TAX CONTROVERSY 360
TAX CONTROVERSY 360
McDermott’s Real-Time Tax Disputes Insights
TAX CONTROVERSY 360
McDermott’s Real-Time Tax Disputes Insights
IRS Audits
Subscribe to IRS Audits's Posts

Weekly IRS Roundup May 15 – May 19, 2023

by | May 22, 2023 | , ,

Check out our summary of significant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidance and relevant tax matters for the week of May 15, 2023 – May 19, 2023.

May 15, 2023: The IRS released Internal Revenue Bulletin 2023-20, which highlights the following:

  • Announcement 2023-16: The IRS announced that it will no longer conduct public hearings on notices of proposed rulemaking solely by telephone for proposed regulations that are published in the Federal Register after May 11, 2023. The change comes with the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. A telephonic option will remain available for those who prefer to attend or testify at a public hearing by telephone.

May 15, 2023: The IRS released a letter from Commissioner Daniel Werfel to the US Senate regarding the request for information about racial disparity in the selection of tax returns for audit and the IRS’s plan to address the issue.

May 15, 2023: The IRS released Tax Tip 2023-67, announcing that tax relief is available for people living in areas that are declared disasters by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Click here to find out which areas qualify for federal disaster relief.

May 15, 2023: The IRS released Notice 2023-40, which provides the corporate bond monthly yield curve and corresponding spot segment rates and the 24-month average segment rates for May 2023. This notice also provides guidance as to interest rates on 30-year Treasury securities and 30-year Treasury weighted average rates.

May 15, 2023: The IRS released Revenue Ruling 2023-10, providing the applicable federal rates for federal income tax purposes for June 2023. The short-term federal interest rate is 4.43%, the mid-term rate will drop to 3.56% and the long-term rate is 3.79%.

May 16, 2023: The IRS released Tax Tip 2023-68, reminding taxpayers that installing solar panels or making other home improvements may qualify them for the home energy credit.

May 16, 2023: The IRS released Revenue Procedure 2023-23, which provides the 2024 inflation-adjusted amounts for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) as determined under Section 223 and the maximum amount that may be made newly available for excepted benefit health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) provided under Section 54.9831-1(c)(3)(viii) of the Pension Excise Tax Regulations.

May 16, 2023: The IRS announced the release of the IRS’s report from Commissioner Werfel evaluating the feasibility of providing taxpayers with a free Direct File option. The evaluation of the system focused on three areas: taxpayer opinions, cost and feasibility. The report also includes an analysis conducted by an independent third party. The IRS plans to pilot the project for the 2024 filing season.

May 17, 2023: The IRS released Tax Tip 2023-69, reminding taxpayers that emergency preparedness plans should include financial records and tax information.

May 19, 2023: The IRS released its weekly list of written determinations (e.g., Private [...]

Continue Reading



read more

IRS Updates Its List of Compliance Campaigns

by and | Apr 28, 2023 | ,

The Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Large Business and International (LB&I) Division updated its list of Active Campaigns, which includes more than 50 efforts to increase tax compliance. Each campaign identifies the practice area, lead executive, a point of contact and a description or purpose for the campaign. Notable campaigns include the Micro-Captive Insurance Campaign, Virtual Currency and Syndicated Conservation Easement Transactions.

LB&I Campaigns started in 2017 with the initial identification of 13 campaigns in an effort to redefine compliance work and build a supportive infrastructure. The Campaigns allow LB&I to focus on significant compliance and resource challenges. The IRS also maintains a list of the campaigns not currently active.

