Exclusive | NBA star, R&B legend make list of California’s top tax cheats as they allegedly owe hundreds of thousands to the state 48%

By Ross O'Keefe0%

6/23/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 37.3% saturation with 159 hits. Analysis detected 1,150 faulty-reasoning hits from 426 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49% and a BS Rank of 48% (11,513 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.60% of the article peer group.

Carlos Mencia isn’t the only celebrity in California’s tax crosshairs, a newly surfaced list of the state’s 500 biggest tax delinquents also names an R&B icon and a former NBA star among the high-profile names accused of owing major tax debts. 
NBA star Malik Beasley and singer Toni Braxton are on the California Franchise Tax Board's top 500 tax delinquencies list, owing monstrous unpaid sums to the state. 
He recently drew controversy as federal authorities announced investigation into alleged gambling activities while he played for the Milwaukee Bucks. 
The NBA then announced its own investigation into him. 
The results of the investigations are unclear yet. 
“An investigation is not a charge,” Beasley's attorney, Steve Haney, told ESPN. 
“Malik is afforded the same right of the presumption of innocence as anyone else under the U.S. 
Constitution. 
As of now he has not been charged with anything.” 
Beasley recently joined a Puerto Rican overseas team, Cangrejeros de Santurce, but was released last month. 
Braxton has had financial issues within the past few years, including getting hit with liens from federal and state authorities in 2017. 
She had immense success in the 90s, but fizzled out in the new century. 
She’s also admitted to having some lavish spending habits, forcing her to file for bankruptcy twice. 
“I love dishes and house things, so I kind of lost it a little bit on the houseware,” Braxton said to “Good Morning America.” 
In another instance, she filed bankruptcy because she got sick after she paid all her vendors for her Las Vegas residency. 
The Los Angeles DA's office mentioned Mencia's spot on the top 500 list Thursday. 
Los Angeles County DA Nathan Hochman branded Mencia one of the “500 greatest tax delinquents” after the comedian allegedly dodged filings for $8.7 million of his wealth over five years. 
Speaking at a press conference in downtown LA, the DA claimed Mencia was handed 78 warning notices after the state of California missed out on about $300,000 in taxes. 
Six of the counts against him were related to personal taxes, with the other six associated with his businesses between 2019 and 2024. 
If convicted, Mencia faces up to 10 years in prison. 
The jokester was arrested at his home in Encino at 7:05 a.m. 
Thursday by Hochman’s new Business Tax Fraud Unit he created to target tax crimes. 
The California Post reached out to reps for Beasley and Braxton for comment. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.6%Ross O'Keefe: 3.7%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic11.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.3%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 35.2%Ross O'Keefe: 11.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect35.2%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.8%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.8%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Ross O'Keefe: 0.7%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias2.3%This article: 37.3%Ross O'Keefe: 15.0%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias37.3%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.3%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Ross O'Keefe: 2.0%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error8.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.3%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 16.9%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias16.9%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 2.8%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem2.8%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.4%Ross O'Keefe: 5.2%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority24.4%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 2.3%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope2.3%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.6%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization9.6%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 18.1%Ross O'Keefe: 10.4%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion18.1%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 20.2%Ross O'Keefe: 3.1%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)20.2%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.8%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof2.8%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 8.9%Ross O'Keefe: 2.8%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal8.9%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 22.5%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)22.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.8%Ross O'Keefe: 4.6%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote2.8%This article: 6.3%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection6.3%This article: 21.1%Ross O'Keefe: 11.0%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice21.1%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.6%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.9%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

426 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers25%attributed speech318writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Haney • 12 words • 100.0% coverageSteve Haney • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Haney • 1 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Haney • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageToni Braxton • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageLos Angeles DA's office • 14 words • 0.0% coverageNathan Hochman • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Nathan Hochman

100%flagged-word coverage
30 attributed words28% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Biased Writer Voice-28.3 ptsWriter: 28.3%Nathan Hochman: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.5 ptsWriter: 8.5%Nathan Hochman: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.