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

An Update on Section 6751 Penalties

by and | Mar 23, 2022 | , , , , ,

Tax penalties are always a hot topic here. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has a large arsenal when it comes to grounds for asserting penalties on income tax deficiencies, ranging from the common 20% penalty under Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 6662(a) to higher penalties ranging from 40% (gross valuation or basis misstatements and economic substance) to 75% (fraud).

However, before the IRS can assert most penalties against taxpayers, it must comply with the procedural requirement in Code Section 6751(b): That the “initial determination” to assert the penalty be “personally approved (in writing) by the immediate supervisor of the individual making such determination.” As the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explained in Chai v. Commissioner, US Congress imposed this requirement because it “believes that penalties should only be imposed where appropriate and not as a bargaining chip” and “[t]he statute was meant to prevent IRS agents from threatening unjustified penalties to encourage taxpayers to settle.”

Over the past several years, there has been substantial litigation over the proper interpretation and application of Code Section 6751(b). The US Tax Court’s recent opinion in Oxbow Bend, LLC v. Commissioner is the latest development. In Oxbow Bend, the Tax Court rejected the taxpayer’s position that the “initial determination” was made on the date that the examining agent prepared a penalty lead sheet reflecting her recommendation to assert penalties and stated in a telephone conference with the taxpayer’s representative on that same day that penalties were being considered. Approximately three months later, the examining agent’s supervisor approved the penalty lead sheet, and the IRS issued a Notice of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment asserting the penalties. The Tax Court, relying on its prior precedent, held that the word “determination”:

  1. “has an established meaning in the tax context and denotes a communication with a high degree of concreteness and formality”
  2. “signifies a consequential moment of IRS action”
  3. is not a “mere suggestion, proposal, or initial informal mention of penalties”
  4. “will be embodied in a formal written communication that notifies the taxpayer of the decision to assert penalties.”

Thus, under the Tax Court’s analysis, an “initial determination” can only be made in a “written” document that is provided to the taxpayer.

Oxbow Bend is a memorandum opinion of the Tax Court and, therefore, is limited to its facts and technically not precedential, as we have discussed in the past. However, memorandum opinions are often cited by litigants, and the Tax Court does not disregard these types of opinions lightly. One has to wonder whether, under different facts where an examining agent makes an explicit oral statement to a taxpayer that penalties “will” be asserted, courts might reach a different result given Congress’s express intent that examining agents should not threaten penalties and use them as a bargaining chip for settlement purposes. Further, Code Section 6751(b) expressly requires that the supervisory approval be “in writing” but contains a written requirement for purposes of the [...]

Continue Reading



read more

Former Tax Court Judge Gerber Passes Away

by and | Mar 9, 2022 | ,

The US Tax Court announced that former Judge Joel Gerber passed away on March 4, 2022. Judge Gerber retired from the Tax Court on July 16, 2020.

Prior to his appointment to the Tax Court, Judge Gerber spent several years working for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in several cities around the country, including as Acting Chief Counsel. He was then appointed to the Tax Court in 1984, serving as Chief Judge from June 1, 2004, to May 31, 2006. Both before and after his appointment, Judge Gerber was a frequent participant in tax seminars and professional programs, including as a lecturer of law at Vanderbilt School of Law and the University of Miami School of Law Graduate Program.

We both knew Judge Gerber well during our time clerking at the Tax Court. He was always engaging and enjoyed talking about many things outside of tax. As the Tax Court’s announcement states: “Judge Gerber had a zest for life and was a humble, humorous, and unabashedly compassionate man who endeared himself to colleagues, employees, and all those fortunate enough to cross his path.”



read more

New Tax Court Chief Judge Announced

by and | Mar 1, 2022 | ,

On February 25, 2022, the US Tax Court announced that Judge Kathleen Kerrigan has been elected the new Chief Judge and will serve a two-year term beginning June 1, 2022. Judge Kerrigan will replace Chief Judge Maurice B. Foley, who has served in the role since June 1, 2018.

Judge Kerrigan was sworn into the Tax Court on May 4, 2012, for a term ending May 3, 2027. She earned her BS from Boston College in 1985 and her JD from the University of Notre Dame Law School in 1990. After law school, Judge Kerrigan served as Legislative Director for Congressman Richard E. Neal (D-MA) and then worked at Baker & Hostetler LLP in Washington, DC, from 1998 to 2005. From 2005 until her appointment to the Tax Court, she served as Tax Counsel for Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA).