Practice Point: It is good practice to regularly review the LB&I Campaigns list to see if you have a transaction that could be subject to additional scrutiny by the IRS. If you do, consider preparing for an IRS audit. To do so, make sure you have your documentation in order (including all of the calculations that determined the position claimed on the return) and your story for entering into the transaction (e.g., the business purpose), cleanse your emails and electronic documents concerning the transaction in connection with your documentation retention policy, consider your ability to abate any civil tax penalties (e.g., reasonable reliance on a tax professional) and prepare your management for a potential IRS adjustment.



read more

IRS Proposes New Regulations to Settle Supervisory Approval of Penalties Requirements

by and | Apr 14, 2023 | , , , ,

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has proposed regulations to clarify the rules regarding supervisory approval of federal civil tax penalties under IRC Section 6751(b). Since Chai v. Commissioner, there has been a substantial number of cases litigating issues involving supervisory approval of federal civil tax penalties. Back in September, we posted about the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits split in which both Courts departed from long-standing US Tax Court precedence on the timing requirement of supervisor approval. Those two decisions, along with others, prompted this new guidance “to have clear and uniform regulatory standards.”

The proposed regulations address three timing rules: (1) penalties subject to pre-assessment review in the Tax Court; (2) penalties raised in the Tax Court after a petition and (3) penalties assessed without prior opportunity for Tax Court review.

Specifically, the proposed regulations allow supervisors to approve the initial determination of a penalty up until the time the IRS issues a pre-assessment notice, such as a Statutory Notice of Deficiency, which is the notice that provides taxpayers with a ticket to the Tax Court. The proposed regulations explain that “earlier deadlines created by the Tax Court do not ensure that penalties are only imposed where appropriate” and the “bright-line rule relieves supervisors from having to predict whether approval at a certain point will be too early or too late.” Additionally, penalties raised in the Tax Court after a petition is filed, such as an answer or an amended answer, would need supervisory approval any time prior to the penalty being raised. Supervisory approval for penalties not subject to pre-assessment review in the Tax Court may be obtained at any time prior to the assessment.

The proposed regulations require the approval of “the immediate supervisor,” which is defined as “any individual with responsibility to approve another individual’s proposal of penalties without the proposal being subject to an intermediary’s approval.” The term is also not limited to any particular individual.

Comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by July 10, 2023.

Practice Point: Penalties continue to be a hot topic in the tax controversy arena. The updated guidance promises to clarify and standardize the requirements of supervisory approval of IRS penalties, with the hope and expectation of reducing litigation on the issue. From the taxpayer’s perspective, ideally, the new regulations will enable examiners and managers the opportunity to thoroughly review the facts and circumstances of cases before deciding if penalties are warranted. We will continue to follow and report on any new developments.

Please see the links to our prior commentary on Code Section 6751 below:



read more

Supreme Court Punts on Attorney-Client Privilege Question

by , and | Feb 2, 2023 | , , , ,

In a surprising move, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) dismissed a dispute involving the proper test to apply when determining whether an unnamed law firm’s mixed bag of communications involving both legal advice and discussions of tax preparation was privilege. The dismissal came less than two weeks after oral arguments, with SCOTUS stating that “[t]he writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted” (commonly known as a “DIG,” which infrequently happens when SCOTUS determines there is no conflict warranting review, one or both parties have changed their position, or no consensus can be reached by the Justices and dismissal is preferable to fractured opinions with no controlling rationale).

BACKGROUND

The law firm and an unnamed company were each served with subpoenas for documents and communication related to a criminal investigation. Both produced some documents but withheld others on the grounds of attorney-client privilege and the work-product doctrine. The government moved to compel production, which the district court granted in part, explaining that the documents were not protected by any privilege, and they were discoverable under the crime-fraud exception. The company and law firm continued to withhold the documents, and the government filed motions to hold them in contempt. The district court ruled that certain dual-purpose communications were not privileged because the “primary purpose” of the documents was to obtain tax advice, not legal advice. On appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the law firm and the company argued that the court should have relied on a broader, “because of” test, not the “primary purpose” test. The Ninth Circuit disagreed and concluded that the “primary purpose” test governs, and the primary purpose of the communications was tax advice. SCOTUS granted certiorari in October 2022.

SUPREME COURT

In its brief, the law firm asked SCOTUS to adopt a more expansive “significant purpose” test, which was applied by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc. The law firm argued that the test applied in Kellogg “appropriately protects attorney-client dual purpose communications” and that the test “asks a single question that arises directly from the long-established test for attorney-client privilege: whether a client is seeking or obtaining confidential legal advice from his or her lawyer.”

