Have any IRS audits or investigations into Donald Trump's tax returns resulted in criminal charges?

1. The headline: company convictions, not an IRS criminal referral of Trump personally

Multiple outlets report that two entities of the Trump Organization were found guilty by a Manhattan jury on charges including criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records — a corporate criminal conviction that resulted in fines and prison time for the company’s CFO, Allen Weisselberg, but did not, in those verdicts, result in criminal charges against Donald Trump personally in that trial ^{[1] [4] [2]}.

2. What came from IRS work and what came from local prosecutors

The convictions of the Trump Organization grew out of long-running investigations by the Manhattan district attorney and state prosecutors, not as a direct product of an IRS criminal indictment of Trump’s personal returns. Reporting ties the company’s guilty verdict to a scheme involving off‑book compensation to executives; Weisselberg pleaded guilty earlier to related felonies and testified at trial ^{[5] [1]}.

3. IRS audits of Trump’s personal returns: delays, limited scope, no criminal charges reported

Congressional and tax-policy reporting documents that mandatory presidential audits of Trump’s returns were slow or limited during his presidency; the House Ways and Means report concluded the IRS did not timely conduct the full audits its internal rules contemplated and that only one mandatory audit was started and none completed during his four years in office — reporting that raises questions but does not show IRS-originated criminal charges against Trump’s personal returns in the cited sources ^{[3] [6] [7]}.

4. Ongoing audits and potential civil tax liabilities vs. criminal prosecution

News organizations reported that IRS audit work has suggested Trump could face very large tax assessments (for example, a potential $100 million-plus bill tied to Chicago property matters), which reflects civil tax exposure from audits rather than confirmed criminal charges filed by the IRS in federal court against Trump personally in the cited items ^[8]. Available sources do not mention an IRS criminal indictment, based on those audit findings, charging Trump personally.

5. Separate criminal cases that mention tax-related conduct

The Manhattan criminal cases include theories that involve tax consequences — prosecutors alleged the organization concealed compensation that had tax effects and that some transactions were mischaracterized to conceal payments that had electoral or reputational relevance. Legal analysts explain how those allegations intersect with federal tax statutes and state offenses; but the prosecutions driving convictions in 2022–2023 were brought by New York prosecutors, not the IRS pursuing criminal charges against Trump’s personal federal tax returns ^{[9] [5]}.

6. Leaks and prosecutions of those who exposed tax returns

There was criminal enforcement against an ex‑IRS contractor who leaked tax-return information, including Trump’s returns; that contractor pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years — an example of criminal enforcement connected to disclosure of tax records rather than to criminal tax liability of Trump himself ^{[10] [11] [12]}.

7. Conflicting interpretations and political context

Some conservative commentators and lawyers argued that corporate prosecutions represented overreach; the Trump Organization’s lawyers insisted corporate penalties should not imply Trump’s personal guilt ^[5]. Conversely, prosecutors argued company-level schemes benefitted executives and the business, justifying criminal charges against the corporate entities ^{[1] [13]}. Congressional Democrats used IRS audit delays as evidence of irregular handling, while tax-policy analysts flagged procedural shortcomings at the IRS — different camps are focusing on accountability for audits vs. criminal culpability ^{[7] [6]}.

8. Bottom line and limits of the record

The factual record in these sources: (a) the Trump Organization was criminally convicted on tax-related counts ^{[1] [2]}; (b) IRS audit activity concerning Trump’s personal presidential returns was described as delayed and limited by a House committee and analysts, but those reports do not document resulting criminal charges against Trump personally originating from IRS audits ^{[3] [7] [6]}; and (c) some investigations and audits could produce large civil tax bills, but the cited sources do not say the IRS has brought federal criminal charges against Donald Trump personally based on his tax returns ^[8]. If you want, I can list the specific articles and excerpts that support each point.