> So they are using financial records to claim that they are hiding assets...their evidence for this is...the financial records...that they have...already. How

> So they are using financial records to claim that they are hiding assets...their evidence for this is...the financial records...that they have...already. How does that work? Because they didn't get the financial records from the Sacklers. A Court would want a full financial disclosure as part of the settlement. Let's say the IRS audited a small business owner and settled with the owner for back taxes and fines. Well, the owner could have used some creative accounting to hide money, maybe contract out some work to an overseas company he controlled. This might not be illegal alone. But hiding his ownership of the overseas company could decrease the back taxes and fines he owned. So it's going to look bad for him if the IRS discovers his stake in the overseas company from his bank reporting a suspicious transaction.