The government argued that courts consistently emphasize the need to construe the attorney-client privilege narrowly and that the primary or predominant purpose test “thus molds the scope of the privilege to its purpose of encouraging effective legal advice, while avoiding sweeping in communications predominantly about a nonlegal matter.”

During oral argument, the Justices seemed skeptical of a need to change the test and expressed some confusion as to how any privilege analysis would change from a practice perspective. Justice Kagan invoked the saying “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Shortly thereafter, SCOTUS issued the DIG.

Practice Point: More [...]

Continue Reading



read more

IRS Issues New Procedures for Large Corporate Audit Disclosures

by and | Nov 30, 2022 | , ,

For decades, large corporate taxpayers under continuous audit have been able to make disclosures under Revenue Procedure 94-69 at the beginning of an examination to notify the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of adjustments (both positive and negative) to their tax returns and thereby obtain protection from various penalties and obviate the need to file a formal amended tax return. In 2020, the IRS questioned the continuing utility of this disclosure process and invited comments on said process. With the new Revenue Procedure 2022-39, the IRS has moved the largest corporate taxpayers into a new era of voluntary disclosure. This is a significant development for impacted taxpayers.

Read more here.



read more

Update on IRS Enforcement Efforts

by and | Nov 16, 2022 | , , ,

We frequently post about the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) tax enforcement trends and announcements. Prior examples from this year include the release of a five-year strategic plan emphasizing enforcement, the plan to hire up to 200 additional attorneys to assist with litigation efforts, the implementation of the Large Partnership Compliance (LPC) Pilot Program, a focus on tax compliance of non-US citizens and residents, and the creation of a new Joint Strategic Emerging Issues Team to identify emerging “abusive transactions.” Over the past several weeks, the IRS has provided additional updates on its enforcement efforts and future plans, including the following:

  • The IRS is considering raising the economic substance doctrine more frequently in transfer pricing examinations—even those where taxpayers have transfer pricing documentation—and asserting penalties more often in transfer pricing cases. This follows the announcement last April that executive approval is no longer needed before asserting the codified economic substance doctrine under Internal Revenue Code Section 7701(o).
  • The IRS plans to grow the LPC program and envisions it functioning similar to corporate examinations conducted by the Large Business & International Division.
  • The IRS’s Criminal Investigation (CI) Division is highly focused on criminal digital asset cases and intends to make many of these cases public. This follows the recent release of the CI Division’s annual report.
  • The IRS intends to expend more resources on examinations of high-income/high-net-worth taxpayers.
  • The IRS has proposed to require the disclosure of more information regarding corporate taxpayers’ uncertain tax positions, including citations to contrary authorities, which, if finalized, will likely lead to more examinations and challenges to tax reporting positions.

Practice Point: Tax enforcement has been down over the past several years, including a slowdown in audit operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. With increased funding from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and proposed restrictions on access to IRS Appeals for certain matters, we expect more examinations and tax disputes in the near future. Taxpayers and their advisors should prepare. Consider working with your tax controversy advisor to discuss your more vulnerable return positions to see how to better defend against the impending tax enforcement wave!



read more

Weekly IRS Roundup October 31 – November 4, 2022

by | Nov 7, 2022 | , , , ,

Presented below is our summary of significant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidance and relevant tax matters for the week of October 31, 2022 – November 4, 2022.

October 31, 2022: The IRS released Internal Revenue Bulletin 2022-44, which highlights the following:

  • Treasury Decision 9966: These final regulations increase the renewal user fee for enrolled retirement plan agents from $67 to $140 and also increase both the enrollment and renewal of enrollment user fees for enrolled agents from $67 to $140.
  • Proposed Regulations 113068-22: These proposed regulations relate to recordkeeping and reporting requirements for the average income test for purposes of the low-income housing credit.
  • Revenue Ruling 2022-19: This revenue ruling provides a rule for valuing noncommercial flights on employer-provided aircraft, including the three Standard Industry Fare Level (SIFL) rates: the Unadjusted SIFL Rate, the SIFL Rate Adjusted for PSP Grants, and the SIFL Rate Adjusted for PSP Grants and Promissory Notes.
  • Treasury Decision 9967: This document contains final and temporary regulations, which set forth guidance on the average income test for purposes of the low-income housing credit.

