Johns Creek attorney gets prison time in $1.5 million tax evasion case

A Johns Creek attorney who prosecutors said hid nearly $1.5 million in federal income taxes was sentenced to one year and three months in prison, a punishment that also includes two years of supervised release, more than $1.9 million in restitution and a $35,000 fine. The case centered on Amjad Ibrahim, 60, and reached beyond a single law practice, touching at least seven businesses and four tax years.

Chief U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May handed down the sentence on June 12. Federal prosecutors said Ibrahim concealed personal income taxes tied to the 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 tax years, and the U.S. Department of Justice later described the matter as serial tax evasion. The restitution order requires him to repay $1,934,115 to the Internal Revenue Service.

Investigators said Ibrahim managed and earned substantial income through at least seven businesses while trying to hide that money from tax authorities. They said he wrote at least 70 checks to himself, totaling about $700,000, a paper trail that helped expose the alleged scheme. IRS Criminal Investigation handled the case, underscoring how federal agents can use business records, check histories and filing patterns to reconstruct income when they suspect concealment.

The sentence carries weight for Johns Creek and nearby professional corridors that stretch toward Forsyth County, where attorneys, accountants, consultants and small-business owners often move money among multiple entities. The case is a reminder that federal scrutiny can intensify when personal income and business operations blur, especially if records suggest money is being routed in ways that do not match tax filings.

Ibrahim had practiced law since 1994, which made the case especially notable for federal prosecutors. For local clients hiring attorneys or financial advisers, the warning signs are familiar: unexplained transfers, frequent self-payments, multiple entities with inconsistent reporting, and tax returns that do not match business activity. In this case, investigators said those signals pointed to a years-long effort to understate income, and the federal penalty showed how costly that kind of conduct can become.