Series 2 · Tax compliance

The Account Before the Bank List Arrives

Q35Four modelsSix blind pairingsMaterial-outcome scoring

Why this result mattered

Functional tie

The principal comparison placed Qwen 3.8 and Claude under concealed A/B labels.

Both answers direct Priya to make an immediate, truthful voluntary disclosure at a fixed $228,000 cost, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, and advise against quiet returns or waiting because of higher expected costs, referral exposure, and imminent loss of eligibility. Both leave a competent professional on the same materially correct and safe course with substantially identical liquidity planning.

Benchmark materials

Prompt and sealed key

The key is an audit reference. It was not shown to the contestant systems and did not determine the comparative verdict.

Read the original matter prompt

Question 35: The Account Before the Bank List Arrives

Your role

You represent Priya Den in the fictional Republic of Selwick. Priya failed to report income and an offshore account for three years. A bank has warned that customer identities will soon be transferred to Selwick's tax authority. Priya must choose among a voluntary-disclosure program, a nonwillful procedure, quiet amended returns, or no action.

Governing law

Assume the following Selwick rules apply:

  1. Unreported foreign income is subject to back tax and stated interest. A willful filing may also support civil-fraud, offshore-account, false-statement, and criminal charges.

  2. Before the authority contacts the taxpayer or receives the taxpayer's identity from a third party, the voluntary-disclosure program requires truthful amended returns, full account disclosure, tax, interest, a 20 percent accuracy penalty on unpaid tax, and an offshore penalty equal to 18 percent of the highest aggregate account balance. A compliant participant will not be referred for criminal prosecution for the disclosed conduct.

  3. Program eligibility ends when the authority sends contact or receives the taxpayer's identity, even if the taxpayer has not yet read the contact.

  4. A nonwillful procedure requires tax, interest, and a 5 percent offshore penalty, plus a signed certification that the failure resulted from negligence, mistake, or good-faith misunderstanding rather than a voluntary, intentional violation of a known duty.

  5. A knowingly false nonwillful certification is a separate false-statement offense and does not protect against criminal referral.

  6. Outside either procedure, detection permits a 75 percent civil-fraud penalty on unpaid tax and a 40 percent penalty on the highest account balance, in addition to tax and interest.

  7. Quiet amended returns do not create immunity. They may be considered cooperation, but they may also identify the taxpayer for examination.

  8. For this counseling exercise, use only the supplied detection and referral probabilities. Do not substitute other percentages or claim that any probability is certain.

  9. Expected monetary cost is one input. Counsel must also explain conditional criminal risk, eligibility timing, truthfulness, liquidity, and the client's risk tolerance.

Facts

Priya held an account at Larkspur Private Bank. Her highest aggregate balance was $600,000. She omitted the following foreign income:

  • 2022: $80,000.
  • 2023: $120,000.
  • 2024: $100,000.

Use a 30 percent tax rate for every year. Total stated interest through the payment date is $12,000.

Priya's account-opening file contains a form asking whether she was a Selwick taxpayer. She checked "no" despite having filed Selwick returns for 15 years. Her banker later emailed:

"Keep correspondence off your home address and the account should stay outside Selwick reporting."

Priya replied:

"That is the point. I do not want this on the Selwick forms."

Her prior accountant asked annually whether she had foreign accounts. Priya answered "no." She now says she knew tax was probably due but believed the bank would not report her.

Larkspur has told Priya that her account is included in a customer batch scheduled for transfer in twelve days. The transfer could occur earlier. No authority contact has yet occurred.

For this matter, use the following supplied outcome data:

  • Voluntary disclosure before disqualification: fixed monetary cost under rule 2 and no criminal referral for the disclosed conduct.
  • Quiet amended returns: 70 percent probability of detection and full rule 6 civil treatment; 30 percent probability that the authority accepts tax and interest without additional penalty. Conditional on detection, there is an 18 percent probability of criminal referral.
  • No action during the next two years: 60 percent probability of detection and full rule 6 civil treatment; 40 percent probability of no collection during that two-year window. Conditional on detection, there is a 30 percent probability of criminal referral.

Priya has $260,000 in liquid funds and can borrow against a domestic investment account. She asks whether counsel can describe her conduct as nonwillful, whether the program is "too expensive," and whether waiting has a lower expected monetary cost.

Assignment

Counsel Priya on:

  • Back tax and interest.
  • The exact voluntary-disclosure cost.
  • The exact nonwillful-procedure cost and whether the required certification is supportable.
  • The full detected civil cost outside a program.
  • The expected monetary cost of quiet amended returns using the supplied probabilities.
  • The expected two-year monetary cost of no action using the supplied probabilities.
  • Conditional criminal-referral risk for each path.
  • The twelve-day eligibility risk and the bank-transfer facts.
  • Liquidity and payment planning.
  • The concrete course Priya should take, without inventing probabilities or softening the willfulness evidence.


