Former Hub City business owner indicted on 21 counts

Former Hub City business owner indicted on 21 counts
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.