You are here

Justice News

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Middle District of Pennsylvania

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Harrisburg Woman Pleads Guilty To Filing A False And Fraudulent Personal Income Tax Return

HARRISBURG – The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that Aida Crespo, age 44, pleaded guilty yesterday to one count of an Indictment that charged her with submitting a false and fraudulent tax return to the Internal Revenue Service.  Crespo was previously indicted by a federal grand jury on October 7, 2015.

According to United States Attorney Peter Smith, between the years 2007 and 2011, Crespo made numerous false representations in the preparation of income tax returns for herself and for others in order to maximize refund amounts.  The fraudulent preparation included misrepresenting Schedule C income, listing fictitious dependents and manipulating filing status.  As a result, the United States Treasury issued refunds to citizens which exceeded the amount that they were entitled to receive. 

The investigation was conducted by the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Chelsea Schinnour. 

Indictments and informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

A sentence following a finding of guilt is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

The maximum penalty under federal law for submitting a false claim to the United States is 5 years of imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine. 

Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational and medical needs. For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.        

# # #

Updated June 23, 2016