“The Justice Department on Tuesday expanded the just-announced settlement of President Donald Trump’s lawsuit over the leaking of his tax returns to include a pledge that the IRS will no longer pursue any claims it may have against Trump, his family members and his companies over unpaid taxes. The nine-page settlement agreement DOJ released Monday, setting up a nearly $1.8 billion fund to compensate victims of alleged weaponization of law enforcement, did not mention any resolution of disputes over Trump’s tax returns, which he has repeatedly claimed were under protracted audits by the IRS. However, a one-page document posted on the DOJ website early Tuesday includes a sweeping release under which the IRS is “forever barred and precluded” from pursuing “examinations” of Trump, “related or affiliated individuals,” and related trusts and businesses.

“The waiver specifically encompasses “tax returns filed before the effective date” of the settlement, which was Monday. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche signed the addendum, dated Tuesday. It does not bear the signature of any representative of the IRS or any current Trump lawyers. Metadata attached to the document indicates it was prepared or scanned at 7:50 a.m. Tuesday.

Blanche did not sign the original settlement agreement, which was signed by Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, IRS CEO Frank Bisignano and Trump attorney Daniel Epstein. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on why the waiver wasn’t included in the agreement released Monday and why it isn’t signed by the same people.

“As is customary in settlements, both sides have executed waivers of a variety of claims that were or could have been brought,” the Justice Department said in a statement. “There would be little point in settling several significant claims if either party could simply turn around and seek to initiative more adverse claims that could have been pursued previously.” “This is only with respect to existing audits, not future,” the DOJ statement added.

John Koskinen, the former IRS commissioner from 2013 to 2017, said the expanded settlement set a “terrible precedent” that could effectively generate a windfall for Trump.“It makes you wonder what the President has to hide in those tax returns. He’s apparently been actively trading in the stock market and, since he knows a lot more about situations than the average investor, he’s probably generated significant taxable earnings,” he said in an emailed statement. “Not auditing his returns is the same as giving him an easy way to, in effect, receive money from the government.”

Danny Werfel, the former IRS commissioner from 2023 to 2025, said he was “unaware of a single precedent where the IRS has agreed in advance to permanently forgo examination of previously filed tax returns for a specific person or business.” Press reports in advance of the settlement indicated that a potential deal might include an agreement by the government to drop all audits of Trump-related returns and perhaps even to refrain from future audits.

Blanche spent more than two hours Tuesday testifying before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee. He faced numerous skeptical questions about the settlement and the related “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” but was not asked about the impact of the deal on Trump’s outstanding tax issues.

Following an announcement Tuesday on an antitrust prosecution, Woodward defended the settlement with Trump and the creation of the fund. “I already have the authority to settle any claim that is brought against the United States of America,” Woodward told reporters at DOJ headquarters. “I frankly think that we should be ecstatic about the idea that we’re going to inject more accountability into the process, as opposed to having just one person sign off on settlements.”

“I think that it’s way, way, way too early for us to rush to judgment on whether this was a good or a bad idea, to describe it as a slush fund, or really even to criticize it,” Woodward added.”

How can anyone defend any of this? A couple of brief points before I collect all of the skull and brain bits from around my office:

• That quote from Woodward at the end is amazing. We should be ecstatic that in response to an unwinnable lawsuit where the Justice Department handed over $1.8 billion for the President to use to reward anyone he decides has been mistreated by the IRS or another arm of the government?
• The statement is pure consequentialism. Woodward is saying that we should wait and see what happens. This is worse that Nancy Pelosi’s infamous “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it.”
• How can a blanket ban on examinations of one particular family’s tax behavior be considered anything but anything but corrupt and an abuse of power by all involved, including the President.
• For Trump to allow this is, once again, giving his political foes a gift. In the middle of an unpopular war along with other sensitive issues and with a mid-terms fast approaching, I can only describe the deal as stupid, reckless, and indefensible.

It needs to be widely condemned and stopped.