On September 30, 2015, we posted Judge Denies Injunctive Relief for FATCA Implementation!, where we discussed that an Ohio federal judge said that Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., and others do not have standing in a challenge to the offshore financial account tax enforcement measures enacted in the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and they were not likely to succeed on the merits in the case. The case is Crawford v. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, S.D. Ohio, No. 3:15-cv-00250, 9/29/15.
Tag Archive for Tax Court
According to Law360, A Minnesota federal judge has denied the IRS’ request to enforce a summons against a local criminal defense lawyer the agency accused of hiding tax-related information, agreeing with his Fifth Amendment objection citing the right against self-incrimination.
The Tax Court rejected the IRS proposed transfer pricing method of re-allocating income between a U.S. parent corporation and its foreign subsidiary. Also, it ruled against the Service’s attempt to collect $1.36 billion in tax deficiencies, finding that the assessment did not reflect the economic realities of manufacturing these medical devices in a case involving Medtronic’s intellectual property licenses necessary to produce and sell high-risk, heavily regulated implantable technology.
The United States Tax Court has concluded that a pro se taxpayer who was a U.S. citizen and permanent Israel resident was taxable on his capital gains. Although the taxpayer argued that such gain was excluded from U.S. tax under one provision of the U.S.-Israel income tax treaty, the court nonetheless ruled the income taxable under the treaty’s “saving clause.”
After moving to Israel in 2009, Elazar Cole, a U.S. citizen, became a permanent resident of Israel in 2010. As a result of moving to Israel, he qualified for a ten-year Israeli “tax holiday,” which exempted him from Israeli tax on non-Israeli-source capital gain income. Indeed, Article 15, paragraph 1, of the Convention between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Israel with Respect to Taxes on Income, U.S.-Israel, Nov. 20, 1975 provides that “[a] resident of one of the Contracting States shall be exempt from tax by the other Contracting State on gains from the sale, exchange, or other disposition of capital assets.”
Tax Court Did Not Consider To Be A Valid Return
In Reifler, TC Memo 2015-199TC Memo 2015-199, the Tax Court recently held that a joint return not signed by the wife was not a valid return and, as a result, imposed the failure-to-file penalty. In so doing, it rejected the taxpayer’s arguments that the return was valid either because it substantially complied with the valid return rules or because the wife intended to file a joint return and tacitly consented to the filing of a joint return.
Signatures on a tax return not only verify that a return has indeed been filed by the person indicated on the front page of a Form 1040 but also certify that all the statements in the tax return are made under penalty of perjury and are true, correct, and complete to the best of Read more
Recently in Rogers case, the DC court affirmed the Tax Court’s decision that a flight attendant who performed some duties in and over the U.S. and international waters could not exclude all of her wages under IRC 911 as foreign earned income.
The taxpayer worked as an international flight attendant based in Hong Kong. She performed in-flight duties and some pre-departure and post-arrival work and was generally paid according to her flight time. She received vacation time and benefits, and could receive guarantee pay for work that she would have performed on flights that were canceled. When she received guarantee pay, she was required to remain in Hong Kong awaiting reassignment to another flight. The airline provided the taxpayer with an apportionment of her estimated duty time between minutes spent in or over foreign Read more
On April 6, 2015, following a trial in Tampa, Florida, the Tax Court ruled that back taxes and penalties imposed upon Mr. Jacoby were unfounded because they had not acted fraudulently in the filing of tax return.
The Court’s ruling overturned the IRS’s assessment of approximately $2 million in back taxes and penalties for positions taken by the taxpayers on their 1999 and 2000 tax returns relating to tax shelters promoted by KPMG and others.
Judge Juan F. Vasquez rules that Steven F. Jacoby, who worked as a licensed securities broker and account executive before starting his own financial strategies company, hadn’t intended to evade tax through concealing, misleading or otherwise preventing the Read more
SB/SE Issues Memo Outlining Changes To The Limitations Period For Cases Going To And Coming From IRS Appeals
This article was co-authored by Randall Brody, EA of Tax Samaritan. I wish to acknowledge his keen insight and invaluable contributions to this article.
Picture this. You receive a notice of determination from the IRS informing you that you owe more tax than you reported on your tax return. As is usually the case, the IRS issues a 30-day letter, advising you that you have 30 days to request Appeals consideration of the case.
But a new interim guidance issued by the IRS might make waiting for such a letter the equivalent of “waiting for Godot.” Why? This new guidance severely restricts the rights of certain taxpayers from seeking redress of their disputed tax determinations in Appeals, by Read more
Your hobby business could land you in Tax Court – avoid IRS pitfalls by how you structure your small business.
Many people successfully develop a hobby into a going concern and actually receive income from it. That income must always be reported and taxes paid on that money regardless of your situation. If you leave that hobby as a hobby, under the tax law, you are not allowed to deduct any of the losses incurred by activity in that hobby. That is the reason most people turn their hobbies into businesses once they start making money.
When Are Hobby Losses Deductible?
By showing that your pursuit of your “hobby” is an activity engaged in for profit, you may be Read more
Recently, there have been several important IRS and court opinions affecting various areas of taxation.
A. Distribution of benefits to estate beneficiaries.
An executor was aware that the estate would owe significant taxes but instead of distributing the assets to the beneficiaries, he had the estate distribute money to himself and other heirs. As a result, the estate did not have enough funds to pay the taxes. The IRS put a lien against other property owned by the executor. The executor appealed the IRS decision to a Pennsylvania District court. The court upheld the IRS decision stating that the executor is personally liable for depleting the assets of the estate [Stiles, D.C., PA]. Read more
Two 2013 United States Tax Court decisions, Peekand Ellis, evince a clear mandate for taxpayers seeking protection from the plan asset look-through rule’s operating company exception: STOP THE CONSTRUCTIVE OWNERSHIP DISQUALIFIED PERSON ENTITY CHAIN!!!!! In Peek, the self-directed Peek IRA and the self-directed Fleck IRA each owned 50% capital equity interest of the fire extinguisher sales operating company. In Ellis, the taxpayer’s self-directed IRA owned 98% of the used car sales operating company.
In both cases, the Tax Court’s holdings distill the proposition operating company section 4975(e)(2)(G) disqualified person status preempts the operating company exception to the plan asset look-through rule. My paper, “Changes in Form 5498 Reporting And Read more
In Wole Odujinrin v. IRS Commissioner the petitioner, a hematology oncologist who represented himself, did not have adequate substantiation to support his petition and was not entitled to claim a net operating loss. He was also liable for an accuracy-related penalty under IRC 6662 – the expensive kick in the shorts.
This petitioner moronically showed up with little documentation in support of his claimed deductions and had inadequate evidence to show that he correctly assessed his 2009 tax liability. He testified that he relied on the advice of a tax practitioner but that person was not present to testify at trial nor provide an affidavit.
The Tax Court ultimately ruled in this case that the petitioner failed to establish a defense Read more