What Is the Trump IRS Lawsuit?
The Trump IRS lawsuit is a federal civil case, Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609, filed on January 29, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. President Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization sued the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. They sought at least $10 billion over tax returns that a former IRS contractor leaked to the press.
Trump filed the suit in his personal capacity, yet he also oversees both agencies he sued. Reporting describes it as the first time a sitting president sued his own administration. Judge Kathleen M. Williams presided. The plaintiffs dismissed the case with prejudice on May 18, 2026, and the court later found the case collusive, as the status section below explains.
“This is a civil lawsuit (‘the Case’) brought by President Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Jr., Eric Trump, and The Trump Organization, LLC (‘Plaintiffs’) against the Internal Revenue Service (‘IRS’) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (‘Defendants’) under 26 U.S.C. § 6103, 26 U.S.C. § 7431, and 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(10).”
Source: Settlement Agreement, President Donald J. Trump, et al. v. Internal Revenue Service, et al., No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.), dated May 18, 2026, published by the U.S. Department of Justice
Why Was the Trump IRS Lawsuit Filed?
The Trump IRS lawsuit was filed because the plaintiffs say the IRS failed to prevent a contractor from stealing and leaking Trump's tax returns. Charles Littlejohn, a contractor employed by Booz Allen Hamilton, took the returns of Trump and thousands of other wealthy taxpayers from IRS systems. Between 2018 and 2020, he gave Trump's returns to The New York Times and the other returns to ProPublica. He pleaded guilty in October 2023 and received a five-year prison sentence in January 2024.
The complaint pleads that the IRS and Treasury willfully failed to safeguard the returns, which 26 U.S.C. § 6103 makes confidential. It argues Littlejohn acted as a joint employee, because the IRS exercised close, day-to-day supervision of his work. A Trump legal spokesperson said the IRS wrongly allowed a rogue, politically motivated employee to leak private information.
The $10 billion figure comes from a statutory damages theory under 26 U.S.C. § 7431. The plaintiffs count each person who saw the leaked information in news coverage as a separate $1,000 disclosure. Thomson Reuters' Checkpoint reported this theory when the complaint was filed.
The timing drew scrutiny. Trump sued years after the 2020 disclosures, and former government officials argued in a February 2026 amicus brief that the claim was time-barred. Judge Williams later wrote that Trump did not pursue the claims until he was back in the White House and had placed lawyers with ties to him in senior Justice Department roles.
What Harms Does the Trump IRS Lawsuit Allege?
The Trump IRS lawsuit alleges four distinct harms: unauthorized disclosure of tax returns, a failure to safeguard records, reputational and financial harm, and false light. The plaintiffs plead two statutory counts. Judge Williams's April 24, 2026 order identifies Count I under 26 U.S.C. §§ 6103 and 7431(a)(1) and Count II under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(10).
No court has ruled on whether any of these allegations is true. The rulings in this case addressed whether a genuine dispute existed, not whether the IRS caused the plaintiffs harm.
Unauthorized Disclosure of Tax Returns
Unauthorized disclosure of tax returns means a person views or shares confidential tax return information without legal permission, which federal law generally forbids.
Count I alleges the IRS and Treasury allowed Littlejohn to obtain and disclose the Trump plaintiffs' returns, violating 26 U.S.C. § 6103. Section 7431(a)(1) provides the civil damages remedy the plaintiffs invoke. They seek statutory damages of $1,000 per disclosure.
Failure to Safeguard Records Under the Privacy Act
The Privacy Act is a federal law that requires agencies to protect personal records with appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards.
Count II alleges the IRS and Treasury violated 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(10) by not safeguarding the records. The complaint's central allegation is that the IRS failed to prevent Littlejohn from reaching the elder Trump's tax returns. Former officials argued in their amicus brief that the suit named the wrong defendant, because they read § 7431 to require claims against a non-employee like Littlejohn directly.
Reputational and Financial Harm
Reputational and financial harm is damage to a person's public standing or business value, and a plaintiff generally must connect it to a specific loss.
The complaint alleges reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, and tarnished business reputations for all four plaintiffs. It also alleges the disclosures adversely affected Trump's support among voters in the 2020 presidential election. Tax attorney David Gair told Checkpoint that proving financial harm would be difficult, since reports suggest Trump's net worth has risen since the leaks.