The Tax Court is comprised of 19 presidentially appointed members, senior judges serving on recall and special trial judges. The judges travel nationwide to conduct trials in various designated places.



read more

Former Tax Court Judge Robert P. Ruwe Passes Away

by and | Feb 23, 2022 | ,

We are deeply saddened to report that retired US Tax Court Judge Robert P. Ruwe passed away on February 12, 2022. The Tax Court’s press release aptly stated: “Judge Ruwe was known for his extraordinary memory and grasp of tax law, and for the valuable experience that he brought to his work.”

We both clerked for Judge Ruwe in the early 2000s and will never forget his mentorship, dedication to service and love of tax. Judge Ruwe was fond of going for walks with his clerks, whether to talk about pending cases, sports, politics or family life. He also enjoyed giving history lessons during those walks, pointing out lesser-known monuments or memorials and sharing the background of various government buildings. Most walks also ended with the purchase of roses from street vendors to give to his wife MaryKay that evening. Judge Ruwe will be sorely missed.

Below are links with further information about Judge Ruwe and his legacy:

(Robert P. Ruwe, July 3, 1941 – February 12, 2022)



read more

Tax Court Posts New Citation and Style Manual

by and | Feb 3, 2022 | ,

A substantial amount of our practice over the years has involved representing clients before the US Tax Court. And, we both started our tax careers clerking at the Tax Court and working on dozens of orders and opinions. Needless to say, we are familiar with the ins and outs of the Tax Court.

When it comes to the system of citation and style used by the Tax Court in its orders and opinions, it generally endorses use of the Bluebook. Our historic practice in filing documents with the Tax Court involved following the citation and style used in its orders and opinions, even where that citation and style varies from the Bluebook. Based on our clerkships and familiarity with many of the judges, we have always believed that clerks and judges prefer to read filings that use the same citation and style that is used in orders and opinions.

The Tax Court recently issued a new Citation and Style Manual (Manual) for the purpose of providing consistency within the Tax Court and with other federal courts. The policies and procedures in the Manual are intended to serve as guidance for documents issued by the Tax Court to the public, although each authoring judge retains discretion on citation and style. A couple of notable changes include the use of italics rather than underscoring for signals, citations and emphasis, as well as changes in the way Internal Revenue Code provisions and US Department of the Treasury Regulations are cited.

Practice Point: It may seem trivial to some but following the Manual is important for taxpayers and their representatives when filing documents in the Tax Court. Accordingly, we recommend reviewing the Manual and conforming your filings to the citation and style set forth therein. Making your points in filings in a clear, direct manner using the style recognized and accepted by the Tax Court will assist you in being successful in your Tax Court litigation.



read more

IRS Chief Counsel Signals Increased Tax Enforcement

by , and | Jan 27, 2022 | , , , , ,

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Chief Counsel is the chief legal advisor to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue on all matters pertaining to the interpretation, administration and enforcement of the Internal Revenue Laws. In this regard, the IRS Office of Chief Counsel is responsible for litigating cases in the US Tax Court. Such cases can arise from examinations conducted by different divisions within the IRS, such as the Large Business & International (LB&I), Small Business/Self Employed (SB/SE), Tax Exempt & Government Entities (TE/GE) and Wage & Investment (W&I) Divisions.

On January 21, 2022, the IRS Office of Chief Counsel announced plans to hire up to 200 additional attorneys to assist with litigation efforts. The announcement specifically notes that new hires are necessary “to help the agency combat syndicated conservation easements, abusive micro-captive insurance arrangements and other tax schemes.” They will also help the IRS manage its increasing caseload as part of its multiyear effort to combat what it believes are abusive schemes and to ensure that the appropriate taxes and penalties are paid. The new hires will be located around the country and focus on audits of complex corporate and partnership issues.

Additionally, there are a significant number of cases before the Tax Court that involve conservation easements and micro-captive insurance arrangements. The IRS’s attack on the donation of conservation easements is well known in the tax world. To date, the IRS has largely been successful in these cases based on non-valuation arguments that easement deeds do not comply with the applicable regulations. However, in the recent Hewitt v. Commissioner case, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit dealt a significant blow when it held that the IRS’s interpretation of Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6)(ii) was arbitrary and capricious and violated the Administrative Procedure Act because the US Department of the Treasury failed to respond to significant comments submitted during the notice-and-comment process. Many conservation easements are within the Eleventh Circuit’s jurisdiction and other appellate courts are expected to weigh in soon, which could result in the IRS and taxpayers proceeding to trial on valuation issues. Valuation issues are inherently fact intensive and will require the IRS to utilize substantial resources to litigate.

