FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 1 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

PUBLIC

In the matter of: 

Intuit Inc., Docket No. 9408 a corporation, 

Respondent. 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S OPPOSITION TO INTUIT INC.’S MOTION TO 

COMPEL CONCERNING COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S RESPONSES TO 

INTUIT’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 

As set out in Complaint Counsel’s Motion for Summary Decision, this case is 

about Intuit’s advertising of TurboTax using deceptive free claims. There is no mystery 

about Complaint Counsel’s theory of the case in this proceeding. Still, Intuit has filed a 

Motion to Compel (“MTC”) seeking supplemental interrogatory responses from 

Complaint Counsel related to evidence Complaint Counsel has gathered in its 

investigation and this proceeding, most of which is already in Intuit’s possession, and 

seeking to compel Complaint Counsel to provide analysis of documents in Intuit’s 

possession. Complaint Counsel has already provided detailed and proper responses, 

subject to proper objections, to Intuit’s interrogatories and has provided Intuit with 

ample and transparent information for it to conduct discovery. 

“The purpose of interrogatories is to narrow the issues and thus help determine 

what evidence will be needed at trial . . . .” In re TK-7 Corp., 1990 FTC LEXIS 20, *1-2 

(F.T.C. March 9, 1990). See also In the Matter of Aspen Technology, Inc., 2003 FTC LEXIS 

195, *5-6 (F.T.C. Dec. 23, 2003). Complaint Counsel has provided Intuit with detailed 

information narrowing the issues for trial, including with its fully briefed Motion for 

Summary Decision. Discovery is ongoing and requiring Complaint Counsel to 

supplement its responses would create an undue burden. Intuit’s motion should be 

denied. 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 2 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

I. Factual Background 

Discovery in this matter is ongoing. Intuit served Complaint Counsel with its 

First Set of Interrogatories1 on August 19, 2022. MTC Ex. A. Complaint Counsel 

provided its written responses and objections on September 19, 2022. MTC Ex. B. On 

September 12, 2022, Complaint Counsel served Intuit with its First Set of Requests for 

Production. Plett Declaration (“PD”) ¶5, Ex. A. On October 14, 2022, Complaint Counsel 

served Intuit with its Second Set of Requests for Production and its First Set of 

Interrogatories. PD ¶¶10-11, Ex. B & C. On October 14, 2022, Complaint Counsel also 

issued subpoenas to third party advertising agencies to collect information about 

Intuit’s advertising. PD ¶12. Intuit has issued subpoenas to 383 consumers, including 

for the production of documents. PD ¶¶13-15. 

Much of the discovery Complaint Counsel is seeking from Intuit and third 

parties relates to Intuit’s advertising. For example, Complaint Counsel has asked Intuit 

to identify “each materially different Advertisement” for a certain timeframe, and to 

produce “[a] copy of each unique TurboTax advertisement that uses or used any of the 

following words: “free,” “zero,” “$0,” “no cost,” or “gratis.” See Ex. A & C. Complaint 

Counsel is also seeking information from Intuit about consumer complaints. See Ex. A 

(seeking “documents related to complaints or negative feedback from consumers or 

potential consumers who expected to file their taxes for free using TurboTax but were 

not eligible to do so”). Most of this discovery is still outstanding. 

Intuit has already received extensive discovery about Complaint Counsel’s 

evidence in this case. On April 21, 2022, Complaint Counsel provided Intuit with over 

600 documents related to consumer complaints. PD ¶4. On September 14, 2022, 

Complaint Counsel provided Intuit with a set of relevant consumer complaints as part 

of its initial disclosures. PD ¶6. On September 19, 2022, Complaint Counsel 

1 Complaint Counsel understands Intuit’s motion to be limited to its First Set of 

Requests Interrogatories, the only Interrogatories that Intuit and Complaint Counsel 

have met and conferred about. 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 3 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

supplemented these disclosures with an additional set of consumer complaints. PD ¶7. 

In nearly every instance, these complaints include the consumer’s complaint narrative. 

PD ¶8, see also, e.g., Complaint Counsel’s Reply to Respondent Intuit Inc.’s 

Supplemental Response to the Statement of Material Facts as to Which There is No 

Genuine Issue for Trial, Attach. A. On October 13, 2022, Complaint Counsel provided 

Intuit with many external communications between consumers and complaint counsel, 

including documents provided by consumers in support of their complaints. PD ¶9. 

II. Complaint Counsel Has Provided Complete Responses to Intuit’s

Interrogatories, Subject to Proper Objections. 

Intuit claims that Complaint Counsel’s responses to certain interrogatories are 

deficient. First, Intuit argues Complaint Counsel’s response to Interrogatory 1 seeking 

information about those advertisements that Complaint Counsel contends are deceptive 

is insufficient because Complaint Counsel identifies what Intuit calls a “small” number 

of advertisements, along with all substantially similar ads.2 MTC at 2. However, 

Complaint Counsel provided a detailed response identifying dozens of deceptive ads. 

MTC Ex. B at 7-8. Moreover, the incorporation of “substantially similar” ads provides 

Intuit with sufficient information to understand which ads Complaint Counsel alleges 

are deceptive. As Intuit has acknowledged, identifying “substantially similar” 

advertisements is definite and allows Intuit to identify relevant ads. See MTC Ex. E, 

Section III.G (multistate settlement prohibiting Intuit from publishing ads that are 

“substantially similar” to those identified in an appendix). Finally, discovery is ongoing, 

and Complaint Counsel is seeking additional information about Intuit’s 

advertisements.3 

2 Interrogatory 1 asks Complaint Counsel to “IDENTIFY every ADVERTISEMENT OR 

COMMUNICATION by INTUIT regarding TURBOTAX FREE EDITION that YOU 

claim in this lawsuit to be deceptive.” MTC Ex. A. 

3 Many of Intuit’s interrogatories are premature contention interrogatories, and 

Complaint Counsel objected to the interrogatories on those grounds. See MTC Ex. B. Per 

Rule 3.35(b)(2), contention interrogatories “need not be answered until after designated 

discovery has been completed.” See also In re Impax Labs., Inc., 2017 FTC LEXIS 82, *6-7 

(continued) 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 4 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Next, Intuit claims that Complaint Counsel’s identification of the net impression 

and materiality for the set of deceptive ads (rather than each ad) is deficient. MTC 3-4. 

But Complaint Counsel has provided a complete answer to Intuit’s Interrogatory. The 

net impression and the materiality for the ads identified, and substantially similar ads, 

is the same, and Complaint Counsel has cited to evidence in its possession supporting 

those positions.4 Creating an appendix with duplicative entries that state the same 

response imposes burden without “narrow[ing] the issues” or facilitating Intuit’s 

discovery. See In re TK-7 Corp., 1990 FTC LEXIS 20, *1-2 (F.T.C. March 9, 1990). 

III. Intuit Can Derive Information from Documents Produced by Complaint 

Counsel 

Intuit also takes issue with Complaint Counsel’s responses that identify, rather 

than analyze, consumer complaint records.5 It seeks to impose on Complaint Counsel 

the obligation to review consumer complaint records to identify complaints 

corresponding to its specific interrogatories, even though the complaint records 

containing the information are in Intuit’s possession. The burden of conducting this 

analysis is equal for Complaint Counsel and Intuit. 