False Light
False light is a privacy claim alleging that publicity portrays a person in a misleading way that a reasonable person would find offensive.
The complaint says the leaks portrayed the plaintiffs in a false light. False light appears as an alleged harm rather than a separate count, because the court's April 24, 2026 order lists only the two statutory counts.
What Is the Current Status of the Trump IRS Lawsuit?
The current status of the Trump IRS lawsuit is that the underlying claims are no longer being litigated, while the sanctions and collusion findings are on appeal in the Eleventh Circuit. The plaintiffs dismissed the claims with prejudice on May 18, 2026. The two entries below track the district court case and the appeal as of October 9, 2026.
President Donald J. Trump, et al. v. Internal Revenue Service, et al.
Judge Williams questioned jurisdiction on April 24, 2026, writing that the court could not tell whether the parties were adverse enough for a case or controversy. The plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice on May 18, 2026, and the court closed the case that day. After 35 former federal judges moved for relief, Judge Williams reopened the case on May 29, 2026 to examine allegations of collusion.
On July 13, 2026, Judge Williams issued a 56-page order, reported at 2026 WL 2015525, finding there was never adverseness between the parties, and that the plaintiffs acted in bad faith. She ruled the suit was filed for an improper purpose, to give a private arrangement the look of judicial legitimacy. The order bars the parties from citing the arrangement as a settlement in official proceedings, refers attorney Alejandro Brito to the Florida Bar, and bars attorney Daniel Epstein from practicing in the Southern District of Florida for a year. It also permits attorneys' fees to be reimbursed to the amici, and a fee motion from the 35 former judges was filed on July 27, 2026.
| Case Number | 1:26-cv-20609-KMW |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Presiding Judge | Hon. Kathleen M. Williams |
| Magistrate Judge | Hon. Enjolique A. Lett |
| Filed | January 29, 2026 |
| Dismissed With Prejudice | May 18, 2026 |
| Plaintiffs | Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Eric Trump, The Trump Organization LLC |
| Defendants | Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Department of the Treasury |
| Counts | 26 U.S.C. §§ 6103 and 7431(a)(1); 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(10) |
The defendants never contested the claims in the district court. The April 24 order notes that no defendant had entered an appearance, and an August 1, 2026 order records that the defendants did not intend to respond to the stay motion. The court instead appointed six private attorneys as amici on April 29, 2026 to brief the jurisdiction question.
The settlement agreement's recitals say plaintiffs' counsel intended to amend the complaint to likely add a putative class claim. The case was dismissed before any amendment, so no class was ever pleaded.
Eleventh Circuit Appeal No. 26-12692
Trump, his sons, the Trump Organization, and attorneys Brito and Epstein appealed the July 13 order on July 31, 2026 and asked for an expedited stay. The IRS and Treasury filed their own notice of appeal on September 11, 2026. On September 29, 2026, a three-judge panel of Judges Adalberto Jordan, Robin Rosenbaum, and Kevin Newsom denied the stay request, with no dissent reported.
The panel wrote that the appellants offered no evidence to explain their litigation conduct or show the suit was not collusive. It also found no strong showing on the First Amendment challenge, noting the speech limit applies only in legal proceedings. The merits appeal continues, and the plaintiffs could seek rehearing by the full court or review by the Supreme Court.
| Appeal Number | 26-12692 (government's notice docketed as 26-12692-CC) |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |
| Order Appealed | July 13, 2026 order of Judge Williams (DE 106) |
| Stay Panel | Judges Jordan, Rosenbaum, and Newsom |
| Stay Ruling | Denied on September 29, 2026 |
| Merits Appeal | Pending |
Did the Trump IRS Lawsuit Pay Trump Any Money?
No. The Trump IRS lawsuit paid Trump no money, because the May 18, 2026 settlement agreement says the plaintiffs receive a formal apology and no monetary payment or damages of any kind.
The agreement instead directed the Attorney General to create a $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, paid from the Treasury's Judgment Fund, to hear claims from others who say the government targeted them. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's May 19, 2026 order also released the plaintiffs and their affiliates from federal claims, including audits of tax returns filed before May 18, 2026. The fund would have stopped processing claims by December 1, 2028.
