The US Federal Judge, Judge Andrew Guilford of the US District Court in Santa Ana, California issued a ruling that stated Olenicoff’s case was "built upon a simple premise; UBS gave Olenicoff bad tax advice, which Olenicoff believed."
He further added, having pleaded guilty to tax evasion, Olenicoff already had placed "nearly every room of his legal house of cards into jeopardy."
Go deeper with GlobalData
Access deeper industry intelligence
Experience unmatched clarity with a single platform that combines unique data, AI, and human expertise.
Thus, drawing on the maxim "two wrongs do not make a right," the judge said that "UBS’s admission of guilt does not give Olenicoff the right to sue UBS for fraudulent tax advice."
Olenicoff had sued UBS in 2008, accusing the bank of fraud, conspiracy and other charges in handling some US$200 million he had kept in offshore accounts.
He had claimed that UBS had wrongfully advised him that he did not have to report them to the IRS.
The billionaire had pleaded guilty to tax evasion in 2007 and to lying on his tax returns by failing to disclose the offshore accounts. He had also paid US$52 million in back taxes.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataRule states that though US residents may legally hold offshore bank accounts, the IRS requires taxpayers to disclose the accounts on their tax returns and to sign disclosures provided by the banks.
Regarding the ruling, UBS spokeswoman Torie Von Alt said, "The Court’s decision corresponds with our view that Olenicoff’s claims have been without merit."
