FOREVER BARRED – A one-page addendum signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche Tuesday added new language to the Justice Department’s IRS settlement tied to President Donald Trump, barring the government from pursuing certain tax-related claims involving Trump, his family
By Tuesday, the Justice Department’s IRS settlement had already been sold as an end to an ugly chapter over disclosure of President Donald Trump’s tax information.
But the addendum signed that day shifted the fight to a different battleground: whether the federal government will ever be allowed to revisit certain tax returns.
The new language, first reported by Politico, appears in a one-page addendum signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. It says the government is “FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED” from pursuing claims. examinations or other matters tied to tax returns filed before the agreement took effect. The protection is written to apply broadly—covering Trump, family members, trusts, companies and affiliated entities.
Officials did not add the tax protection when they announced the core deal Monday. That original settlement resolved Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the disclosure of his tax information and created a fund for people who say they were unfairly targeted by government actions. The tax-language details were not part of that first agreement.
The addendum also carries its own paper trail. It was signed only by Blanche, and it does not include signatures from the IRS, Trump’s current legal team or the officials who signed the settlement released Monday.
For former IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel, the newly disclosed language raised alarms of precedent. He told Politico he was unaware of any precedent for the agency agreeing in advance to permanently stop examining previously filed tax returns for a specific person or business. Former IRS Commissioner John Koskinen went further, calling the agreement a “terrible precedent.”.
Trump administration officials, for their part, defended the fund and rejected the notion that Trump or his family would personally collect money from it. Vice President JD Vance told reporters Tuesday the fund would not pay Trump, his administration or his relatives.
“The question is, is a dollar of this money going to the Trump administration? No,” Vance said. “Is a dollar of this money going to Donald Trump personally? No. Is a dollar of this money going to Donald Trump’s family? No.”
Vance did not close the door on payments to people accused of violence around the Jan. 6 attack. He did not rule out payments being made to some of the Jan. 6 rioters who assaulted law enforcement officers.
Blanche defended the agreement during congressional testimony as well, saying it was unusual but not without historical grounding. “It was done to address something that had never happened again either,” Blanche told lawmakers. “So there is an impressive nature of what we did yesterday in response to years and years of weaponization.”.
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward pushed back on criticism that has followed the settlement, arguing that judgment is premature because no claims have been filed and no payments have been made.
“I think that it’s way, way, way too early for us to rush to judgment on whether this was a good or a bad idea to describe it as a slush fund, or really even to criticize it,” Woodward said.
Democrats, however, focused on the settlement’s biggest number as well as the newly disclosed tax protection. Democratic lawmakers and outside critics sharply criticized the deal—pointing to a taxpayer-funded pot of money and the “forever” language now shielding previously filed tax returns.
Rep. Richard Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, accused Trump of turning the federal government into “his personal protection racket.” In a statement on X, he wrote, “this corruption marks a dark day for democracy.”
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT.) called the fund a “political slush fund,” warning that taxpayer money could go to Jan. 6 rioters or Trump’s political allies.
“We’ve never ever seen anything like this before,” Murphy said. “I get it that people, you know don’t know what a big number is anymore, but $1.7 billion, that’s a lot of money. That’s your taxpayer money… To hand out to his political allies around the country. That’s outrageous.”
Even as Democrats led the charge, questions weren’t confined to one party. On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) told reporters, “I think that there are and will be, continue to be, a lot of questions around that that the administration is going to have to answer.”
The settlement sits at an uncomfortable intersection of law and trust. The administration insists the anti-weaponization fund will not serve as a pipeline to Trump or his family. and that no payouts have started. Critics argue the structure—paired with the “FOREVER BARRED” tax language—amounts to an unprecedented set of protections. For now. the government says it’s too early to judge what will happen next. while lawmakers press for answers on what. exactly. was agreed to—and what the IRS will now be barred from doing indefinitely.
Department of Justice IRS settlement Todd Blanche Trump taxes anti-weaponization fund Jan. 6 rioters Richard Neal Chris Murphy JD Vance John Thune