Practice Point: Much has been written about the trend of decreased enforcement by the IRS over the past several years, owing in part to decreased or stagnant funding from US Congress. Tax litigation, particularly in fact intensive cases involving valuation issues and transactions the IRS (but not necessarily the courts) deemed abusive, requires the expenditure of substantial resources by the IRS. The IRS has signaled that it is ready to reverse the trend. All IRS tax controversies start with the examination of the taxpayer’s positions on the return. We have seen an increase in IRS audit activity in the last year or so, especially with medium-sized businesses and high-net-worth individuals. The Chief Counsel is assembling his “army” to litigate positions developed during the examination. It’s a good time for taxpayers [...]

Continue Reading



read more

Extending the Statute of Limitations for Assessing Federal Tax

by and | Jan 14, 2022 | , ,

We previously provided an overview of the time limits imposed on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for assessing federal tax. The general rule is that the IRS must assess tax within three years from the later of the due date of the original tax return or the date it was filed. If the IRS does not assess tax during this period, it is foreclosed from doing so in the future. Note that the filing of an amended return does not restart or extend the limitations period. There are numerous exceptions to this rule, including if there is a substantial omission of income, fraud, failure to file a return, extension by agreement and failure to provide certain information regarding foreign transactions. We discussed many of these exceptions in Seeking Closure on Tax Positions: A Look at Tax Statutes of Limitation and Omitted Subpart F and GILTI Income May Be a Statute of Limitations Trap for the Unwary. Below, we discuss the rules and considerations for consenting to extending the time to assess federal tax.

Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 6501(c)(4) provides that, except in the case of estate taxes, taxpayers (or their duly authorized representative) and the IRS may consent in writing to an extension of the limitations period for assessment. Importantly, such an agreement must be executed before the limitations period expires. In other words, assuming no other exception applies to the general three-year rule, an agreement to extend the limitations must be executed within the later of three years from the date the tax return was due or filed. If executed after that date, the consent is invalid. Thus, a late-filed consent cannot revive an otherwise closed limitations period. Under Code Section 6511(c), extending the statute of limitations on assessment also extends the period for filing a claim for credit or refund to six months after the expiration of the extended assessment period.

Form 872, Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, is generally used to effectuate an agreed extension to a certain date, however, other versions of the form may be used for different types of taxpayers or issues (e.g., Form 872-M, Consent to Extend the Time to Make Partnership Adjustments, is used for partners subject to the centralized partnership audit regime under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015). Form 872-A, Special Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, may be used to extend the limitations period for an indefinite period (referred to as an Open-Ended Consent). An Open-Ended Consent ends 90 days after the mailing by the IRS of written notification of termination or receipt by the IRS of written notification of termination from the taxpayer (both actions are accomplished through the use of Form 872-T, Notice of Termination of Special Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax), or the mailing of a notice of deficiency. The IRS’s views on Open-Ended Consents are summarized in
Continue Reading



read more

Tax Court Opinions Are Searchable (Again)

by and | Dec 29, 2021 | ,

The US Tax Court gave taxpayers and tax practitioners a belated Christmas gift when it announced that the Opinion search feature is back. This news comes on the heels of the Tax Court’s reintroduction of the Order search function earlier this month.

The Opinion search function allows the public to search for specific cases by name or docket number or run general searches by a keyword or phrase, judge, date range or opinion type (see here for an explanation of opinion types). Unlike the Tax Court’s prior case management system, the new system allows the public to search Bench Opinions. Guidance from the Tax Court on using the Opinion and Order search functions can be found here.

Results are available for opinions in the Tax Court’s system for cases filed on or after May 1, 1986. Thus, the public will need to use other resources in order to obtain older cases. Opinions are also available for cases where the docket is sealed, which is an improvement over the Order search function which does not return results for sealed cases.

Practice Point: The return of the Opinion search feature is an exciting development. It is extremely helpful in searching for specific opinions and is also a useful tool when searching whether a particular judge has dealt with certain issues in the past. Unfortunately, the Tax Court still has not fixed the issue where its case management system seals the entire docket and not just the specific items ordered sealed, but we are hopeful this issue will be resolved soon.



read more

Types of Tax Court Opinions and Their Precedential Effect (Updated)

by and | Dec 20, 2021 | ,

At the end of 2016 we posted “Types of Tax Court Opinions and Their Precedential Effect” and added that document to the Resources tab on the blog. We recently updated this resource and, below, we’ve also provided the updated text.

