburgh man currently serving time for involuntary manslaughter will have another three years tacked on after being sentenced in connection with a tax fraud scheme run from his prison cell.

U.S. District Judge Mark Hornak imposed the sentence on Sean Brooks, 28, of Pittsburgh, along with ordering him to pay $250,000 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service.

Hornak ordered the sentence to run consecutive with the 12-to-24-year sentence Brooks is currently serving, according to U.S. Attorney Scott Brady.

Prosecutors said Brooks filed tax returns on behalf of inmates and other individuals claiming tax refunds, arranging to have the refunds sent to other conspirators who were not serving time.

Those people then forged check endorsements and deposited the checks, later withdrawing the money and disbursing it.

In total, the scheme involved hundreds of thousands of dollars from hundreds of fraudulent tax returns, according to the U.S. Attorney's office.

Brooks was convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and tax fraud. The investigation involved the IRS, U.S. Postal Inspection Service and Department of Homeland Security.

Patrick Varine is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-2862, pvarine@tribweb.com or via Twitter @MurrysvilleStar.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me