Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-35138House OversightFinancial Record

Defense argues Giuffre's nonprofit tax compliance irrelevant, hints at undisclosed Epstein payments

The passage suggests a possible financial trail linking Jeffrey Epstein’s payments to Ms. Giuffre’s nonprofit and her personal taxes, which could be a lead for tracing undisclosed funds. However, it l Defense seeks to exclude evidence of Giuffre’s nonprofit tax compliance in a defamation suit. Argument centers on relevance of tax returns to the core case and potential undisclosed Epstein gift Impl

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011331
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage suggests a possible financial trail linking Jeffrey Epstein’s payments to Ms. Giuffre’s nonprofit and her personal taxes, which could be a lead for tracing undisclosed funds. However, it l Defense seeks to exclude evidence of Giuffre’s nonprofit tax compliance in a defamation suit. Argument centers on relevance of tax returns to the core case and potential undisclosed Epstein gift Impl

Tags

jeffrey-epsteintax-compliancefinancial-flowcourt-filingfinancial-disclosuresdefamationhouse-oversightlegal-exposuregiuffre

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 H3VOGIU1 Ms. Giuffre's not-for-profit tax compliance are based on an errant report by her purported expert, an expert who should be excluded from testifying because his report lacked methodology and he opined on topics far afield from his expertise. Second, any allegations that her not-for-profit is not tax compliant is prejudicial, misleading, confusing to the jury because it has nothing to do with the claim at issue in this case. Your Honor, we asked for defendant's tax returns in this case. If they go to truthfulness, as defendant argues, they also go to defendant's truthfulness. At this point, we're not going to get them until the first day of trial, so we will not be able to effectively cross examine defendant on those tax returns, and we won't be able to s until then if she's paid taxes on all the money and gifts and in-kind payments from Epstein that she's received or has kept that away from the government. Unlike Ms. Giuffre's tax information, defendant's tax information goes to our case in chief and is relevant evidence. On point number 13, we move to exclud videnc relating to Ms. Giuffre's alleged tax compliance. Your Honor, this is a defamation action where reputation is at issue. Tax compliance does not go to a reputation, it is a private matter. Second, there is no evidence in this case that any government, ither United States or Australia, believes that SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone(212) 805-0300

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.