The fund never paid claims. A federal judge in Virginia blocked it on May 29, 2026, the Justice Department said it was not moving forward, and an order rescinding it followed in August 2026. The audit release stayed in place, with the Justice Department restating in writing that it applies only to the plaintiffs, according to the Tax Law Center.
The audit release could still carry real value. The New York Times reported that the order likely ended a dispute over a $72.9 million refund Trump claimed tied to The Apprentice. The BBC reported that the July ruling could let the IRS pursue future audits, while the Tax Law Center argues Congress still needs to act.
Because the case has no class, nobody else can file a claim to share in it. The original $10 billion demand was never paid either.
Trump IRS Lawsuit Updates
The latest Trump IRS lawsuit updates run from the January 29, 2026 filing through the Eleventh Circuit's September 29, 2026 stay ruling. Each entry names the court, the order, and the actor, and new filings are added as they are confirmed.
Full Trump IRS Lawsuit Timeline
Eleventh Circuit Denies a Stay of the Trump IRS Sanctions
A three-judge Eleventh Circuit panel denied the request from Trump and his attorneys to pause Judge Williams's July 13 sanctions order in Appeal No. 26-12692. The panel said the appellants offered no evidence explaining their conduct, and that the merits appeal would continue.
Judge Brinkema Tells DOJ the Anti-Weaponization Fund Issues Remain Alive
At a hearing in the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Leonie Brinkema questioned the Justice Department's request to dismiss the challenge to the Anti-Weaponization Fund. She agreed the fund itself appeared gone, asked whether a functional equivalent existed, and said she would craft a new discovery order.
IRS and Treasury File Their Own Notice of Appeal
The Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department filed a notice of appeal from Judge Williams's July 13 order in the Southern District of Florida. The Eleventh Circuit docketed it on September 14 under No. 26-12692-CC.
Challengers Amend the Virginia Complaint Against the Fund and Immunity Order
Andrew Floyd, a city, nonprofits, and the National Treasury Employees Union filed a first amended complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia, No. 1:26-cv-01399. It challenges both the Anti-Weaponization Fund and the May 19 immunity order.
Blanche Restates Limits on the Audit Immunity in Writing as His Nomination Advances
The Justice Department issued a document restating that the May 19 immunity order applies only to the plaintiffs, according to the Tax Law Center. The Associated Press reported that Todd Blanche's written assurances, including that the order applies only retroactively, cleared a path for his confirmation as Attorney General, while the underlying order stayed in place.
Justice Department Rescinds the Order Creating the Anti-Weaponization Fund
The Justice Department issued an order rescinding the Attorney General's order that created the $1.776 billion fund. The Tax Law Center noted the rescission did not change the underlying settlement agreement or bind the Trump plaintiffs.
Judge Williams Asks Court-Appointed Amici to Respond to the Stay Request
Judge Williams noted the defendants did not intend to respond to the plaintiffs' expedited stay motion. She asked the six amici she appointed in April to address the motion's legal issues instead.
Trump Plaintiffs and Their Attorneys Appeal and Seek an Expedited Stay
Trump, his sons, the Trump Organization, and attorneys Alejandro Brito and Daniel Epstein filed a notice of appeal and an expedited motion to stay the July 13 order. The same day, Trump told reporters the fund was dead but that he wished it were not, according to NBC News.
Former Federal Judges Ask for Attorneys' Fees
The 35 former federal judges who sought to reopen the Trump IRS lawsuit filed a motion for attorneys' fees. Their motion follows the part of the July 13 order that permits fee reimbursement to the amici.
Judge Williams Finds the Trump IRS Lawsuit Collusive and Sanctions Counsel
Judge Williams ruled that the Trump IRS lawsuit was filed in bad faith for an improper purpose and that no case or controversy ever existed. She barred the parties from citing the arrangement as a settlement, referred attorney Alejandro Brito to the Florida Bar, and limited attorney Daniel Epstein's practice in the Southern District of Florida.
Court Denies Further Amicus Briefs, Calling the Record Sufficiently Briefed
Judge Williams denied three motions for leave to file more amicus briefs, including one from 23 state attorneys general. She wrote that the case had been sufficiently briefed.
