Tax lawyers are divided over the legal consequences of the bruising defeat in court of a billionaire former client of UBS AG who sued the Swiss bank for allegedly giving him incorrect tax advice.
On April 10, Judge Andrew Guilford of U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, Calif., dismissed a case brought by Igor Olenicoff, a Russia-born property developer. Olenicoff had accused the bank of improperly telling him he didn’t have to disclose certain Swiss-held assets on his U.S. tax returns.
In ruling for UBS, the judge said that because Olenicoff had been convicted in 2007 of tax evasion and of lying on his tax returns about having offshore accounts, he did not have a solid claim of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty against UBS. Judge Guilford wrote that because Olenicoff had admitted to tax evasion, he had placed “nearly every room of his legal house of cards into jeopardy.”
The judge wrote that UBS had run afoul of U.S. authorities over its offshore private bank, but added that “UBS’s admission of guilt does not give Olenicoff the right to sue UBS for fraudulent tax advice.”
In 2009, UBS averted indictment, admitted to criminal wrongdoing with tax-evasion services sold to 19,000 Americans through its private bank and signed a $780 million deferred-prosecution agreement with the U.S. Justice Department.



















