Former Hub City business owner indicted on 21 counts - WDAM-TV 7-News, Weather, Sports-Hattiesburg, MS

breaking

Former Hub City business owner indicted on 21 counts

Photo credit: WDAM Photo credit: WDAM
HATTIESBURG, MS (WDAM) -

A former Hub City business owner has been indicted on 21 counts related to false and fraudulent tax returns that he allegedly filed through his Hattiesburg business.

Oliver Jackson, owner of Integrity Tax, previously located on West 4th Street, was indicted Tuesday by a federal grand jury connected to more than $150,000 worth of false tax returns.

The indictment lists 21 people that Jackson “did willfully aid and assist in, and procure, counsel, and advise the preparation and presentation to the Internal Revenue Service, of U.S. Individual Tax Return, Form 1040A,… for the calendar year 2012.”

The crimes listed in each count of the indictment are all from February 2013 and add up to $152,933.00 according to court records.

Count 1:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that J.R.M. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $7,399.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know J.R.M. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $7,399.00.”

Count 2:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that T.W. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,552.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know T.W. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,552.00.”

Count 3:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that J.R. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $5,345.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know J.R. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $5,345.00.”

Count 4:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that A.S. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,148.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know A.S. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,148.00.”

Count 5:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that S.H. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $7,262.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know S.H. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $7,262.00.”

Count 6:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that A.H. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $7,470.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know A.H. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $7,470.00.”

Count 7:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that L.B. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $6,991.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know L.B. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $6,991.00.”

Count 8:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that S.W. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $9,693.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know S.W. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $9,693.00.”


Count 9:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that D.H. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $7,962.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know D.H. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $7,962.00.”

Count 10:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that Q.P. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,459.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know Q.P. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,459.00.”

Count 11:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that L.M. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,515.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know L.M. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,515.00.”

Count 12:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that B.P. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $7,111.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know B.P. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $7,111.00.”


Count 13:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that W.B. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $3,621.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know W.B. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $3,621.00.”

Count 14:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that A.S. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,946.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know A.S. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,946.00.”

Count 15:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that A.T. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $5,657.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know A.T. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $5,657.00.”

Count 16:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that R.A.M. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $5,984.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know R.A.M. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $5,984.00.”

Count 17:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that J.N. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $6,160.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know J.N. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $6,160.00.”

Count 18:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that L.W. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $9,878.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know L.W. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $9,878.00.”

Count 19:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that J.E. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $5,355.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know J.E. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $5,355.00.”

Count 20:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that W.A.F. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $6,041.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know W.A.F. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $6,041.00.”

Count 21:

“The return was false and fraudulent as to a material matter in that it represented that J.H. was entitled under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Laws to claim a tax refund in the total sum of $8,384.00, whereas, as the defendant, Oliver Jackson, then and there know J.H. was not entitled to claim tax refunds in the amount of $8,384.00.”

Previous Coverage:

In 2013, WDAM 7 News did multiple stories on Integrity Tax and discovered that the business was operating without a license in the city of Hattiesburg. 

On April 4, 2013, in a phone call between WDAM 7 News and Jackson, he denied lying on his tax forms to get his customers more money and that he had never broken any law, and that he has always been available and there for his customers.

A written statement from Integrity Tax in 2013 stated:

“Integrity Tax has closed its Hattiesburg location due to an ongoing dispute with the city of Hattiesburg Code Enforcement Division regarding our business license. If you are entitled to a refund, we will be sending out refund checks via certified mail, as soon as your refunds are processed and received by us.”

At that point, WDAM 7 News was informed about the federal investigation into the tax claims.

Copyright 2016 WDAM. All rights reserved.

  • Local NewsLOCALMore>>

  • Flu kills 2-year-old MS girl

    Flu kills 2-year-old MS girl

    Monday, January 22 2018 6:45 PM EST2018-01-22 23:45:54 GMT

    Forrest County Coroner Butch Benedict confirms a 2-year-old girl died at Forrest General Hospital over the weekend due to complications from the flu. Benedict said the child is from Sumrall.

    More >>

    Forrest County Coroner Butch Benedict confirms a 2-year-old girl died at Forrest General Hospital over the weekend due to complications from the flu. Benedict said the child is from Sumrall.

    More >>
  • 1 person shot at Collins plant

    1 person shot at Collins plant

    Monday, January 22 2018 6:25 PM EST2018-01-22 23:25:25 GMT
    1 person shot at Sanderson Farm plant in Collins. (Photo source: WDAM)1 person shot at Sanderson Farm plant in Collins. (Photo source: WDAM)

    Multiple law enforcement agencies are on scene of a shooting at the Sanderson Farm plant in Collins where one person was shot.  According to Collins Police Chief Joey Ponder, the shooting happened inside the facility around 4 p.m.  The factory was closed down while the scene was made secure according to Ponder.  He said one person was shot and transported to a local hospital with injuries, but he did not know the extent of them.  A suspect did flee the sce...

    More >>

    Multiple law enforcement agencies are on scene of a shooting at the Sanderson Farm plant in Collins where one person was shot.  According to Collins Police Chief Joey Ponder, the shooting happened inside the facility around 4 p.m.  The factory was closed down while the scene was made secure according to Ponder.  He said one person was shot and transported to a local hospital with injuries, but he did not know the extent of them.  A suspect did flee the sce...

    More >>
  • USM ranked among top universities in MS for online classes

    USM ranked among top universities in MS for online classes

    Monday, January 22 2018 4:10 PM EST2018-01-22 21:10:03 GMT
    The University of Southern Mississippi is ranked the 2nd top public university for online courses in the state of Mississippi. The school has approximately 15,000 students with more than 180 undergraduate and graduate degree programs. Southern Miss also has a graduation rate of 50 percent.  Several degrees are offered at the university in areas such as business administration, applied technology, and education.  To view the full list of ...More >>
    The University of Southern Mississippi is ranked the 2nd top public university for online courses in the state of Mississippi. The school has approximately 15,000 students with more than 180 undergraduate and graduate degree programs. Southern Miss also has a graduation rate of 50 percent.  Several degrees are offered at the university in areas such as business administration, applied technology, and education.  To view the full list of ...More >>
Powered by Frankly