When a significant event occurs and no one in authority wants to discuss it, a certain silence descends upon Washington. This week, that’s the vibe. President Donald Trump and his two eldest sons filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS in January over tax returns that were leaked, and the Department of Justice announced on May 18 that the case had been settled. $1.8 billion is the sum associated with the settlement. It’s also $1.8 billion, which people keep saying with a sort of incredulity.
However, the majority of the harm to the administration’s attempt to call this routine is caused by the addendum. The one-page document, which was released the day after the main agreement, uses the legalese that ages poorly: “FOREVER BARRED AND PRECLUDED” in capital letters. As long as the taxes were filed by Trump, his family, their trusts, their businesses, or their subsidiaries prior to May 19, 2026, the IRS is prohibited from filing claims, conducting examinations, or requesting injunctive relief. For its part, the Justice Department maintains that this is standard language. That’s a tough sell, after reading it again.
What was truly on the table is obscured by the legalese. According to the New York Times, the new agreement effectively eliminates a $100 million IRS penalty against the Trump Organization related to claims the business attempted to deduct. Any audits that were taking place are no longer in existence, and since the IRS doesn’t make these announcements public, no one outside the organization is aware of the complete list. forever. The scope of that closure is almost unbelievable.
It’s surprising how unpredictable the political reaction has been. According to reports, Senator Ron Wyden intends to use upcoming town halls to further his investigation into what he refers to as a “slush fund,” which is the $1.776 billion compensation pool that the DOJ claims will compensate individuals who feel the tax agency unfairly investigated them. The deal “smells bad,” according to CNBC anchor Joe Kernen, who isn’t known for being anti-president. That expression has been making the rounds. It captures something that the more technical criticisms overlook.
In an interview with PBS, the former IRS commissioner used the term “dangerous precedent,” which is what people use when they want to be measured about something that truly worries them. As far as I can tell, the issue isn’t specifically related to Trump. It concerns what would happen if a sitting president filed a lawsuit against a federal agency, reached a settlement, and then left with an amendment that put an end to all investigations into him. Here is a demonstration of the mechanism. The route is charted.
After reading this story for a few days, the sequence keeps coming up. A president files a lawsuit against the administration he leads. He appoints the leadership of the agency that is being sued. It’s important to keep in mind that Todd Blanche, his acting attorney general and former personal defense attorney for Trump, signed the settlement. The judgment fund, a perpetual appropriation that Congress does not directly approve each time it is used, is the source of the fund being created. It is possible to defend each piece separately. When stacked, they create something different.
Some of this may be resolved by the legal challenges that are already emerging. There has already been one lawsuit filed, and more appear likely. Rarely, members of Trump’s own party have expressed opposition. The question is whether it matters at all. As of right now, the $1.8 billion is moving, the audits have ended, and the addendum is still in effect. The remainder is merely debate.
