FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Kansas Bookkeeper Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Clients and Failing to Pay Taxes

Nicole Clem admitted to wire fraud and failure to pay employment taxes, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 2, 2026, 2:01 p.m. ET
A Kansas businesswoman guilty on September 2, 2026, to defrauding customers of her bookkeeping company, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas. Nicole Clem, 43, of Augusta, guilty to one count of wire fraud and one count of failure to pay employment taxes, the office announced. Clem owned and operated Bookkeeping N Beyond, which provided accounting, tax preparation, and payroll services. Court documents state that she used Automated Clearing House (ACH) transfers to withdraw funds from clients' bank accounts that were meant for tax payments, but instead spent the money on personal expenses such as airline and concert tickets, hotels, restaurants, student loan payments, vehicle repairs, and essential oils. The investigation identified more than 20 clients with losses totaling more than $1 million, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. Clem also failed to accurately report her income to the IRS and did not pay $35,222 in employment taxes for her own business from 2017 to 2023, the office said. Sentencing is scheduled for December 2, 2026. The case is being investigated by IRS-Criminal Investigation and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Katie Andrusak.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 12 Sept 2026, 18:01current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.