Once again, trying to catch up and cover a few weeks in one SumOp post. Before getting to the new items from the last three weeks, I wanted to give a short update on Hawkins v. Franchise Tax Board. In September, A. Lavar Taylor wrote a two part guest post on the 9th Circuit’s holding, which can be found here and here. The case deals with, as the guest post title indicates, “What Constitutes An Attempt to Evade or Defeat Taxes for Purposes of Section 523(a)(1)(C) of the Bankruptcy Code,” and a split found between the recent holding and other Circuits. Carlton Smith shared with us last week that the Government sought en banc review, the debtor has responded, and the petition is now before the entire 9th Circuit to decide whether the review is appropriate or not. Either way, some court may be reviewing soon, and we will let you know if we hear more.
I also want to highlight some really strong guest posts over the last three weeks, and thank all of our guest posters again! The aforementioned Carlton Smith wrote on the Lippolis Tax Court jurisdiction case relating to the $2MM Whistleblower amount limitation. Professor Andy Grewal covered the recent Petaluma FX Partners oral argument in the DC Circuit, regarding the scope of TEFRA jurisdiction when the underlying partnership is a sham.
A few first time guest posters also contributed over the last few weeks. Rachel Partain, an attorney at Caplin & Drysdale, wrote on the LB&I policy restricting informal refund claims for taxpayers in exam. And, finally, Jeffrey Sklarz, of Green and Sklarz, touched on the interaction between Section 6020(b) and Deficiency Assessments in the recent Radar case.
To the other procedure.
read more...- PWC provided a fairly comprehensive overview regarding the new information document request process. The document outlines the history behind the changes, how the process works, and what occurs if the IDR is not responded to in a manner the IRS finds acceptable.
- As I mentioned above, Carlton Smith had a write up on PT regarding the Lippolis case. Tax Litigation Survey has added its thoughts here.
- Two weeks ago, Jack Townsend on his Federal Tax Crimes Blog posted about a FOIA information dump regarding FBAR audits found on Dennis Brager’s web page. You can find Jack’s post about it here. The FOIA request resulted in over 6,500 pages of info. Jack’s page has some good comments and responses.
- Chief Counsel has taken the position that a company which acquired, pursuant to Section 381, another company that had taken TARP funds was subject to the same restrictions as the TARP company regarding NOL carrybacks.
- Tax Girl has a well written story on Forbes about the Whistleblower case brought against Vanguard. Vanguard is a huge financial company located in Chester County (same as me), which is known for its low cost investing options. A prior in house tax attorney, David Danon, has brought an action under the New York False Claims Act regarding its internal transfer pricing for investment services, which he claims caused Vanguard to underpay its taxes substantially. The New York statute was expanded in 2010 to include tax claims. Last year, this expanded statute was discussed on the whistleblower panel at the VLS Shachoy symposium, although this case was under seal at that time (if it had been filed), and was not discussed. There is probably a IRS and SEC action moving forward, although those were not highlighted in the story.
- This story deals with a few Golden Corral restaurants. Apparently the slogan there is “Help Yourself to Happiness,” which is a reference to its all you can eat buffet. The one time I went to the Corral, that didn’t summarize my experience, but it seems like a popular chain, so others would probably disagree with me. Also interesting, there is a lot of internet debate out there about the fact that Golden Corral no longer allows people to bring guns into its establishments. This really pisses people off.
In Erwin v. United States, 114 AFTR2d 2014-6630 (MD NC), a general manager (a gent named Pintner) of a company that owned five GC restaurants (these are franchises) was found to be a responsible person for the TFRP. He clearly handled day to day operations, oversaw payroll, could hire and fire, and could write checks. The fact that the owners and officers indicated they would take care of the issue did not mitigate the responsibility. There was an argument about whether he knew of the debt in June or October of the year in question, but the Court directed that did not matter, which is somewhat interesting because he left the company two months after finding out about the issue. Tough holding for the manager, as the amount was substantial, and his knowledge may have been less than 60 days. Should have left the Corral sooner. Keith had a good post a few months ago about postponing the assessment of the TFRP when others might be liable (and hopefully pay), which can be found here. I bet most folks in the manager’s position would be surprised to know this is how the law works.
- Also from Jack Townsend’s Federal Tax Crimes Blog, some additional discussion of willfulness, and some potential arguments for those litigating FBAR claims.
- Foundation was granted reasonable cause relief to abate first-tier excise taxes under Section 4943 by the Service. The TAM found that the foundation had reasonably relied on a memorandum that incorrectly determined the attribution rules regarding excess business holdings, and how the percentage applied. The memorandum was made by a qualified tax preparer. The foundation realized the error and fixed the issue. The Service determined there was not willful neglect, and the error was due to reasonable cause.
- The Service issued Announcement 2014-34 discussing the realignment of technical work between TE/GE and Chief Counsel to shift authority for preparing revenue rulings, revenue procedures, announcements, notices, technical advice, and certain letter rulings relating to exempt orgs and certain qualified plans.
- Occasionally, a nice woman from accounting-degree.org sends me a link to infographics they have created, which are usually interesting. This one is a fairly simple chart regarding entity choice, including the tax impacts. Unlike most similar lists, this one covers cooperatives…which are useful if you want to be a snooty building or start an organic farm in a vacant lot.
About Stephen Olsen
Comment Policy: While we all have years of experience as practitioners and attorneys, and while Keith and Les have taught for many years, we think our work is better when we generate input from others. That is one of the reasons we solicit guest posts (and also because of the time it takes to write what we think are high quality posts). Involvement from others makes our site better. That is why we have kept our site open to comments.
If you want to make a public comment, you must identify yourself (using your first and last name) and register by including your email. If you do not, we will remove your comment. In a comment, if you disagree with or intend to criticize someone (such as the poster, another commenter, a party or counsel in a case), you must do so in a respectful manner. We reserve the right to delete comments. If your comment is obnoxious, mean-spirited or violates our sense of decency we will remove the comment. While you have the right to say what you want, you do not have the right to say what you want on our blog.