The former IRS contractor behind the leaks of former President Trump’s tax returns and the tax data of thousands of other wealthy individuals shouldn’t get a sweetheart deal, according to the Justice Department.
The Justice Department already signaled that it would seek a harsher punishment for Charles Littlejohn beyond the standard sentencing range that likely wouldn’t have exceeded a 14-month prison sentence. In a January 16 court filing in United States v. Littlejohn, prosecutors said they want Littlejohn to receive the statutory maximum of 60 months in prison.
“The scope and scale of Defendant’s unlawful disclosures appear to be unparalleled in the IRS’s history,” the Justice Department wrote as it made its case for an upward departure from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual.
Littlejohn occasionally worked for government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. between 2008 and 2013, mostly on contracts involving the IRS, where he had access to private taxpayer data within the agency’s databases. But after the 2016 presidential election, Littlejohn sought work with Booz Allen again — this time “with the hope and expectation of accessing and disclosing” Trump’s tax return data, according to the Justice Department.
That hope soon became reality: Littlejohn was rehired by Booz Allen in late 2017, and by February 2018, he was again able to access private taxpayer data. By the end of 2018, Littlejohn had developed a “sophisticated, detailed plan” for stealing Trump’s tax returns, the Justice Department wrote, resulting in the leaks of Trump’s tax returns to The New York Times and, later, the tax data of thousands of the wealthiest taxpayers to ProPublica.
According to prosecutors, Littlejohn’s familiarity with the IRS’s security protocols surrounding taxpayer data enabled him to exploit loopholes in the IRS’s databases.
Maximum Security Breach
The Justice Department acknowledged that normal sentencing rules would suggest a sentence that could include less than a year in prison. After sentencing adjustments for obstruction of justice, abuse of trust, and acceptance of responsibility, Littlejohn would face a guidelines sentence of eight to 14 months. Application of the new adjustment for first-time offenders would further reduce the recommendation to as little as four months in prison, the government noted.
However, the Justice Department laid out several reasons why Littlejohn deserves a harsher sentence than called for by the recommended guidelines.
Chief among those is that the sentencing guidelines treat Littlejohn’s leaks of thousands of tax returns the same as if he had leaked just one return, because he was charged with a single count of disclosing tax return information without authorization, the court filing noted.
Thus, the sentencing guideline range is “flatly inconsistent with the gravity of the offense,” the Justice Department argued. “An upward departure . . . is warranted based on the uniquely egregious conduct here.”
Littlejohn has already pleaded guilty, and as part of that plea deal, he agreed to waive most of his appeal rights. However, he reserved the right to challenge a harsher sentence beyond the sentencing guidelines.
Prosecutors also drew attention to Littlejohn’s motives, observing that in the leaks of tax data to ProPublica, he disseminated more than just tax returns, sharing personal information about gambling winnings, audit determinations, and more “to catch the attention of the public with more salacious details than mere tax returns might provide.”
The Justice Department also argued that Littlejohn’s disclosures didn’t stem from a momentary lapse in judgment but occurred over several years — 2018 to 2021. “Indeed, he reorganized his entire life around this crime,” prosecutors wrote, asserting that his sophisticated efforts to avoid detection by the IRS’s security protocols merit a harsher sentence.
The court filing details several other factors, including that Littlejohn violated the trust placed in him by the IRS to safeguard taxpayer data, he undermined trust in the agency to fairly oversee the tax system, and, based on his highly educated and experienced background, he would have been fully aware of the “gravity of his offense.”
Prosecutors concluded by arguing that the district court needs to “send a message” to deter other potential copycats from following Littlejohn’s example.
The government compared Littlejohn’s case to two other recent data-leaking cases to show that a harsh sentence for him may be necessary to support general deterrence.
John C. Fry was sentenced to five years of probation for leaking suspicious activity reports (SARs) involving one Trump associate, and Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards got six months for leaking SARs about another Trump associate, the government noted. Those leakers used to work for the IRS and Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, respectively.
“Although tax returns and return information enjoy stronger statutory and privacy protection than SARs, the advisory sentencing guidelines applicable here still do not adequately capture the severity of offenses like this one,” the Justice Department argued.
Joseph Bishop-Henchman of the National Taxpayers Union said he was glad to see that the IRS was “throwing the book” at Littlejohn, but he maintained that the fundamental problem — which he said the prosecutors seemed to acknowledge — is that Littlejohn is facing just one charge, despite leaking thousands of tax returns. Thus, Littlejohn is still “getting off quite lightly,” he said.
Littlejohn’s sentencing is scheduled for January 29 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The defendant in United States v. Littlejohn, No. 1:23-cr-00343 (D.D.C. 2023), is represented by Lisa Manning of Schertler Onorato Mead & Sears.
Nathan J. Richman contributed to this article.