Commission Rule 3.35(c) allows a party to “specify records from which answers 

to interrogatories may be derived or ascertained” if the “burden of deriving or 

ascertaining the answer is substantially the same for the party serving the interrogatory 

(F.T.C. June 12, 2017). Intuit’s attempt, with its Motion, to limit Complaint Counsel to 

evidence in Complaint Counsel’s possession before the end of discovery is improper. 

4 Intuit seems to imply that Complaint Counsel’s only response to Interrogatory 3 was

to point Intuit to “discussion of materiality in CC’s Motion for Summary Decision,” 

MTC at 4. But Complaint Counsel referenced its discussion and the related exhibits, 

along with other evidence of materiality, including Intuit’s own documents. 

5 Without pointing to any pleading or other evidence to support its assertion, Intuit 

also claims that Complaint Counsel alleges, and Intuit is entitled to discovery related to, 

whether “consumers viewing Intuit’s deceptive advertising believe that TurboTax is 

free for all taxpayers.” MTC at 5 (emphasis added). However, that is not what 

Complaint Counsel has alleged, and Intuit has not pointed to any evidence to the 

contrary. Intuit is not entitled to discovery related to allegations Complaint Counsel did 

not make. In re HomeAdvisor, Inc., 2022 FTC LEXIS 65, *3 (F.T.C. August 29, 2022)

(“Respondent’s contrary arguments in its Motion misconstrue the record, are 

unpersuasive, and are rejected.”). 

4 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 5 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

as for the party served.” 16 C.F.R. § 3.35(c); see also In re North Texas Specialty Physicians, 

2004 FTC LEXIS 12 (F.T.C. Jan. 21, 2004), *3-4 (denying a motion to compel where the 

“burden of deriving or ascertaining the answers” from a database produced in 

discovery was “substantially the same” for both parties); In re Tronox Ltd., 2018 FTC 

LEXIS 99, *3 (F.T.C. May 31, 2018). 

Complaint Counsel provided Intuit with the consumer complaint information in 

its possession over 5 weeks ago, including the complaint narratives upon which any 

analysis would be based. PD ¶¶ 6-8. Intuit can equally review the complaint records 

provided to identify consumers who, for example, complained about Intuit’s free 

advertising or about the amount of time they spent using TurboTax before realizing 

they could not file their taxes for free. In fact, Intuit’s claim that many complaints are 

not relevant, see MTC at 5 n.2, suggests that it has already conducted a thorough review 

of the records. To the extent consumers provided Complaint Counsel with documents 

supporting their complaints, Complaint Counsel has produced substantially all such 

documents to Intuit. Finally, Complaint Counsel is still in the process of seeking 

additional discovery from Intuit about consumer complaints, since Intuit is likely the 

recipient of the most complaints about its products, and likely possesses the most 

accurate information about consumers who used TurboTax. 

IV. Complaint Counsel Is Not Required to Speculate About or Analyze Intuit’s 

Potential Future Ads 

Intuit’s remaining objections to Complaint Counsel’s interrogatory responses 

center around its demand that Complaint Counsel conduct a review of Intuit’s current 

and future ads and, in conjunction with the terms of Intuit’s settlement with the states, 

provide legal analysis of both. The information Intuit seeks is not only irrelevant but 

also work product and seeks to impose on Complaint Counsel the burden of conducting 

a compliance review of Intuit’s advertising practices. Complaint Counsel is not required 

to conduct such a review. 

5 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 6 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Discovery must be “reasonably expected to yield information relevant to the 

allegations of the complaint, to the proposed relief, or to the defense of any 

respondent.” 16 C.F.R. § 3.31(c)(1). See In re Basic Research, LLC, 2004 FTC LEXIS 210, *2 

(F.T.C. November 4, 2004). As an initial matter, Intuit’s settlement with the states is 

entirely irrelevant to this proceeding, an argument raised in Complaint Counsel’s 

responses and objections that Intuit’s Motion to Compel ignores. Even so, in the spirit of 

providing Intuit with information it claims it needs for discovery, subject to properly 

lodged objections, Complaint Counsel responded to Intuit’s Interrogatories and 

identified, with specificity, the infirmities with the multistate settlement and additional 

relief Complaint Counsel is seeking in this proceeding. MTC Ex. B at 25-26, 32-33. 

But Intuit wants more. It seeks to have Complaint Counsel provide legal analysis 

of its current and any potential future advertising, propounding interrogatories that are 

vague, overbroad, and call for speculation. Though Intuit claims its interrogatories 

merely seek to have Complaint Counsel “identify alleged specific deficiencies with its 

current advertising,” MTC at 7, that is not the case. For example, Intuit’s Interrogatory 

13 requests that Complaint Counsel “IDENTIFY ANY circumstances in which ANY 

ADVERTISEMENT that complies with the AG SETTLEMENT would be false, 

misleading, OR deceptive” MTC Ex. A (emphasis added). This Interrogatory is not 

limited to a particular party (for example, Intuit), advertising for a particular product 

(for example, TurboTax) or any particular medium (for example TikTok).6 In fact, it 

does not refer to Intuit’s current advertising at all and is vastly overbroad. 

Even assuming Intuit intended to limit its interrogatories to its own advertising, 

or even to its advertising for TurboTax, the interrogatories would require Complaint 

6 Interrogatory 14 is similarly overbroad and vague, requiring Complaint Counsel to 

“IDENTIFY ANY circumstances in which ANY ADVERTISEMENT that complies with 

the AG SETTLEMENT would violate Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission 

Act.” MTC Ex. A. 

6 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 7 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Counsel to hazard guesses about how Intuit may advertise and calls for speculation.7 

Complaint Counsel is not required to provide answers to such speculative questions. 

See In re Basic Research, LLC 2004 FTC LEXIS 210, *6 (F.T.C. November 4, 2004) (denying 

a motion to compel that would have required Complaint Counsel to provide 

“speculative” answers to interrogatories). To the extent Intuit believes it needs 

information about whether Complaint Counsel considers its advertising to be 

deceptive, Complaint Counsel already identified such advertisements in response to 

Interrogatory 1, and in its Motion for Summary Decision and related filings. Intuit has 

all the information it needs to prepare its defenses and determine whether its current 

advertising is deceptive. 

Additionally, Intuit’s interrogatories require Complaint Counsel to conduct a 

two-part analysis that would be squarely work product. The predicate of some of 

Intuit’s Interrogatories (for example, Interrogatories 13 and 14) is that Complaint 

Counsel should imagine or consider advertisements and determine whether they 

comply with the multistate settlement. After such analysis, Complaint Counsel must 

then consider how the ads may still be deceptive. Requiring Complaint Counsel to 

assess whether an advertisement that does not exist is compliant with a multistate 

settlement to which the FTC is not a party is not only irrelevant, but it would also 

require Complaint Counsel to disclose legal analysis and mental impressions that are 

clearly work product. In re Lab. Corp. of Am., 2011 FTC LEXIS 30, *9 (F.T.C. February 24, 

7 Complaint Counsel has identified a plethora of what it contends is deceptive past 

advertising and described, in detail, why it is deceptive. See Complaint Counsel’s 

Motion for Summary Decision. Past advertising is particularly probative in an 

adjudicative proceeding pending before the Commission which was occasioned when a 

“corporation has been or is using any ... deceptive act or practice in or affecting

commerce.” 15 U.S.C. § 45(b) (emphasis added). Moreover, to the extent Intuit has 

identified its current advertising, Complaint Counsel included it in its response to 

Interrogatory 1. See MTC Ex. B at 8 (referring to RX 5, 9, and 10, which Intuit has 

presented as “current” advertising, at least as of late August 2022. See Declaration of 

Cathleen Ryan in Support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Complaint Counsel’s Motion for 

Summary Decision, at ¶¶ 36, 42, 44). Complaint Counsel is seeking other current 

responsive advertising in discovery. 

