We tailor sanctions to the facts of each case. Nevertheless , we think sanctions in other tax cases are a helpful guide. See, e.g., Committee on Prof'l Ethics Conduct v. Oltrogge, 463 N.W.2d 19, 20 (Iowa 1990) (holding one-year suspension warranted for failing to file on the due dates federal and state income tax returns for five years and for falsely answering questions on annual statements and questionnaires from the Client Security and Attorney Disciplinary Commission); Committee on Prof'l Ethics Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1, 2 (Iowa 1988) (holding eighteen-month suspension warranted for failing to file on the due dates state income tax returns for four years and federal income tax returns for five years, compounded by the fact that attorney made false answers on Client Security and Attorney Disciplinary Commission questionnaire relating to one year); Belay, 420 N.W.2d at 785 (holding six-month suspension warranted for failing to file on the due dates federal income tax returns for two years); Committee on Prof'l Ethics Conduct v. Cook, 409 N.W.2d 469, 470-71 (1987) (holding three-month suspension warranted for failing to file on the due dates federal income tax returns for three years and state returns for two years; also attorney made false certification his returns were filed); Committee on Prof'l Ethics Conduct v. McDermott, 405 N.W.2d 824, 825 (Iowa 1987) (holding that fifteen-month suspension warranted for failing to file on the due dates federal income tax returns for four years and falsely stating compliance w
We give respectful consideration to the commission's recommendations, but this court is not bound by them. Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 1988). To determine whether and to what extent discipline should be imposed on an attorney, it is necessary to review the evidence de novo, considering the nature of the alleged violation, the need for deterrence, the protection of the public, the maintenance of the reputation of the bar as a whole, and the attorney's fitness to continue practice.
In the interest of brevity I have not cited all of the cases that have been decided since Kraschel. Most of the cases before 1987 have been summarized in Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Crawford, 351 N.W.2d 530, 531-32 (Iowa 1984) and Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Davison, 414 N.W.2d 97, 99-100 (Iowa 1987). Since Davison we have decided the following cases: Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Summa, 416 N.W.2d 690 (Iowa 1987); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Belay, 420 N.W.2d 783 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Bertelli, 422 N.W.2d 175 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Ramey, 424 N.W.2d 435 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Morris, 427 N.W.2d 458 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional and Conduct v. Jackson, 429 N.W.2d 122 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Jay, 430 N.W.2d 115 (Iowa 1988); Committee and Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Jones, 441 N.W.2d 370 (Iowa 1989); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. Clauss, 445 N.W.2d 758 (Iowa 1989); Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct v. McMillen, 449 N.W.2d 339 (Iowa 1989). It is apparent that our tough approach has not stopped lawyers from filing untimely returns.
Davison, 414 N.W.2d at 99. A review of the tax evasion/false reporting cases recently before this court reveals the following range of sanctions: Clauss, 445 N.W.2d at 760 (six-month suspension for failure to file returns for three years plus false certification); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Jay, 430 N.W.2d 115, 118 (Iowa 1989) (sixty-day suspension for two-year failure to file); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Jackson, 429 N.W.2d 122, 123 (Iowa 1988) (three-month suspension for two-year failure to file); Morris, 427 N.W.2d at 460 (three-month suspension for three-year failure to file); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Ramey, 424 N.W.2d 435, 437 (Iowa 1988) (six-month suspension for failure to file four income tax returns and one false certification); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1, 2 (Iowa 1988) (eighteen-month suspension for five-year failure to file). Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Cook, 409 N.W.2d 469, 471 (Iowa 1987) (three-month suspension for three years of late filings and one false certification).
Jay's 1986 returns were also untimely filed in November 1987. These returns resulted in a tax refund from the state of $832 for overpaid taxes and a tax refund from the federal government of $933 for overpaid taxes. Jay also admits he certified on his 1987 client security questionnaire that he had filed his federal and state income tax returns for 1985 when he had not. These actions constituted unethical and unprofessional conduct in violation of EC 1-5 and DR 1-102(A)(1), (4), (5), (6) of the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers. See, e.g., Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1, 2 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Cook, 409 N.W.2d 469, 470-71 (Iowa 1987). Jay's actions came to the attention of the committee when he voluntarily disclosed them in a letter dated November 20, 1987, sent to the ethics counsel of the committee.
We are not bound by the Grievance Commission's recommendations, but do give respectful consideration to them. We continue to impose license suspensions in our effort to end income tax filing violations by Iowa attorneys. See Committeeon Professional Ethics Conduct v. Houser, 423 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Bertelli, 422 N.W.2d 175 (Iowa 1988); Committee on Professional Ethics Conduct v. Belay, 420 N.W.2d 788, 784 (Iowa 1988). We find the Grievance Commission's recommendation to be appropriate.