October 31, 2022: The IRS released COVID Tax Tip 2022-166, announcing that more than nine million people may qualify for tax benefits they did not claim by filing a 2021 federal income tax return. Many of these people may be eligible to claim some or all of the 2021 Recovery Rebate Credit, the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit, among others, which were expanded last year under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and other legislation.

November 1, 2022: The IRS released COVID Tax Tip 2022-167, alerting taxpayers in areas covered by certain Federal Emergency Management Agency disaster declarations that they may have more time to file their returns and may qualify for penalty relief under Notice 2022-36.

November 2, 2022: The IRS released COVID Tax Tip 2022-168, reminding people to review their tax withholdings to avoid tax surprises, such as a balance due or a larger-than-expected refund.

November 3, 2022: The IRS requested comments on three notices related to different aspects of extensions and enhancements of energy tax benefits in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The IRS hopes that comments will aid the agency in drafting the related guidance items. Feedback should be submitted by December 3, 2022. The notices include:

  • Notice 2022-56, which requests comments related to the qualified commercial clean vehicles provisions and the alternative fuel vehicle refueling property
  • Notice 2022-57, which requests comments related to the carbon capture tax credit
  • Notice 2022-58, which requests comments related to the tax credit for the production of clean hydrogen and the clean fuel production tax credit.

November 3, 2022: The IRS
Continue Reading



read more

The IRS Can Share Your Tax Information with Foreign Governments

by and | Oct 28, 2022 | , , ,

The recent Zhang v. United States case, Docket No. 21-17093 (9th Cir. Oct. 18, 2022), serves as a reminder that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) can force you to disclose and share your tax information with foreign governments. The taxpayers in Zhang appealed the decision from the US District Court for the Northern District of California denying their petition to quash an IRS summons for information. The summons was at the request of the Canadian tax authority pursuant to a bilateral tax treaty between the United States and Canada. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reaffirmed that the IRS can seek information for, and on behalf of, a foreign government as long as the request satisfies the accepted guidelines of requesting information in the United States—for example, the “good faith” requirement announced in United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).

So why do we highlight Zhang for you? In this ever-increasing world of tax information transparency, taxpayers need to be mindful of the ability of tax authorities to share information with each other and adjust their taxes accordingly. During a tax audit, it’s a strategic decision as to what tax information to share and what not to share with each tax authority. Telling different stories to different tax authorities could lead to more intrusive audits/scrutiny and higher overall tax bills and could even lead to criminal prosecution. Below are some basic principles to keep in mind:

  • There are three primary methods as to how countries share tax information with each other:
    • Automatic Exchanges
    • Spontaneous Exchanges
    • Targeted Requests
  • Automatic exchanges are becoming increasingly used by countries (g., BEPS Action 5 and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) because they are automatic and routine and usually associated with standardized financial/bank transactions.
  • A spontaneous exchange occurs when one country sees something of interest and alerts another country about a potential tax issue or as part of a joint audit by the countries.
    • These exchanges are usually facilitated by provisions in bilateral tax treaties.
    • The IRS’s Internal Revenue Manual (g., IRM 4.60.1.3) has detailed instructions for IRS employees on how to handle these treaty exchanges.
  • Targeted requests (like in Zhang) are typically initiated by one country that is a party to an information exchange treaty to seek information needed by that country in its tax investigation of its resident or citizen.
    • In such a case where a foreign government makes a request of the US government through a treaty, the IRS Office of the Competent Authority on the US side handles the request. (See, e.g., IRM 4.60.1.2.2.4.)
    • If the US taxpayer does not comply with the IRS request for information made by the foreign government (usually in the form of an “Information Document Request”), the IRS can use its administrative summons power to enforce the summons in court (which is what happened in Zhang).

Practice Point: It is crucial to be strategic [...]