7 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 8 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

2011) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)) (“[T]he court shall protect against disclosure of 

the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other 

representative of a party concerning the litigation.”). Work product must only be 

disclosed where the party seeking such materials “has substantial need of the materials 

in the preparation of its case and that the party is unable without undue hardship to 

obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.” 16 C.F.R. 3.31(c)(5); 

see also In re Aspen Technology Inc., 2003 FTC LEXIS 195, *4 (F.T.C. December 23, 2003). 

Intuit has not established any “substantial need” that justifies requiring Complaint 

Counsel to conduct and disclose legal analysis in this way. 

V. Conclusion 

For the foregoing reasons Intuit’s Motion to Compel should be denied. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: October 26, 2022 /s/ Rebecca Plett 

Roberto Anguizola, IL Bar No. 6270874 

Rebecca Plett, VA Bar No. 90988 

James Evans, VA Bar No. 83866 

Sara Tonnesen, MD Bar No. 1312190241 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, CC-6316 

Washington, DC 20580

(202) 326-3284 / ranguizola@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-3664 / rplett@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-2026 / james.evans@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-2879 / stonnesen@ftc.gov 

Counsel Supporting the Complaint

Federal Trade Commission 

8 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 9 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on October 26, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing 

Complaint Counsel’s Opposition to Intuit Inc.’s Motion to Compel electronically using 

the FTC’s E-Filing system, which will send notification of such filing to: 

April Tabor

Office of the Secretary

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Suite CC-5610 

Washington, DC 20580

ElectronicFilings@ftc.gov 

Secretary of the Commission

Clerk of the Court 

Hon. D. Michael Chappell

Chief Administrative Law Judge

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Suite H-110 

Washington, DC 20580 

Administrative Law Judge 

I further certify that on October 26, 2022, I caused the foregoing document to be 

served via email on: 

David Z. Gringer 

Phoebe Silos 

Charles Bridge

Eleanor Davis 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

7 World Trade Center 

250 Greenwich Street 

New York, NY 10007

David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com

Phoebe.Silos@wilmerhale.com

Charles.Bridge@wilmerhale.com

Eleanor.Davis@wilmerhale.com 

(212) 230-8800 

Shelby Martin 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2600 

Denver, CO 80202

Shelby.Martin@wilmerhale.com 

(720) 274-3135 

Katherine Mackey

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

60 State Street 

Boston, MA 02109

Katherine.Mackey@wilmerhale.com

(617) 526-6000 

Jonathan E. Paikin 

Jennifer Milici 

Derek A. Woodman 

Vinecia Perkins 

Andres Salinas 

Spencer Todd

Jocelyn Berteaud

Benjamin Chapin

Margaret (Molly) Dillaway

Reade Jacob 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP

1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20006

Jonathan.Paikin@wilmerhale.com 

Jennifer.Milici@wilmerhale.com

Derek.Woodman@wilmerhale.com

Vinecia.Perkins@wilmerhale.com 

Andres.Salinas@wilmerhale.com 

Spencer.Todd@wilmerhale.com

Joss.Berteaud@wilmerhale.com

Benjamin.Chapin@wilmerhale.com 

Molly.Dillaway@wilmerhale.com 

Reade.Jacob@wilmerhale.com 

(202) 663-6000 

Attorneys for Respondent, Intuit Inc. 

/s/ Rebecca Plett 

Rebecca Plett 

9 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 10 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

PUBLIC

In the matter of: 

Intuit Inc., Docket No. 9408 a corporation, 

Respondent. 

DECLARATION OF REBECCA PLETT IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT 

COUNSEL’S OPPOSITION TO INTUIT INC.’S MOTION TO COMPEL 

CONCERNING COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S RESPONSES TO INTUIT’S 

FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 

I, Rebecca Plett, have personal knowledge of the facts and matters set forth below. If 

called as a witness, I could and would testify as follows: 

1. I am one of the counsel supporting the Complaint in In re Intuit Inc., 

Docket No. 9408, an adjudicative proceeding pending before the Federal Trade 

Commission. 

2. I am over twenty-one years old and am a citizen of the United States. I am 

a member in good standing of the Virginia State Bar (Bar No. 90988). My business 

address is 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Mailstop CC-6316, Washington, DC 20580. 

3. I submit this declaration in support of Complaint Counsel’s Opposition to 

Intuit Inc.’s Motion to Compel Concerning Responses to Intuit’s First Set of 

Interrogatories. 

4. On April 21, 2022, Complaint Counsel served its initial disclosures on 

Intuit Inc. These initial disclosures included over 600 documents related to consumer 

complaints. 

5. On September 12, 2022, Complaint Counsel served Intuit with Complaint 

Counsel’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents. A true and correct copy of 

that document is attached as Exhibit A. 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 11 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

6. On September 14, 2022, pursuant to its obligation to supplement initial 

disclosures, Complaint Counsel served Intuit with complaints from 228 consumers that 

are relevant to this matter. 

7. On September 19, 2022, Complaint Counsel supplemented its initial 

disclosures and provided Intuit with complaints from an additional 161 consumers 

relevant to this matter. 

8. In nearly every instance, the complaints provided, as discussed in the two 

preceding paragraphs, included a complaint narrative, in the consumer’s words, 

describing their experience or complaint about Intuit and/or TurboTax. 

9. On October 13, 2022, Complaint Counsel produced 1,247 non-privileged, 

responsive documents to Intuit. These documents reflect most of Complaint Counsel’s 

non-privileged communications with third parties, including with consumers. 

10. On October 14, 2022, Complaint Counsel served Intuit with its Second Set 

of Requests for Production of Documents. A true and correct copy of that document is 

attached as Exhibit B. 

11. On October 14, 2022, Complaint Counsel served Intuit with its First Set of 

Interrogatories. A true and correct copy of that document is attached as Exhibit C. 

12. On October 14, 2022, Complaint Counsel served subpoenas duces tecum 

on four of the advertising agencies that Complaint Counsel understands have 

performed work for Intuit related to its advertising. Among other things, the subpoenas 

seek “a copy of each materially different Advertisement for TurboTax that the 

Company played a role in disseminating, developing, creating, executing, evaluating, 

testing, or approving.” 

13. On September 1, 2022, counsel for Intuit provided Complaint Counsel 

with copies of subpoenas to 42 consumers for deposition testimony, trial testimony, and 

the production of documents 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 12 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC

14. October 7, 2022, counsel for Intuit provided Complaint Counsel with 

copies of subpoenas to an additional 24 third-party consumers. 

