Id. at 38 n. 2. But the motive behind the crime is irrelevant in determining whether the crime is one involving dishonesty. Id. This is especially true in Florida where it is improper for courts to look beyond the face of a conviction to determine whether the conviction is for a crime involving dishonesty. Page, 449 So.2d at 816. Instead, the dishonesty must appear on the face of the conviction, such that an element of the crime reflects dishonesty. Cree, 969 F.2d at 38 n. 2; Page, 449 So.2d at 816. Because convictions for willful failure to file tax returns do not, on their face, require dishonesty or the making of a false statement, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of the convictions. Cf. United States v. Yang, 887 F.Supp. 95, 96 (S.D.N.Y.1995)(<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Vitale, 445 Pa.Super. 43, 664
holding that a conviction under a new york state statute for failure to file tax returns requires proof of a specific intent to evade taxes and as such can be used for impeachment purposes consistently with the third circuit holding in cree holding the conduct element satisfied where debtor failed to timely file tax returns and failed to pay taxes for those years holding that the lawyers failure to file tax returns and pay taxes over three years constituted conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice holding that debt or who failed to file income tax returns and failed to pay tax satisfied  523alcs conduct requirement despite no affirmative conduct to evade taxes holding that failure to file correct tax returns constitutes bad faith and makes it difficult for the court to confirm a plan