Most tax cases are decided by the US Tax Court, which issues two categories of opinions: formally published dispositions and unpublished dispositions. The first category consists of opinions that are published in the Tax Court Reports and are technically called “division opinions” but are more commonly referred to as “T.C. opinions.” The second category consists of three sets of unpublished dispositions:

  1. memorandum opinions (commonly referred to as “memo opinions” or “T.C. memos”)
  2. summary opinions
  3. orders.

A common question asked by taxpayers relates to the difference between these forms of dispositions in terms of precedential effect.

T.C. opinions are binding in the Tax Court, precedential and published by the Tax Court. They generally address issues of first impression, issues that impact a large number of taxpayers or matters related to the validity or invalidity of regulations. To the extent there is a T.C. opinion on point, taxpayers should cite to it as primary authority in a Tax Court proceeding.

Memo opinions are not officially published but are reproduced by commercial publishers. They generally address cases that do not involve novel legal issues and the law is settled, or the result is factually driven. Although these opinions are technically not precedential, they are often cited by litigants, and the Tax Court does not disregard these opinions lightly. It is rare to find a non-T.C. opinion that rejects the reasoning of a memo opinion. Indeed, the trend in recent years seems to be that the weight afforded to T.C. opinions and memo opinions is not substantially different. This reflects the fact that there are significantly more memo opinions than T.C. opinions each year (approximately 90% of all Tax Court opinions are memo opinions), providing taxpayers with more authority upon which to provide support for their position.

Summary opinions are also not published by the Tax Court but are reproduced by commercial publishers. They are issued in cases where the amount in dispute is less than $50,000 and the taxpayer elects to have their case tried under the small tax case procedures. Most summary opinions involve run-of-the-mill facts, but some provide insightful discussions of the law that may support a taxpayer’s case. By statute, summary opinions are not precedential, however, the Tax Court does not prohibit the citation of this type of opinion and has noted that it may give consideration to the reasoning and conclusions in a summary opinion to the extent they are persuasive. Thus, in the absence of a T.C. opinion or memo opinion supporting a taxpayer’s position or addressing the issue presented, taxpayers may want to consider citing to a favorable summary opinion.

Finally, the Tax Court issues dozens of orders, some of which involve the discussion of substantive issues that may [...]

Continue Reading



read more

Tax Court Orders Are Searchable (Again)

by and | Dec 15, 2021 |

In late 2020, the US Tax Court transitioned to a new case management system, DAWSON (Docket Access Within a Secure Online Network), which was named after the late Judge Howard A. Dawson, Jr.. We previously discussed DAWSON here and here.

Over the past year, the Tax Court has made improvements to DAWSON in order to provide better access to taxpayers and their representatives. One of the helpful features of the old case management system was the ability to search Orders, however, that feature was not present in DAWSON—until now.

On December 14, 2021, the Tax Court announced that the Order search feature is once again available to the public. In addition to searching for Orders by case name or docket number, the public can also search by keyword or phrase, by judge or by date range. The Tax Court’s DAWSON Release Notes page provides the following additional information:

  • Implemented Order search for public users
    • Includes keyword and phrase search
    • Includes ability to find exact matches with “” (quotation marks) ex: “innocent spouse”
    • Includes ability to combine two or more keywords or phrases with the + (plus sign) ex: “collection due process” + remand
    • Includes ability to find documents with one or more keywords or phrases with the | (pipe character) ex: Lien | levy [Note: this search will return documents that contain the words “lien” or “levy”]
    • Includes ability to filter by date, judge, case title, petitioner name, or docket number
  • Petitions and other documents with form fields now upload correctly for all browsers.

Similar guidance concerning searching for documents is also available on the Tax Court’s website. The Tax Court also updated its Public Guide, Self-Represented (Pro Se) Petitioner Guide and Practitioner Guide for DAWSON. The Public Guide indicates that the ability to search court opinions in DAWSON is coming soon. Additionally, cases that migrated from the prior case management system appear as sealed in DAWSON if there were any sealed documents in the case. It remains to be seen whether unsealed Orders in such cases will be searchable in the future.

The Tax Court’s announcement does not indicate how far back the public can go to search for Orders. Using the Order search function and restricting the date range, the earliest Order we were able to find dates back to May 22, 1980. Based on entering different date ranges, it appears that certain Orders are available back to this date but not all Orders dating back to May 22, 1980, are available. This is not surprising given that Tax Court records are sent offsite to storage after a set period of time. Regardless, the ability to search for Orders back to 1980, at least for those Orders that are available on the website, is an improvement over the prior Order search feature, which [...]

Continue Reading



read more

BLOG EDITORS

Kevin Spencer

Evan Walters

STAY CONNECTED

Subscribe

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

jd supra readers choice top firm 2023 badge