15. On October 17, counsel for Intuit provided Complaint Counsel with 

copies of 317 subpoenas duces tecum it issued to consumers. Among other things, the 

subpoenas seek “DOCUMENTS sufficient to show the amount of time YOU spent 

visiting the TURBOTAX WEBSITE from January 2015 to present” and “All 

DOCUMENTS sufficient to show all ADVERTISEMENTS that YOU have seen OR 

received from ANY online tax preparation companies from January 2015 to present.” 

I declare that the foregoing is true and correct under penalty of perjury. 

Dated: October 26, 2022 /s/ Rebecca Plett 

Durham, North Carolina Roberto Anguizola, IL Bar No. 6270874 

Rebecca Plett, VA Bar No. 90988 

James Evans, VA Bar No. 83866 

Sara Tonnesen, MD Bar No. 1312190241 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, CC-6316 

Washington, DC 20580

(202) 326-3284 / ranguizola@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-3664 / rplett@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-2026 / james.evans@ftc.gov 

(202) 326-2879 / stonnesen@ftc.gov 

Counsel Supporting the Complaint

Federal Trade Commission 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 13 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Exhibit A
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 14 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

PUBLIC

In the Matter of: Docket No. 9408 

Intuit Inc., a corporation. 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S FIRST REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF 

DOCUMENTS TO INTUIT INC. 

 Pursuant to Rule 3.37 of the Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice 

for Adjudicative Proceedings, Complaint Counsel requests that Respondent 

Intuit Inc. (“Intuit”) produce the items and documents specified below. 

INSTRUCTIONS 

1. Response; objections: Within 21 days of service of this request, you are 

required to: (1) confer about the format for the production of electronically stored 

information; and (2) serve a written response to this request on Complaint Counsel 

stating, with respect to each item or category, that inspection and related activities 

will be permitted as requested, unless the request is objected to, in which event the 

reasons for the objection shall be stated. If objection is made to part of an item or 

category, the part shall be specified and inspection permitted of the remaining parts. 

The response may state an objection to a requested form for producing electronically 

stored information. If you object to a requested form - or if no form was specified in 

the request – you must state the form you intend to use. Within five days of serving 

your objections, if any, to this request you shall meet and confer with Complaint 

Counsel to attempt to resolve such disputes. 

2. Time, Place, and Manner for Production: Electronic copies of the items 

requested below are to be produced by Tuesday, October 11, 2022, by transmitting 

them to Complaint Counsel via secure file transfer. When you are ready to transmit 

the items requested below, please email Complaint Counsel at: ranguizola@ftc.gov; 

jevans1@ftc.gov; and rplett@ftc.gov, and we will send you an invitation to transmit 

the items via the FTC secure file transfer system. All items requested must be 

produced as they were kept in the usual course of business or must be organized 

and labeled to correspond to the categories in this request. If production of the 

requested items at the time, place, and manner set forth above is not possible, please 

contact Complaint Counsel Roberto Anguizola at (202) 326-3284, James Evans at 

(202) 326-2026, or Rebecca Plett at (202) 326-3664, no later than Friday, October 7, 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 15 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

2022, to discuss an alternate time, place, or manner for production of the requested 

items. 

3. Applicable Time Period: Unless otherwise specified, the time period 

covered by each request below shall be from November 1, 2020, through the date of 

your complete compliance with these requests. Documents originating before this 

period but referring or relating to actions or conduct within the period should be 

included in your production response(s). If after the date of production, you become 

aware of additional responsive documents, you should produce those documents to 

Complaint Counsel. 

4. If any documents responsive to a document request have been previously 

produced to the Commission during the course of its investigation, In re Intuit 

Matter No. 1923119, you shall identify the document(s) previously provided and 

the date of submission instead of re-submitting the document(s). Identification 

shall be by Bates number if the documents were so numbered when submitted, 

or by author, date, and subject matter if not so numbered, and shall specify to 

which request(s) they are responsive. Documents that may be responsive to more 

than one request need not be submitted more than once; however, your response 

shall indicate, for each document submitted, each document request to which the 

document is responsive. 

5. A complete copy of each document should be submitted even if only a 

portion of the document is within the terms of the document request. The 

document shall not be edited, cut, or expunged and shall include all covering 

letters and memoranda, transmittal slips, appendices, tables, or other 

attachments. 

6. If any of the responsive documents are in the form of ESI, please produce 

these documents in their existing, native formats. 

7. If any requested material is withheld based on a claim of privilege, 

submit, together with such claim, a schedule of items withheld that states 

individually for each item withheld: (a) the nature of the document; (b) the 

identity of the person who created the document; (c) the identity of the person to 

whom the document was directed; (d) the subject matter of the document; (e) the 

date of the document; (f) the identity of all parties who executed the document; 

(g) the nature of the privilege which you claim; and (h) the custodian of the 

document. 

8. As used herein, the singular form of a noun or pronoun shall be 

considered to include within its meaning the plural form of the noun or pronoun 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 16 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

so used, and vice versa; the use of the masculine form of a pronoun shall be 

considered to include also within its meaning the feminine form of the pronoun 

so used, and vice versa; the use of any tense of any verb shall be considered to 

include within its meaning all other tenses of the verb so used; and the use of 

“and” shall be considered to include “or,” and vice versa. 

DEFINITIONS 

Notwithstanding any definition below, each word, term, or phrase used in 

these requests is intended to have the broadest meaning permitted under the 

Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice. 

1. “Advertisement” or “Advertising” or “Ad” means any written or verbal 

statement, illustration, or depiction that promotes the sale or use of a good or service 

or is designed to increase consumer interest in a brand, good, or service. Advertising 

media covered by this definition includes but is not limited to: packaging and 

labeling; promotional materials; print, including direct mail; television, including 

short form TV ads and infomercials; radio; video advertisements, including 

YouTube ads and ads disseminated through streaming services, and internet, social 

media, and other digital content, including banner advertisements and web pages, 

mobile networks and applications. 

2. “Any” shall be construed to include the word “all,” and the word “all” shall 

be construed to include the word “any.” 

3. “Company,” “You,” or “Your” means Intuit Inc., its wholly or partially 

owned subsidiaries, unincorporated divisions, joint ventures, operations under 

assumed names, and affiliates, and all directors, officers, members, employees, 

agents, consultants, and other persons working for or on behalf of the foregoing. 

4. “Document” or “Documents” are synonymous in meaning and equal in 

scope to the usage of the terms as defined by 16 C.F.R. 3.34(b), and includes, without 

limitation, the complete original and any non-identical copy (whether different from 

the original because of notations on the copy or otherwise), regardless of origin or 

location, of any written, typed, printed, transcribed, filmed, punched, or graphic 

matter of every type and description, however and by whomever prepared, 

produced, disseminated or made, including, but not limited to, any advertisement, 

book, pamphlet, periodical, contract, correspondence, communication, file, invoice, 

memorandum, note, telegram, report, record, handwritten note, working paper, 

routing slip, chart, graph, paper, index, map, tabulation, manual, guide, outline, 

script, abstract, history, calendar, diary, journal, agenda, minute, code book, or label. 

“Document” shall also include electronically stored information (“ESI”). ESI means 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 17 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

the complete original and any nonidentical copy (whether different from the original 

because of notations, different metadata, or otherwise), regardless of origin or 

location, of any electronically created or stored information, including, but not 

limited to, electronic mail, instant messaging, videoconferencing, and other 

electronic correspondence (whether active, archived, or in a deleted items folder), 

word processing files, spreadsheets, databases, and sound recordings, whether 

stored on cards, magnetic or electronic tapes, disks, computer files, computer or 

other drives, cell phones, Blackberry, PDA, or other storage media, and such 

technical assistance or instructions as will enable conversion of such ESI into a 

reasonably usable form. 