Continue Reading



read more

New IRS Funding Will Be Used to Focus on Tax Compliance of Non-US Citizens and Residents

by and | Oct 18, 2022 | , ,

US Congress will be giving the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) $79.6 billion over the next 10 years in an effort to put the agency back on the path to effective and efficient tax administration. The money will find lots of uses, including for the hiring of new personnel and updating the IRS’s antiquated technology.

At a recent American Bar Association Tax Section conference, Audrey Morris from the IRS Office of Chief Counsel (Small Business/Self-Employed Division) publicly stated that tax compliance among foreign nationals living and working in the United States also will be a priority and focus of the IRS’s new funding.

We have reported extensively about the re-funding of the IRS. (See here and here for example.) There are special considerations for non-US citizens who are not in compliance with US tax laws. For example, failing to properly report taxable income could be a bar or impediment to obtaining immigration status in the United States.

Practice Point: If you are a foreign national living in the United States and you may not be in compliance with US tax rules, it is time to consider doing so. The IRS has programs to help, including a voluntary disclosure program by which taxpayers who knowingly have reported their income erroneously or have failed to report income at all can disclose their transgressions and clean up their non-compliance. (See, e.g., here.)

Care should be taken, however, when dealing with the convergence of tax and immigration issues. If you are dealing with these sorts of issues, we strongly suggest speaking frankly with your tax and immigration advisors before doing anything.



read more

Courts Split on Supervisory Approval Requirement for Tax Penalties

by , and | Sep 28, 2022 | , , ,

Since Chai v. Commissioner, an opinion by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit subsequently followed by the US Tax Court in several opinions, there has been a substantial number of cases litigating issues involving supervisory approval of federal civil tax penalties. Two recent additions to that list include decisions from the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits, where both Courts departed from the Tax Court’s analysis and ruling on the issue. The disagreement centers on when approval must occur. (Some of our prior discussions on this topic are linked below.)

LAIDLAW’S AND THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In Laidlaw’s Harley-Davidson Sales, Inc. v. Commissioner, the Ninth Circuit, reversing the Tax Court’s ruling, applied a textualist approach and held that approval is required only before the assessment of a tax penalty and not before the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) communicates a proposed penalty to the taxpayer. The Court reasoned that the “language of [Internal Revenue Code (Code) section 6571(b)] provides no reason to conclude that an ‘initial determination’ is transformed into ‘something more like a final determination’ simply because the revenue agent who made the initial determination subsequently mailed a letter to the taxpayer describing it.” While the Court was “troubled” by the manner in which the IRS communicated the potential imposition of the penalty, it explained that a court’s role is to “apply the law as it is written, not to devise alternative language.” In reaching its decision, the Ninth Circuit disagreed with the position developed by the Tax Court in recent years.

KRONER AND THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

In Kroner v. Commissioner, the Eleventh Circuit followed Laidlaw’s Harley Davidson Sales and similarly concluded that the IRS satisfies Code Section 6751(b) so long as a supervisor approves the penalty before it is assessed. The Court explained that this was the best reading of the statute because (1) it is more consistent with the meaning of the phrase “initial determination of such assessment,” (2) it reflects the absence of any express timing requirement in the statute, and (3) it is a workable reading in the light of the statute’s purpose. The Court suggested that the IRS may be wise “to have a supervisor approve proposed tax penalties at an early juncture…but the text of the statute does not impose an earlier deadline.”

The Eleventh Circuit was explicit in its departure from Chai and Tax Court precedent, stating that “the Chai court missed an important aspect of the statute’s purpose: it is not just about bargaining, it is also a check on the imposition of erroneous penalties.” The Court also explained that “appropriate penalties should be assessed and collected. Chai’s analysis of these competing interests leaned heavily on the former to the detriment of the latter when justifying its departure from the statutory text.”

Practice Point: It remains to be seen whether this issue will make its way to the Supreme Court of the United States given the apparent circuit split on the issue as [...]

Continue Reading



read more

BLOG EDITORS

Kevin Spencer

Evan Walters

STAY CONNECTED

Subscribe

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

jd supra readers choice top firm 2023 badge