## Facts

- Federal tax law requires any person receiving more than $10,000 in cash in a trade or business transaction to file IRS Form 8300 identifying the payor and describing the transaction.
- A criminal defense attorney’s law firm filed multiple Forms 8300 reporting receipt of large cash payments but omitted client-identifying information and the general nature of services provided.
- The IRS issued summonses seeking the missing information needed to complete the Forms 8300.
- The attorney appeared but refused to provide the requested information, asserting attorney-client privilege and state-law duties of confidentiality.
- The government sought judicial enforcement of the summonses in federal district court under the Internal Revenue Code’s summons-enforcement provisions.
- The district court ordered enforcement, and the attorney appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether client identity, fee/payment information, and a general description of legal services sought to complete Form 8300 are protected by attorney-client privilege.
2. Whether enforcement of the IRS summons violates constitutional protections, including Fifth Amendment self-incrimination principles as applied to the attorney’s clients.
3. Whether state professional-conduct and confidentiality rules can excuse noncompliance with a federal IRS summons enforcing Form 8300 reporting obligations.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the enforcement order.
- The court held the IRS could compel disclosure of client-identifying information and the general nature of services required to complete Form 8300.
- The court rejected a blanket privilege claim, concluding the requested information did not, on this record, fall within any recognized “special circumstances” exception.
- The court rejected constitutional objections, reasoning that the reporting obligation is imposed on the recipient of the cash (the attorney/firm), not on the client-payor.
- The court held federal reporting and summons authority preempt conflicting state confidentiality duties.

## Legal Principles

- Attorney-client privilege generally protects confidential communications, not the identity of the client, the fact or amount of a fee payment, or the general nature of services.
- A “special circumstances” exception may apply only when disclosure of identity or fee information would effectively reveal the substance of a confidential communication; the party asserting privilege bears the burden to show such circumstances.
- Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination is personal and does not bar the government from obtaining non-privileged information from a third party subject to a lawful reporting and summons regime.
- State ethical and confidentiality rules cannot override a federal statutory duty to report or comply with an IRS summons authorized by the Internal Revenue Code.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit required the attorney to comply with the IRS summons and supply client-identifying information and a general description of services needed to complete Forms 8300, holding that the information was not privileged on the record presented and that federal tax-reporting and summons authority superseded contrary state confidentiality obligations.


United States v. Blackman, 72 F.3d 1418 (9th Cir. 1995)