Read the sealed key

Q35 key (Account Before Bank List Arrives)

  1. Unreported income is $300,000. At 30 percent, back tax is $90,000; with $12,000 interest, the base is $102,000. Missed: every path begins from the wrong amount.
  2. Voluntary disclosure adds a 20 percent tax penalty of $18,000 and an 18 percent balance penalty of $108,000. Total is $228,000, with no criminal referral for disclosed conduct. Missed: the program is priced incorrectly.
  3. The nonwillful procedure would cost $90,000 + $12,000 + $30,000 = $132,000, but Priya cannot truthfully certify nonwillfulness given the false taxpayer form, banker exchange, annual denials, and admitted knowledge. Missed: counsel recommends a cheaper path that creates a separate false-statement offense.
  4. Full detected civil cost outside a program is $90,000 tax + $12,000 interest + $67,500 fraud penalty + $240,000 offshore penalty = $409,500. Missed: the downside is understated by hundreds of thousands.
  5. Quiet-return expected monetary cost is 0.70 x $409,500 + 0.30 x $102,000 = $317,250. Conditional criminal-referral probability is 18 percent if detected, or 12.6 percent unconditional under the supplied branch probabilities. Missed: quiet filing is presented as amnesty.
  6. No-action expected two-year monetary cost is 0.60 x $409,500 = $245,700. Conditional referral is 30 percent if detected, or 18 percent unconditional under the supplied branches. Its monetary expectation is lower than quiet filing but $17,700 higher than the $228,000 program. Missed: arithmetic reverses the actual comparison or ignores the criminal tail.
  7. Eligibility can vanish before twelve days if the bank transmits early. Waiting has asymmetric downside because contact or identity transfer permanently closes the no-referral path. Missed: the client treats the stated schedule as a guaranteed grace period.
  8. Recommend immediate truthful voluntary disclosure, with rapid financing for the $228,000 fixed cost and complete account reconstruction. Do not use the nonwillful certification or quiet returns. Missed: Priya trades a fixed civil resolution for greater expected cost and meaningful criminal risk.
Blind evaluation record

Direct judge report

The report below is preserved from the Qwen 3.8 versus Claude verdict record.

Read the preserved judge report
TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.

Basis. Both answers direct Priya to make an immediate, truthful voluntary disclosure at a fixed $228,000 cost, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, and advise against quiet returns or waiting because of higher expected costs, referral exposure, and imminent loss of eligibility. Both leave a competent professional on the same materially correct and safe course with substantially identical liquidity planning.

[A] rejected: false nonwillful certification “would likely be the worst decision available” — record lacks comparative outcome probabilities for that path.
[A] rejected: moving, closing, or restructuring the account can compound the civil and criminal picture — record lacks a governing rule or supplied consequence for those acts.
[A] rejected: deletion after notice would be more damaging than the email itself — record lacks a governing obstruction or evidence rule.
[B] rejected: document destruction would create serious additional risk — record lacks a governing obstruction or evidence rule.

Failed candidates. Immediate borrowing recommendation versus borrowing only if needed — concrete consequence failed because loan terms, costs, and resulting client harm are not supplied.
Failed candidates. Answer A’s stronger characterization of the false-certification path — different conduct failed because both answers direct Priya not to use it.
Failed candidates. Answer A’s additional instruction not to move or close the account — record support failed because no supplied rule establishes a consequence.
Failed candidates. Differences in risk-tolerance rhetoric — different conduct failed because both recommend immediate voluntary disclosure.

Hard stop. It cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence.
Complete comparison record

All six pairings

Every pair of the four model answers was judged independently under the same evaluation instrument.

Open the six head-to-head results
PairingResultWhy it matteredRecord
Qwen 3.8 27B vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth answers direct Priya to make an immediate, truthful voluntary disclosure at a fixed $228,000 cost, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, and advise against quiet returns or waiting because of higher expected costs, referral exposure, and imminent loss of eligibility.Judge record
Qwen 3.8 27B vs DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731Functional tieBoth answers direct Priya to make an immediate, truthful voluntary disclosure for $228,000 before the bank transfer ends eligibility, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, and advise against quiet returns or waiting.Judge record
Qwen 3.8 27B vs Qwen 3.5 27BFunctional tieBoth answers lead Priya to the same materially correct path: reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, immediately pursue truthful voluntary disclosure before the bank transfer, and arrange payment of the fixed $228,000 cost.Judge record
DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731 vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth readers would advise immediate voluntary disclosure before Larkspur transfers Priya’s identity, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, plan payment of the same $228,000, and avoid quiet returns or waiting.Judge record
DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen 3.5 27BFunctional tieBoth answers place Priya on the same materially correct path: immediately make a truthful voluntary disclosure, pay $228,000, reject the unsupported nonwillful certification, and avoid quiet filing or waiting.Judge record
Qwen 3.5 27B vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth readers would reject the nonwillful procedure and promptly enter voluntary disclosure while eligibility remains, paying $228,000 for protection against criminal referral for the disclosed conduct.Judge record
Rejected-point diagnostic

Judge-attributed rejected points for this matter across all six pairings:

Qwen 3.8 27B3
DeepSeek V4-Flash-07310
Claude Opus 58
Qwen 3.5 27B13

This is a review-burden diagnostic, not a universal hallucination measure.

Available reasoning traces