retirement Archives - TAX CONTROVERSY 360

Weekly IRS Roundup May 31 – June 4, 2021

by McDermott Will & Emery | Jun 7, 2021 | IRS Guidance, Tax Reform, Tax Refunds

Presented below is our summary of significant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidance and relevant tax matters for the week of May 31, 2021 – June 4, 2021. Additionally, for continuing updates on the tax impact of COVID-19, please visit our resource page here.

June 1, 2021: The IRS issued a news release, soliciting applications for the IRS Advisory Council, a forum consisting of representatives of the public to advise the IRS regarding various tax administration issues.

June 2, 2021: The IRS issued a news release, reminding taxpayers living and working abroad of the June 15, 2021, deadline for filing their 2020 US federal income tax returns.

June 4, 2021: The IRS issued Notice 2021-34, providing the applicable reference price and associated credit amount used in determining the marginal well production credit under section 45I of the Code.

June 4, 2021: The IRS issued Announcement 2021-11, announcing that the United States and Switzerland have entered into an arrangement listing the US and Swiss pension and retirement plans, which now include various US and Swiss individual retirement savings plans that may qualify for the exemption from withholding on dividends under the US-Switzerland tax treaty.

June 4, 2021: The IRS issued a news release, announcing the issuance of more than 2.8 million refunds to taxpayers who paid taxes on unemployment compensation in 2020, compensation that was retroactively excluded from 2020 taxable income by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.

June 4, 2021: The IRS released its weekly list of written determinations (e.g., Private Letter Rulings, Technical Advice Memorandums and Chief Counsel Advice).

Special thanks to Le Chen in our Washington, DC, office for this week’s roundup.

The Next Normal — Tax Responses to COVID-19

by McDermott Will & Emery | Jun 18, 2020 | IRS Guidance

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has thrown our personal and professional lives into a constant state of change, as we deal with social distancing, e-learning, remote working, and Zoom. In this American Bar Association article, Andrew R. Roberson, a partner in US and International Tax at McDermott Will & Emery, describes how the constant change or “next normal” rings true in the tax world as well, both for taxpayers and practitioners, as we all adapt to today’s challenges.

Access the full article.

Section 965 Transition Tax Overpayment Addressed in Technical Corrections

by McDermott Will & Emery | Jan 4, 2019 | IRS Guidance, Tax Reform, Tax Refunds, Uncategorized

On January 2, 2019, the outgoing Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, Kevin Brady (R-TX), released the Tax Technical and Clerical Corrections Act (the Bill), addressing several technical issues associated with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (P.L. 115-97) (TCJA). The Bill includes certain provisions that, if enacted, would affirm Congress’ intent that taxpayers with an overpayment with respect to an installment payment of the transition tax under Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 965 should be able to claim a credit or refund with respect to such amount. The provisions in the Bill with respect to Code Section 965 overpayments are largely consistent with similar draft legislation introduced on November 26, 2018 (the Retirement, Savings and Other Tax Relief Act of 2018 and the Taxpayer First Act of 2018, or H.R. 88; see prior discussion here). In particular, the Bill provides that where a taxpayer that made an election under Code Section 965(h)(1) to pay the net tax liability under Section 965 in installments has filed a request for a credit or refund with respect to an overpayment, the Internal Revenue Service cannot take any installment into account as a liability for purposes of determining whether an overpayment exists. If enacted, the Bill would permit taxpayers to claim a refund or credit with respect to an installment payment of the taxpayer’s transition tax under Code Section 965. (more…)

Senior Tax Court Judge Robert A. Wherry, Jr. Retires

by K. Christy Vouri-Misso | Jan 8, 2018 | Court Procedure Matters, Trial Courts, Uncategorized

On January 3, 2018, Chief Judge Marvel of the US Tax Court (Tax Court) announced that Senior Judge Robert A. Wherry, Jr. fully retired as of January 1, 2018, and would no longer be recalled for judicial service.

Judge Wherry was appointed on April 23, 2003, by President George W. Bush. In 2014, Judge Wherry took senior status and continued to try cases. By statute, the Tax Court is composed of 19 presidentially appointed judges. Judges are appointed for a term of 15 years and after an appointed term has expired, or they reach a specified age, may serve as a “senior judge” if recalled by the Tax Court. The Tax Court also has several special trial judges, who generally preside over small tax cases. (more…)

President Trump Nominates Copeland and Urda to US Tax Court

by Jeffrey M. Glassman, Kevin Spencer and McDermott Will & Emery | Aug 7, 2017 | Court Procedure Matters, Trial Courts, Uncategorized

On August 3, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated two judges to the US Tax Court. The nominations were received in the US Senate (Senate) and referred to the Committee on Finance.

One of the nominees, Elizabeth Copeland, was previously nominated by President Barack Obama. Her previous nomination expired with the conclusion of the 114th Congress in January 2017. The Committee on Finance unanimously approved her previous nomination, but the nomination was never voted on by the full Senate. Copeland is a partner at the law firm Strasburger & Price, LLP. If confirmed, she will be assuming the position left vacant by the 2015 retirement of Judge James S. Halpern. Judge Halpern still performs judicial duties as a Senior Judge on recall.

The second nominee, Patrick Urda, is counsel to the deputy assistant attorney general in the US Department of Justice’s Tax Division. If confirmed, he will be assuming the position left vacant by the 2014 retirement of Judge Diane L. Kroupa. We previously covered the circumstances of Judge Kroupa’s retirement and related criminal proceedings.