"A person who, intentionally, with the intention of evading tax or assisting another person to evade tax, commits one of the offenses listed below, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for seven years or a fine as stated in section 61(a)(4) of the Penal Law and twice the amount of income that he concealed, intended to conceal or helped to conceal, or both penalties; These are:
- omitted from a report prepared in accordance with the Ordinance any income that must be included in the report;
- a statement in the report according to the Ordinance or a false statement;
- Gave a false answer, orally or in writing, to a question that was asked, or to a request for information made to him in accordance with the Ordinance;
- prepares or exists, or permits a person to prepare or maintain, false ledgers or other false records, or forges or permits falsification of ledgers or records;
(5) Use or permit the use of any trick, trick, or trick;
..."
With regard to an offense under section 220(1) of the Ordinance, the factual element consists of two – the preparation of a report that must be prepared under the Ordinance and the omission of income that must be included in the report (Amir, Tax Offenses and Money Laundering, 8th edition, March 2024, p. 649). Although this is desirable, the prosecution is not obligated to prove the exact amount of the income that was omitted (see Criminal Appeal 5529/12 Ohev Zion v. State of Israel (November 9, 2014, paragraph 13 of the opinion of the Honorable Justice Danziger).
With regard to an offense under section 220(5) of the Ordinance: "When the act or omission is not explicitly mentioned in sections 220(1)-220(4) of the Ordinance, but it constitutes fraud, cunning or deception, it is a criminal act, even if the prosecution has no evidence of false registration in the ledgers, or omission from a report, or of giving a false statement or giving a false answer..." (Tax Offenses and Money Laundering, p. 684).
The mental element of the two offenses is identical. In addition to being aware of the nature of the act and the existence of the circumstances, an intention is required to achieve the goal of tax evasion. As for proving the mental element, see Criminal Appeal 1182/99 Hurwitz v. State of Israel (September 7, 2000), paragraph 34 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice Or: