In Baird v. Koerner (9th Cir. 1960) 279 F.2d 623, several clients engaged an attorney for advice on tax matters. The attorney determined the clients' tax returns were incorrect and the taxes understated. The attorney transmitted a cashier's check to the IRS. for the amount he had received, together with a letter instructing the I.R.S. to deposit the money in its fund for unidentified collections. The IRS. sought the clients' identities even though no government investigation was pending into their tax liabilities. The attorney refused to answer and invoked the attorney-client privilege. ( Id. at pp. 626-627.) Baird upheld the attorney's assertion of the privilege. "A disclosure of the persons employing the attorney would disclose the persons paying the tax; the fact of payment indicates clearly what is here specifically admitted, that an additional tax was payable and that the unknown clients owed it....... Revealing the clients' names would disclose the 'ultimate motive of litigation' which Wigmore says the privilege should protect." (279 F.2d at p. 630.) Baird further held that if the "identification of the client conveys information which ordinarily would be conceded to be part of the usual privileged communication between attorney and client, then the privilege should extend to such identification" in the absence of other factors, such as the client's commencement of litigation or employment of the attorney with respect to future criminal or fraudulent transactions. ( Id. at p. 632) Baird found the nature and extent of the attorney-client privilege should be based on state law, and application of the exception should depend on the circumstances of each case. ( Id. at pp. 630, 632.) Baird relied on McDonough and held: "'The name of the client will be considered privileged where the circumstances of the case are such that the name of the client is material only for the purpose of showing an acknowledgement of guilt on the part of such client of the very offenses on account of which the attorney was employed. '" (Baird, supra, 279 F.2d at p. 633, quoting 97 C.J.S. Witnesses, 283e, p. 803.)