Judge Brinkema Extends the Block on the Fund Until Further Notice
Judge Brinkema converted her temporary block on the Anti-Weaponization Fund into a preliminary injunction. She offered to lift it if Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent swore in written declarations that the fund was dead.
Blanche Retreats From the Fund but Keeps the Audit Order
Blanche told a House appropriations subcommittee that the Justice Department was not moving forward with the Anti-Weaponization Fund. He confirmed that the agreement ending audits of Trump, his family, and their businesses would stay in force.
Judge Williams Reopens the Case to Examine Collusion Allegations
Acting on the motion from 35 former federal judges, Judge Williams reopened the Trump IRS lawsuit to explore what she called grievous allegations. She gave the plaintiffs two weeks to respond.
Judge Brinkema Temporarily Blocks the Anti-Weaponization Fund
In a separate Eastern District of Virginia case, Judge Leonie Brinkema temporarily blocked creation of the fund pending a hearing the following week. The Justice Department said on June 1 that the administration would abide by the order.
Thirty-Five Former Federal Judges Move for Relief From the Dismissal
A group of 35 former federal judges filed a motion for relief from the May 18 closing order. They argued the Trump IRS lawsuit and its settlement amounted to a fraud on the court.
CREW Sues Over the Fund in the District of Columbia
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a 50-page complaint, No. 1:26-cv-01789, in the District of Columbia. It names the Justice Department, Treasury, the IRS, and the Anti-Weaponization Fund as defendants.
Acting Attorney General Blanche Issues the Release and Immunity Order
Todd Blanche signed an order releasing the Trump plaintiffs and their related or affiliated parties from federal claims that existed as of May 18, 2026. The order covers tax returns filed before that date and any matters pending before federal agencies.
Plaintiffs Dismiss the Case Under a Settlement Agreement With the Justice Department
Plaintiffs' counsel and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. signed a settlement agreement providing a formal apology, no payment, and a $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund. The plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice, and Judge Williams entered an order closing the case.
Judge Williams Appoints Six Private Attorneys as Amici
Judge Williams appointed John Gleeson, David O'Neil, Donald Verrilli Jr., Faith Gay, Philippe Selendy, and Corey Stoughton as amici curiae. They were asked to help the court assess whether the Trump IRS lawsuit was a genuine dispute.
Judge Williams Questions Whether the Parties Are Adverse
Judge Williams stayed the defendants' response deadline and ordered memoranda on whether a case or controversy existed. She wrote that Trump's named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction, and set a hearing for May 27, 2026.
Plaintiffs File a Consent Motion for a 90-Day Pause
The Trump plaintiffs filed a consent motion asking for a 90-day extension of all proceedings so the parties could hold discussions to resolve the matter. The court responded a week later by questioning its own jurisdiction.
CREW and Public Citizen Seek to File an Amicus Brief
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and Public Citizen moved for leave to file an amicus brief in the Trump IRS lawsuit. It followed a February 5 motion from former officials including John Koskinen and Nina Olson.
Former IRS and Justice Officials Challenge the Lawsuit's Core Claims
Former IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, former Tax Division chief Kathryn Keneally, former Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, and Gilbert Rothenberg moved to file an amicus brief. They argued the claims were time-barred, named the wrong defendant, and risked becoming collusive litigation.
Case Assigned to Judge Kathleen Williams
The Southern District of Florida assigned the Trump IRS lawsuit to Judge Kathleen M. Williams and referred discovery and pretrial non-dispositive matters to Magistrate Judge Enjolique A. Lett.
Trump, His Sons, and the Trump Organization File the $10 Billion Lawsuit
President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization sued the IRS and the Treasury Department in the Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleges the agencies failed to prevent Charles Littlejohn's leak of their tax returns and seeks at least $10 billion.
What Did the IRS Allegedly Fail to Prevent in the Trump IRS Lawsuit?
The Trump IRS lawsuit alleges the IRS failed to prevent Charles Littlejohn from accessing and disclosing the Trump plaintiffs' tax returns. Littlejohn worked for the IRS through Booz Allen Hamilton. Prosecutors described his leaks as unparalleled in the agency's history.