5. “Each” shall be construed to include “every,” and “every” shall be construed 

to include “each.” 

6. “Relating to” or “Regarding” means discussing, describing, reflecting, 

referring, containing, analyzing, studying, reporting, commenting, evidencing, 

constituting, setting forth, considering, recommending, concerning, or pertaining to, 

in whole or in part. 

7. “TurboTax” means any income tax preparation product or service offered 

by Intuit using the TurboTax brand or mark. 

DOCUMENTS REQUESTED 

Produce the following Documents: 

1. A copy of each unique TurboTax advertisement that uses or used any of the 

following words: “free,” “zero,” “$0,” “no cost,” or “gratis.” 

2. All documents relating to any aspect of the creation, development, approval, 

modification, execution, or evaluation of any advertisement responsive to Request 

for Production 1, including client briefs, creative briefs, research analyses, point of 

views, story boards, call reports, meeting reports, or other contact reports. 

3. All documents relating to the advertising and marketing strategy associated 

with any advertisement responsive to Request for Production 1. 

4. All documents relating to data on, or analysis of, consumer perception, 

comprehension, or recall (including copy tests, focus groups, marketing or consumer 

surveys and reports, penetration tests, recall tests, audience reaction tests, a/b tests, 

multivariate tests, and communication tests) of any advertisement responsive to 

Request for Production 1. 

4 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 18 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

5. All documents, without regard to the applicable time period, relating to the 

TurboTax “Power of Free” advertising campaign. 

6. All documents, without regard to the applicable time period, relating to 

TurboTax Super Bowl advertisements that used any of the following words: “free,” 

“zero,” “$0,” “no cost,” or “gratis.” 

7. All documents relating to the creation, content, placement, use, approval, 

modification, or rejection of any disclaimers or disclosures used in any 

advertisement responsive to Requests for Production 1. 

8. For any advertisement responsive Request for Production 1, documents 

sufficient to show the beginning and ending dates of dissemination, audience size, 

and the times and locations the ads were disseminated. 

9. For print ads responsive Request for Production 1, produce documents 

sufficient to show every publication in which the ads were disseminated. 

10. For video, television and radio ads responsive Request for Production 1, 

documents sufficient to show every network, system, streaming service, or station in 

which the ads were disseminated. 

11. For internet ads responsive Request for Production 1, documents sufficient to 

show the platform used (e.g., mobile, desktop); its successfulness in driving traffic to 

the TurboTax website (e.g., click-through rates per ad, keyword or campaign; traffic 

and cost statistic per ad, keyword or campaign; impressions; quality scores; cross 

device conversion rates); and the URL of the landing page each advertisement 

directed the consumer to. 

12. For any advertisement responsive Request for Production 1, documents 

sufficient to identify the cost of each advertisement. 

13. For any advertisement responsive Request for Production 1, documents 

sufficient to identify the revenue directly or indirectly derived from each 

advertisement. 

14. Documents relating to the return on investment (ROI) or monetization of 

TurboTax advertisements that use or used any of the following words: “free,” 

“zero,” “$0,” “no cost,” or “gratis” or customers acquired by the company through 

such ads. 

5 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 19 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

15. All documents regarding the use of the phrase “simple U.S. tax returns” in 

TurboTax advertisements, including on websites. 

16. Copies of all materially different consumer-facing popups or websites 

describing Intuit’s eligibility restrictions for using a TurboTax product or service for 

free. 

17. Copies of all materially different websites that include the terms “for simple 

U.S. returns only,” “for simple returns,” “simple tax returns,” or “see why it’s free.” 

18. All documents relating to data on, or analysis of, consumer perception, 

comprehension, or recall (including copy tests, focus groups, marketing or consumer 

surveys and reports, penetration tests, recall tests, audience reaction tests, a/b tests, 

multivariate tests, and communication tests) about the cost of TurboTax products or 

services. 

19. All documents related to complaints or negative feedback from consumers or 

potential consumers who expected to file their taxes for free using TurboTax but 

were not eligible to do so. 

20. All documents related to employee complaints or negative employee 

feedback regarding the TurboTax advertisements that use the terms “free,” “zero,” 

“$0,” “no cost,” or “gratis.” 

21. Documents sufficient to show each different customer service script or 

frequently asked questions (FAQs) used by the company to communicate with 

consumers or potential consumers who expected to file their taxes for free using 

TurboTax but were not eligible to do so, and the time period during which each 

script or FAQ was used. 

22. All data pertaining to customers and potential customers who interacted with 

a free TurboTax offer or product or service, as contained in your customer 

relationship management database (“CRM”), or any database(s) used to maintain 

customer and potential customer information, feedback, complaints and/or sales. 

23. The schema for any CRM or other database containing the data requested in 

Request for Production 22, including tables, fields, and relationships between tables 

and fields used in those databases. 

24. Data related to negative consumer feedback or complaints about free offers 

pertaining to TurboTax, including data that is not captured in your CRM. 

6 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 20 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC

25. All documents related to any arbitration filed against Intuit related to free 

offers pertaining to TurboTax. 

Dated: September 12, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

s/Rebecca Plett 

Roberto Anguizola 

Rebecca Plett 

James Evans 

Complaint Counsel 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Telephone: 202-326-3664 

Email: rplett@ftc.gov 

7 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 21 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that on September 12, 2022, I caused the foregoing 

Complaint Counsel’s First Requests for Production of Documents to Intuit Inc., 

to be served via email on: 

David Z. Gringer 

Phoebe Silos 

Charles Bridge

Eleanor Davis 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

7 World Trade Center 

250 Greenwich Street 

New York, NY 10007 

David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com

Phoebe.Silos@wilmerhale.com 

Charles.Bridge@wilmerhale.com

Eleanor.Davis@wilmerhale.com 

(212) 230-8800 

Shelby Martin 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2600 

Denver, CO 80202 

Shelby.Martin@wilmerhale.com 

(720) 274-3135 

Katherine Mackey

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

60 State Street 

Boston, MA 02109 

Katherine.Mackey@wilmerhale.com

(617) 526-6000 

Jonathan E. Paikin 

Jennifer Milici 

Derek A. Woodman 

Vinecia Perkins 

Andres Salinas 

Spencer Todd

Jocelyn Berteaud

Benjamin Chapin

Margaret (Molly) Dillaway

Reade Jacob 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20006

Jonathan.Paikin@wilmerhale.com 

Jennifer.Milici@wilmerhale.com 

Derek.Woodman@wilmerhale.com 

Vinecia.Perkins@wilmerhale.com 

Andres.Salinas@wilmerhale.com 

Spencer.Todd@wilmerhale.com

Joss.Berteaud@wilmerhale.com 

Benjamin.Chapin@wilmerhale.com 

Molly.Dillaway@wilmerhale.com 

Reade.Jacob@wilmerhale.com 

(202) 663-6000 

Attorneys for Respondent, Intuit Inc. 

