Senate Republicans helped thwart half of President Donald Trump’s settlement with the IRS — his $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund. Now they’re starting to raise concerns about the other half of that deal: Trump’s audit immunity.
Five GOP senators told Semafor that they have questions about last month’s agreement by the Justice Department to shield Trump, his family, and his businesses from IRS audits or prosecution. Some of them said they outright oppose the audit protection.
The issue could affect the confirmation of Trump’s attorney general nominee, Todd Blanche.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said Blanche promised to get him a briefing on the deal during a recent private meeting ahead of his hearing next month in the Judiciary Committee, where Cornyn sits and Republicans’ one-seat majority makes every vote pivotal.
Blanche underscored to Cornyn that the “purely retrospective” settlement didn’t immunize Trump from “future audits on future taxes,” the senator told Semafor. But Cornyn is declining to back Blanche until he learns more: “I’m not prepared to vote against him. I’m not prepared to vote for him until I get clarity on that.”
The audit agreement was announced in tandem with a $1.8 billion fund designed to compensate people who alleged unjust prosecution by the federal government, including those convicted of participating in the Capitol riot. The Trump administration has since backed away from that fund — but not from Trump’s audit immunity.
Under the immunity deal, Trump and his network are excused from audits or any other federal probes of past tax filings. It’s a settlement that former IRS and DOJ officials warned Monday far exceeds the scope of the underlying lawsuit, which Trump filed after an ex-IRS contractor leaked his return.
Cornyn isn’t the only lawmaker seeking more details on the agreement, including whether it would preclude future audits of past filings or touch only certain past filings.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told Semafor he expects senators to offer amendments repealing it, adding that he “absolutely” disagrees with it: “No American should be above the law, not even the president — and maybe even particularly the president.”
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she thought the Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over the IRS, “should take a look” at it.
“Any kind of immunity deal deserves scrutiny,” Collins said. “There’s, oddly enough, been less discussion generally, in the press and elsewhere, about the tax issue [than the anti-weaponization fund], but I’m unclear whether it’s … retrospective or whether it’s going forward; whether it applies to a specific case or whether it’s all-encompassing.”
Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, declined to comment on the IRS settlement given “it’s related to issues in front of the Finance Committee.” But another GOP panel member, Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, said he also had questions about its contours, telling Semafor that “we’re still trying to get the rest of the details.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, told Semafor that “I don’t like it and I’ve asked for more information on it.”
Murkowski added: “I’m trying to look at it through the lens of citizens of Alaska out there who are like, ‘Wow, that’s a hell of a sweet deal to the president, his family, and his business.’”
The agreement may have saved the president more than $100 million in liability under now-closed inquiries. The Justice Department said it’s working to assuage senators’ concerns.
“The Department of Justice will respond to any questions or clarifications a senator may have or seek. We are currently working to set up the briefing mentioned,” said a spokesperson for the Justice Department when asked about the meeting with Cornyn.
