Epstein’s name is back in the news—and this time it touches tax planning. Ed Lyon unpacks Senator Ron Wyden’s letter to the IRS about transactions linked to Jeffrey Epstein and billionaire Leon Black, separates headlines from reality, and explains what (if anything) this has to do with your tax plan.You’ll learn why lots of non-CPAs legally discuss tax strategy, why most returns aren’t audited (and why that’s not suspicious), how GRATs actually work, and how to think about risk vs. reward in tax strategies without getting sucked into sensationalism.Headlines ≠ Law: A Senate letter is an inquiry, not a finding. Until something is adjudicated or legislated, treat it as context—not a rule change.Who “gets to” talk tax: Many professionals (financial advisors, attorneys, insurance pros) discuss tax implications without preparing returns. That’s normal and legal; implementation still requires proper counsel.Why most returns aren’t audited: The IRS receives ~hundreds of millions of filings and doesn’t have the manpower. Lack of audit ≠ cover-up. Enforcement is shifting toward data + AI targeting.GRAT 101 (Grantor Retained Annuity Trust): A mainstream estate tool to pass appreciation to heirs at a reduced transfer-tax cost. Big firms (e.g., white-shoe law practices) routinely paper these properly.Fees vs. Value: A giant fee can look outrageous and still be rational if it buys outsized, lawful results. But lack of a written fee agreement is a red flag in any engagement.Risk Spectrum: Most strategies we recommend are plain-vanilla and low audit risk (qualified plans, entity hygiene, documented §162 expenses). Some—like conservation easements—can be higher risk if abused (valuation games).Planner’s duty: Define the upside, the audit/penalty downside, and the fit inside a holistic plan (business, cash flow, exit, estate). Then let the client choose their risk level.00:00–01:30 — Why cover Epstein at all? Using current events to teach tax reality01:30–04:30 — Wyden’s letter: what it does/doesn’t allege; audit expectations vs. capacity04:30–06:40 — Who can discuss tax? CPAs vs. EAs vs. attorneys vs. advisors06:40–10:15 — GRAT explained: mainstream estate tool; role of top law firms; where “crime” would actually be10:15–13:45 — The eyebrow-raiser: massive fees, missing engagement letters, what that might imply13:45–17:30 — High-risk vs. plain-vanilla planning: conservation easements, valuations, and why process matters17:30–20:00 — How pros weigh benefit vs. audit risk; clients choose based on risk tolerance (just like investing)“Headlines are not tax law.”“Lack of audit doesn’t equal a conspiracy—it often equals limited resources.”“A GRAT is closer to plain vanilla than edge case—especially when a top firm papers it.”“Your tax plan should match your goals and your risk tolerance, not the news cycle.”GRAT (Grantor Retained Annuity Trust): Estate planning trust that lets the grantor retain an annuity stream while shifting future appreciation to heirs at a reduced transfer-tax cost.Conservation Easement: Charitable deduction strategy tied to land-use restrictions; legal in principle but heavily scrutinized due to abusive valuations in some syndicated deals.Audit Risk: Probability the IRS examines a filing; separate from sustainability risk (whether a strategy holds up if examined). Both should be disclosed.Ask for scope & paperwork: Engagement letter, scope of work, fee basis, and documentation standards.Demand fit, not fads: Confirm every tactic supports your business plan, exit timing, estate goals, and cash flow.Know your risk lane: If you prefer plain-vanilla, stay with qualified plans, entity optimization, accountable plan reimbursements, documented §162 expenses, etc.If venturing “edgier”: Get independent valuations, legal opinions, and model the audit downside (tax, interest, penalties) before you proceed.

Ver todos los episodios