/s/ Rebecca Plett 

Rebecca Plett 

8 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 22 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Exhibit B
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 23 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

PUBLIC

In the Matter of: Docket No. 9408 

Intuit Inc., a corporation. 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR 

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO INTUIT INC. 

 Pursuant to Rule 3.37 of the Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice 

for Adjudicative Proceedings, Complaint Counsel requests that Respondent 

Intuit Inc. (“Intuit”) produce the items and documents specified below. 

INSTRUCTIONS 

1. Response; objections: Within 21 days of service of this request, you are 

required to: (1) confer about the format for the production of electronically stored 

information; and (2) serve a written response to this request on Complaint Counsel 

stating, with respect to each item or category, that inspection and related activities 

will be permitted as requested, unless the request is objected to, in which event the 

reasons for the objection shall be stated. If objection is made to part of an item or 

category, the part shall be specified and inspection permitted of the remaining parts. 

The response may state an objection to a requested form for producing electronically 

stored information. If you object to a requested form - or if no form was specified in 

the request – you must state the form you intend to use. Within five days of serving 

your objections, if any, to this request you shall meet and confer with Complaint 

Counsel to attempt to resolve such disputes. 

2. Time, Place, and Manner for Production: Electronic copies of the items 

requested below are to be produced by Monday, November 14, 2022, by 

transmitting them to Complaint Counsel via secure file transfer. When you are ready 

to transmit the items requested below, please email Complaint Counsel at: 

ranguizola@ftc.gov; jevans1@ftc.gov; and rplett@ftc.gov, and we will send you an 

invitation to transmit the items via the FTC secure file transfer system. All items 

requested must be produced as they were kept in the usual course of business or 

must be organized and labeled to correspond to the categories in this request. If 

production of the requested items at the time, place, and manner set forth above is 

not possible, please contact Complaint Counsel Roberto Anguizola at (202) 326-3284, 

James Evans at (202) 326-2026, or Rebecca Plett at (202) 326-3664, no later than 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 24 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Thursday, November 10, 2022, to discuss an alternate time, place, or manner for 

production of the requested items. 

3. Applicable Time Period: Unless otherwise specified, the time period 

covered by each request below shall be from November 1, 2020, through the date of 

your complete compliance with these requests. Documents originating before this 

period but referring or relating to actions or conduct within the period should be 

included in your production response(s). If after the date of production, you become 

aware of additional responsive documents, you should produce those documents to 

Complaint Counsel. 

4. If any documents responsive to a document request have been previously 

produced to the Commission during the course of its investigation, In re Intuit 

Matter No. 1923119, you shall identify the document(s) previously provided and 

the date of submission instead of re-submitting the document(s). Identification 

shall be by Bates number if the documents were so numbered when submitted, 

or by author, date, and subject matter if not so numbered, and shall specify to 

which request(s) they are responsive. Documents that may be responsive to more 

than one request need not be submitted more than once; however, your response 

shall indicate, for each document submitted, each document request to which the 

document is responsive. 

5. A complete copy of each document should be submitted even if only a 

portion of the document is within the terms of the document request. The 

document shall not be edited, cut, or expunged and shall include all covering 

letters and memoranda, transmittal slips, appendices, tables, or other 

attachments. 

6. If any of the responsive documents are in the form of ESI, please produce 

these documents in their existing, native formats. 

7. If any requested material is withheld based on a claim of privilege, 

submit, together with such claim, a schedule of items withheld that states 

individually for each item withheld: (a) the nature of the document; (b) the 

identity of the person who created the document; (c) the identity of the person to 

whom the document was directed; (d) the subject matter of the document; (e) the 

date of the document; (f) the identity of all parties who executed the document; 

(g) the nature of the privilege which you claim; and (h) the custodian of the 

document. 

8. As used herein, the singular form of a noun or pronoun shall be 

considered to include within its meaning the plural form of the noun or pronoun 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 25 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

so used, and vice versa; the use of the masculine form of a pronoun shall be 

considered to include also within its meaning the feminine form of the pronoun 

so used, and vice versa; the use of any tense of any verb shall be considered to 

include within its meaning all other tenses of the verb so used; and the use of 

“and” shall be considered to include “or,” and vice versa. 

DEFINITIONS 

Notwithstanding any definition below, each word, term, or phrase used in 

these requests is intended to have the broadest meaning permitted under the 

Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice. 

1. “Any” shall be construed to include the word “all,” and the word “all” shall 

be construed to include the word “any.” 

2. “Company,” “You,” or “Your” means Intuit Inc., its wholly or partially 

owned subsidiaries, unincorporated divisions, joint ventures, operations under 

assumed names, and affiliates, and all directors, officers, members, employees, 

agents, consultants, and other persons working for or on behalf of the foregoing. 

3. “Document” or “Documents” are synonymous in meaning and equal in 

scope to the usage of the terms as defined by 16 C.F.R. 3.34(b), and includes, without 

limitation, the complete original and any non-identical copy (whether different from 

the original because of notations on the copy or otherwise), regardless of origin or 

location, of any written, typed, printed, transcribed, filmed, punched, or graphic 

matter of every type and description, however and by whomever prepared, 

produced, disseminated or made, including, but not limited to, any advertisement, 

book, pamphlet, periodical, contract, correspondence, communication, file, invoice, 

memorandum, note, telegram, report, record, handwritten note, working paper, 

routing slip, chart, graph, paper, index, map, tabulation, manual, guide, outline, 

script, abstract, history, calendar, diary, journal, agenda, minute, code book, or label. 

“Document” shall also include electronically stored information (“ESI”). ESI means 

the complete original and any nonidentical copy (whether different from the original 

because of notations, different metadata, or otherwise), regardless of origin or 

location, of any electronically created or stored information, including, but not 

limited to, electronic mail, instant messaging, videoconferencing, and other 

electronic correspondence (whether active, archived, or in a deleted items folder), 

word processing files, spreadsheets, databases, and sound recordings, whether 

stored on cards, magnetic or electronic tapes, disks, computer files, computer or 

other drives, cell phones, smart phones, or other storage media, and such technical 

assistance or instructions as will enable conversion of such ESI into a reasonably 

usable form. 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 26 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC

4. “Each” shall be construed to include “every,” and “every” shall be construed 

to include “each.” 

5. “Free TurboTax” means any TurboTax product or service offered for free, 

including TurboTax Free Edition, excluding products or services offered pursuant to 

the Free File program. 

6. “Relating to” or “Regarding” means discussing, describing, reflecting, 

referring, containing, analyzing, studying, reporting, commenting, evidencing, 

constituting, setting forth, considering, recommending, concerning, or pertaining to, 

in whole or in part. 

7. “TurboTax” means any online income tax preparation product or service 

offered by Intuit using the TurboTax brand or mark. 

DOCUMENTS REQUESTED 

Produce the following Documents: 

26. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

Rebecca Kirk Fair, filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s 

Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction in 

FTC v. Intuit Inc., No. 3:22-cv-01973-CRB (N.D. Cal.). 

27. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

John Hauser filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s Emergency 

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction in FTC v. Intuit 

Inc., No. 3:22-cv-01973-CRB (N.D. Cal.). 

28. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

Peter Golder filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s Emergency 

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction in FTC v. Intuit 

Inc., No. 3:22-cv-01973-CRB (N.D. Cal.). 

29. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

Rebecca Kirk Fair, filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Complaint Counsel’s 

Motion for Summary Decision. 

30. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

Professor John Hauser, filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Complaint 

Counsel’s Motion for Summary Decision. 

4 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 27 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC

31. All documents consulted, relied upon, or cited in drafting the Declaration of 

Professor Peter Golder, filed in support of Intuit Inc.’s Opposition to Complaint 

Counsel’s Motion for Summary Decision. 

32. All documents reflecting or discussing the income, revenues, profits, and 

return on investment generated or derived from Free TurboTax, including the return 

on investment for or value of customers using Free TurboTax, and customers who 

start preparing their taxes in Free TurboTax but pay Intuit for services. 

33. All documents reflecting or discussing the amount of money spent by Intuit 

advertising and marketing Free TurboTax. 

34. All documents reflecting or discussing the specific amount of money spent by 

Intuit on each advertisement identified in response to Interrogatory 1 and produced 

in response to Request for Production 1. 

Dated: October 14, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

s/Rebecca Plett 

Roberto Anguizola 

Rebecca Plett 

James Evans 

Complaint Counsel 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Telephone: 202-326-3664 

Email: rplett@ftc.gov 

5 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 28 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that on October 14, 2022, I caused the foregoing 

Complaint Counsel’s Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents to 

Intuit Inc., to be served via email on: 

David Z. Gringer 

Phoebe Silos 

Charles Bridge

Eleanor Davis 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

7 World Trade Center 

250 Greenwich Street 

New York, NY 10007 

David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com

Phoebe.Silos@wilmerhale.com 

Charles.Bridge@wilmerhale.com

Eleanor.Davis@wilmerhale.com 

(212) 230-8800 

Shelby Martin 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2600 

Denver, CO 80202 

Shelby.Martin@wilmerhale.com 

(720) 274-3135 

Katherine Mackey

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

60 State Street 

Boston, MA 02109 

Katherine.Mackey@wilmerhale.com

(617) 526-6000 

Jonathan E. Paikin 

Jennifer Milici 

Derek A. Woodman 

Vinecia Perkins 

Andres Salinas 

Spencer Todd

Jocelyn Berteaud

Benjamin Chapin

Margaret (Molly) Dillaway

Reade Jacob 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20006

Jonathan.Paikin@wilmerhale.com 

Jennifer.Milici@wilmerhale.com 

Derek.Woodman@wilmerhale.com 

Vinecia.Perkins@wilmerhale.com 

Andres.Salinas@wilmerhale.com 

Spencer.Todd@wilmerhale.com

Joss.Berteaud@wilmerhale.com 

Benjamin.Chapin@wilmerhale.com 

Molly.Dillaway@wilmerhale.com 

Reade.Jacob@wilmerhale.com 

(202) 663-6000 

Attorneys for Respondent, Intuit Inc. 

/s/ Rebecca Plett 

Rebecca Plett 

6 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 29 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Exhibit C
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 30 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

PUBLIC

In the Matter of: Docket No. 9408 

Intuit Inc., a corporation. 

COMPLAINT COUNSEL’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO INTUIT 

INC. 

 Pursuant to Rule 3.35 of the Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice 

for Adjudicative Proceedings and the Scheduling Order, Complaint Counsel 

requests that Respondent Intuit Inc. (“Intuit”) respond to these Interrogatories 

within 30 days and furnish the requested information to Complaint Counsel via 

email to Roberto Anguizola (ranguizola@ftc.gov), Rebecca Plett (rplett@ftc.gov) 

and James Evans (james.evans@ftc.gov), or at such time and place as may be 

agreed upon by all counsel. 

INSTRUCTIONS 

1. Unless otherwise specified, the time period covered by an Interrogatory shall 

be from November 1, 2020 to through the date of Your completion of these 

Interrogatories. 

2. Each Interrogatory should be set forth in full preceding the answer to it 

and should be answered separately and fully in writing, under oath. 

3. All answers shall be served within 30 days after service of these 

Interrogatories. 

4. These Interrogatories seek information that is in Your knowledge or 

possession, or under Your actual or constructive custody or control, whether or 

not such information is located in the files of, or possessed by Your individual 

officers, directors or employees, and whether or not such information is received 

from or disseminated to any other person or entity including attorneys, 

accountants, directors, officers, employees, independent contractors, or 

volunteers. 

5. To the extent that an Interrogatory may be answered by referencing a 

document, it is permissible to attach the document as an exhibit to the answer 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 31 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

and refer to the document in the answer. 

6. Where an Interrogatory requests an answer or portion of an answer that 

already has been supplied in response to another Interrogatory, the answer or 

portion of the answer need not be supplied a second time. It is sufficient to 

specify the responses that contain the answer, and supply any additional 

information necessary to answer the Interrogatory. 

7. All objections to any Interrogatory must be raised in your initial response 

and are otherwise waived. 

8. If you object to any Interrogatory or a part of any Interrogatory, state the 

Interrogatory or part to which you object, state the exact nature of the objection, 

and describe in detail the facts upon which you base your objection. If any 

Interrogatory cannot be answered in full, it shall be answered to the fullest extent 

possible and the reasons for the inability to answer fully shall be provided. If you 

object to any Interrogatory on the grounds of relevance or overbreadth, you shall 

provide all responsive information that is concededly relevant to the parties’ 

claims or defenses or the requested relief. For each Interrogatory that cannot be 

answered in full, you shall describe the efforts made to locate information 

needed for such answer. 

9. If any Documents are not identified in response to an Interrogatory on 

grounds of privilege, submit together with such claim a schedule of the items 

withheld which states individually for each item withheld: (a) the nature of the 

Document; (b) the Identity of the Person who created the Document; (c) the 

Identity of the Person to whom the Document was directed; (d) the subject 

matter of the Document; (e) the date of the Document; (f) the Identity of all 

Parties who executed the Document; (g) the nature of the privilege which You 

claim; and (h) the custodian of the Document. 

10. You are hereby advised that Complaint Counsel will move, if any party 

files any dispositive motion, or at the commencement of trial, to preclude you 

from presenting evidence regarding responsive matters you have failed to set 

forth in your answers to these Interrogatories. 

DEFINITIONS 

Notwithstanding any definition below, each word, term, or phrase used in 

these Requests is intended to have the broadest meaning permitted under the 

Federal Trade Commission’s Rules of Practice. 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 32 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC

1. “Advertisement” or “Advertising” or “Ad” means any written or verbal 

statement, illustration, or depiction that promotes the sale or use of a good or service 

or is designed to increase consumer interest in a brand, good, or service. Advertising 

media includes, but is not limited to: promotional materials; print, including direct 

mail; television, including short form TV Ads and infomercials; radio; and Internet, 

social media, and other digital content, including banner Advertisements and web 

pages, mobile networks and applications. 

2. “Any” shall be construed to include the word “all,” and the word “all” shall 

be construed to include the word “any.” 

3. “Company,” “You,” or “Your” means Intuit Inc., its wholly or partially 

owned subsidiaries, unincorporated divisions, joint ventures, operations under 

assumed names, and affiliates, and all directors, officers, members, employees, 

agents, consultants, and other persons working for or on behalf of the foregoing. 