The IRS has previously denied responsibility for his conduct. In the earlier Ken Griffin case, it argued Littlejohn acted alone. In January 2026, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent ended the department's contracts with Booz Allen, saying the firm failed to implement adequate safeguards. Booz Allen disputed that account.
| Party | Role in the Case |
|---|---|
| Internal Revenue Service | Defendant accused of failing to safeguard the returns |
| U.S. Department of the Treasury | Defendant and parent department of the IRS |
| Charles Littlejohn | Former IRS contractor who pleaded guilty to unlawful disclosure, not a defendant |
| Booz Allen Hamilton | Littlejohn's employer and IRS contractor, not a defendant |
No defendant litigated these allegations in the Trump IRS lawsuit. The Justice Department's Civil Division told CREW it had no responsive records about the case, according to CREW's account of its records request.
How Does the Trump IRS Lawsuit Compare to Related Cases?
The Trump IRS lawsuit differs from three matters that share its leak, its agreement, or its fund. Ken Griffin's case arose from the same Littlejohn leak. The two challenges to the Anti-Weaponization Fund target the agreement that ended the Trump case, not the leak itself.
| Matter | Court and Case Number | What It Is | Where It Stands |
|---|---|---|---|
| Griffin v. IRS | S.D. Fla., No. 1:22-cv-24023 | Citadel CEO Ken Griffin's suit over his own leaked returns from the same Littlejohn disclosures | The IRS publicly apologized in June 2024, and Griffin ended the suit |
| Floyd v. Department of Justice | E.D. Va., No. 1:26-cv-01399-LMB-IDD | Challenge by individuals, a city, nonprofits, and a union to the fund and the May 19 immunity order | Amended complaint filed August 6, 2026, and a dismissal request heard September 18, 2026 |
| CREW v. Department of Justice | D.D.C., No. 1:26-cv-01789-RJL | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's challenge to the fund | Filed May 22, 2026, with Judge Richard Leon reported to have accepted the government's mootness position |
Reporting also describes a separate suit by two police officers injured in the January 6 Capitol attack, Daniel Hodges and Harry Dunn, who argued the administration exceeded its authority in creating the fund.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Trump IRS lawsuit about?
The Trump IRS lawsuit is a federal case filed on January 29, 2026, in which President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization sued the IRS and the Treasury Department for at least $10 billion over tax returns leaked by former IRS contractor Charles Littlejohn.
Is the Trump IRS lawsuit a class action?
No. The Trump IRS lawsuit is not a class action, because the only plaintiffs are four named parties. The settlement agreement's recitals say counsel intended to add a putative class claim, but the case was dismissed before any amendment.
What happened to the settlement in the Trump IRS lawsuit?
The settlement in the Trump IRS lawsuit was signed on May 18, 2026, but Judge Williams later found the case collusive and barred the parties from citing the arrangement as a settlement in official proceedings. The ruling is on appeal in the Eleventh Circuit.
How much money did Trump get from the IRS lawsuit?
Trump received no money from the IRS lawsuit. The May 18, 2026 settlement agreement provides a formal apology and no monetary payment or damages of any kind to the plaintiffs.
What was the Anti-Weaponization Fund in the Trump IRS lawsuit?
The Anti-Weaponization Fund was a $1.776 billion fund the settlement directed the Attorney General to create, paid from the Treasury's Judgment Fund, to hear claims from others who said the government targeted them. The Justice Department rescinded the order creating it in August 2026.
Is the Trump IRS lawsuit still active?
The Trump IRS lawsuit is no longer active on its underlying claims, which were dismissed with prejudice on May 18, 2026. The sanctions and collusion findings are on appeal in Eleventh Circuit No. 26-12692, where a panel denied a stay on September 29, 2026.
Which judge is handling the Trump IRS lawsuit?
Judge Kathleen M. Williams of the Southern District of Florida handled the Trump IRS lawsuit and issued the July 13, 2026 order finding it collusive. The Eleventh Circuit now reviews that order.
How is the Trump IRS lawsuit different from the Ken Griffin lawsuit?
The Trump IRS lawsuit and Ken Griffin's case both arose from Charles Littlejohn's leaks, but Griffin's case ended in a public IRS apology in June 2024. The Trump case produced a settlement agreement, a collusion ruling, and an appeal.