4. “Document” or “Documents” are synonymous in meaning and equal in 

scope to the usage of the terms as defined by 16 C.F.R. 3.34(b), and includes, without 

limitation, the complete original and any non-identical copy (whether different from 

the original because of notations on the copy or otherwise), regardless of origin or 

location, of any written, typed, printed, transcribed, filmed, punched, or graphic 

matter of every type and description, however and by whomever prepared, 

produced, disseminated or made, including, but not limited to, any advertisement, 

book, pamphlet, periodical, contract, correspondence, file, invoice, memorandum, 

note, telegram, report, record, handwritten note, working paper, routing slip, chart, 

graph, paper, index, map, tabulation, manual, guide, outline, script, abstract, history, 

calendar, diary, journal, agenda, minute, code book, or label. “Document” shall also 

include electronically stored information (“ESI”). ESI means the complete original 

and any nonidentical copy (whether different from the original because of notations, 

different metadata, or otherwise), regardless of origin or location, of any 

electronically created or stored information, including, but not limited to, electronic 

mail, instant messaging, videoconferencing, and other electronic correspondence 

(whether active, archived, or in a deleted items folder), word processing files, 

spreadsheets, databases, and sound recordings, whether stored on cards, magnetic 

or electronic tapes, disks, computer files, computer or other drives, cell phones, 

smart phones, or other storage media, and such technical assistance or instructions 

as will enable conversion of such ESI into a reasonably usable form. 

5. “Each” shall be construed to include “every,” and “every” shall be construed 

to include “each.” 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 33 of 36 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

6. “Free TurboTax” means any TurboTax product or service offered for free, 

including TurboTax Free Edition, excluding products or services offered 

pursuant to the Free File program. 

7. “Funnel” means the TurboTax Online Funnel, for example as depicted in 

RX 52 at 4. 

8. “Hard Stop” means the screen(s) shown to consumers in the Free 

TurboTax when consumers indicated that they have a tax situation not covered 

by the Free TurboTax and prompting such consumers to upgrade to paid 

TurboTax. 

9. “Identify” or “the Identity of” requires identification of (a) natural persons 

by name, title, present business affiliation, present business address, telephone 

number, and email address or, if a present business affiliation or present business 

address is not known, the last known business and home addresses; and (b) 

businesses or other organizations by name, address, and the identities of Your 

contact persons at the business or organization. 

10. “Person” or “Persons” means all natural persons, corporations, partnerships 

or other business associations, and all other legal entities, including all members, 

officers, predecessors, assigns, divisions, affiliates, and subsidiaries. 

11. “Tax Year” means the year-long period at the end of and immediately 

after a given calendar year when tax returns for that given calendar year are 

filed. 

12. “Third Parties” means vendors, contractors, consultants, or other Persons 

not considered by Intuit to be Intuit employees. 

13. “TurboTax” means any online income tax preparation product or service 

offered by Intuit using the TurboTax brand or mark. 

4 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 34 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

INTERROGATORIES 

PUBLIC

1. Identify each materially different Advertisement for TurboTax that includes 

the terms “free” “zero” “$0” or “no cost” and for each such Advertisement state: 

(a) The type of Advertisement (e.g., television Advertisement, social media 

Advertisement, paid search, print, radio, video, email campaign, direct mail 

campaign, etc.); 

(b) The dates, times, and locations the Advertisement was disseminated; 

(c) The channels through which the Advertisement was disseminated (e.g. by 

name, the television stations, social media platforms, video sharing 

platforms; search engines; publications etc.); 

(d) The number of times the Advertisement was circulated, aired, served, shown, 

and/or viewed; 

(e) The cost to Intuit for such Advertisement; and 

(f) The revenue generated by or derived from such Advertisement, including 

estimates if actual revenue is not known. 

2. For each Advertisement identified in response to Interrogatory 1, Identify 

Third Parties involved in the dissemination, development, creation, execution, 

evaluation, approval, or testing of such Advertisement and identify, by Tax Year, 

how much Intuit paid to such third parties. 

3. By Tax Year, Intuit’s total expenditures on Advertisements. 

4. For each hyperlinked pop-up screen that provided information about the 

eligibility limitations of any Free TurboTax state, by Tax Year and placement on 

Intuit’s websites: 

(a) the number of times it was served or shown; 

(b) the number of clicks; 

(c) the click-rate; and 

(d) the click-through rate (“CTR”). 

5 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 35 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

PUBLIC

5. By Tax Year, for each stage of the Funnel, state the rate at which consumers 

abandon TurboTax. 

6. For each Hard Stop, state the tax situation that would have prompted Intuit 

to display the Hard Stop to consumers. 

7. By Tax Year and Hard Stop, state how much time, on average, consumers 

spent using Free TurboTax prior to being shown a Hard Stop. 

8. By Tax Year, of consumers who started preparing their tax returns in Free 

TurboTax, state how many: 

(a) Were shown a Hard Stop, broken out by the Hard Stop; 

(b) After being shown a Hard Stop, subsequently filed a tax return using a paid 

TurboTax product or service, broken out by Hard Stop; 

(c) Were shown a Hard Stop and filed a tax return using Free TurboTax, broken 

out by Hard Stop; 

(d) Were shown a Hard Stop and did not file a tax return using any TurboTax 

product or service; and 

(e) The amount consumers Identified in 8(b) paid Intuit to file their taxes. 

Dated: October 14, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

s/Rebecca Plett 

Roberto Anguizola 

Rebecca Plett 

James Evans 

Complaint Counsel 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Telephone: 202-326-3664 

Email: rplett@ftc.gov 

6 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 10/26/2022 | Document No. 605994 | PAGE Page 36 of 36 * PUBLIC *; 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

PUBLIC

I hereby certify that on October 14, 2022, I caused the foregoing Complaint 

Counsel’s First Set of Interrogatories, to be served via email on: 

David Z. Gringer 

Phoebe Silos 

Charles Bridge

Eleanor Davis 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

7 World Trade Center 

250 Greenwich Street 

New York, NY 10007 

David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com

Phoebe.Silos@wilmerhale.com 

Charles.Bridge@wilmerhale.com

Eleanor.Davis@wilmerhale.com 

(212) 230-8800 

Shelby Martin 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2600 

Denver, CO 80202 

Shelby.Martin@wilmerhale.com 

(720) 274-3135 

Katherine Mackey

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

60 State Street 

Boston, MA 02109 

Katherine.Mackey@wilmerhale.com

(617) 526-6000 

Jonathan E. Paikin 

Jennifer Milici 

Derek A. Woodman 

Vinecia Perkins 

Andres Salinas 

Spencer Todd

Jocelyn Berteaud

Benjamin Chapin

Margaret (Molly) Dillaway

Reade Jacob 

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr

LLP 

1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20006

Jonathan.Paikin@wilmerhale.com 

Jennifer.Milici@wilmerhale.com 

Derek.Woodman@wilmerhale.com 

Vinecia.Perkins@wilmerhale.com 

Andres.Salinas@wilmerhale.com 

Spencer.Todd@wilmerhale.com

Joss.Berteaud@wilmerhale.com 

Benjamin.Chapin@wilmerhale.com 

Molly.Dillaway@wilmerhale.com 

Reade.Jacob@wilmerhale.com 

(202) 663-6000 

Attorneys for Respondent, Intuit Inc. 

/s/ Rebecca Plett 

Rebecca Plett 

7