Top Legal News » Tax Law

In re McKinney

admin — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:05:23 +0000

(U.S. 7th Cir., Bankruptcy Law, Civil Procedure, Judgment Enforcement, Property Law & Real Estate, Tax Law) An appeal by a tax debt owner in Chapter 13 proceedings, arising from the bankruptcy court’s denial of its objections to the debtor’s proposed plan to pay off the tax debt with interest within five years, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as, although the issue that the tax debt owner cares about may have been resolved, its basic dispute with the bankruptcy estate has not been resolved and therefore the judgment of the bankruptcy court is not final.

In re: Delta Airlines, Inc.

admin — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:02:15 +0000

(U.S. 2d Cir., Bankruptcy Law, Contracts, Tax Law) In creditors’ appeal from a bankruptcy court’s order upholding debtor’s objections to their claims under tax indemnification agreements, the order is vacated where: 1) the bankruptcy court’s construction of “pay” as that term was used in an agreement at issue nullified debtor’s obligation to pay the “Owner Participant” under the agreement upon the occurrence most likely to call its provisions into play 150 the debtor’s insolvency; and 2) the bankruptcy court effectively nullified the agreements by stripping them of their ability to protect the Owner Participant in the event of debtor’s default.

US v. Batson

admin — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 02:01:56 +0000

(U.S. 9th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Sentencing, Tax Law, White Collar Crime) In a prosecution for conspiracy to commit tax fraud, defendant’s restitution order is affirmed in part where the district court was authorized to order restitution for a violation of Title 26 as a condition of supervised release by 18 U.S.C. section 3563(b)(2), which granted courts broad discretion to order restitution as a condition of probation, and 18 U.S.C. section 3583(d), which made that grant applicable to supervised release. However, the order is vacated in part where restitution so ordered must be limited to the offense of conviction when, as here, that offense does not involve an element of a “scheme, conspiracy, or pattern of criminal activity.”

Estate of Charania v. Shulman

admin — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:56:07 +0000

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Procedure, Family Law, Probate, Trusts & Estates, Tax Law) In a tax deficiency case, the judgment of the tax court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the tax court’s judgment that all of the Citigroup shares were the separate property of the decedent for federal estate tax purposes and, thus, were includable in his gross taxable estate is affirmed, as the rule of De Nicols is that a change in marital domicile does not, in itself, effect a change in the marital property regime governing the spouses’ rights in personal property acquired throughout the course of the marriage; but 2) the tax court’s approbation of the late-filing penalty was in error and is therefore reversed.

Estate of Schneider v. Finmann

admin — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:56:05 +0000

(N.Y., Injury And Tort Law, Probate, Trusts & Estates, Professional Malpractice, Tax Law) In a legal malpractice action alleging that defendants negligently advised decedent to transfer, or failed to advise decedent not to transfer, an insurance policy which resulted in an increased estate tax liability, the appellate division’s affirmance of dismissal of the action is reversed where an attorney may be held liable for damages resulting from negligent representation in estate tax planning that causes enhanced estate tax liability.

In re: Gordon

admin — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:53:22 +0000

(N.Y., Administrative Law, Tax Law) In tax review proceedings against the Town of Esopus, its Assessor, and its Board of Assessment Review to challenge the taxable assessed value of petitioners’ land on the assessment rolls for the years 2002 through 2005, the appellate division’s denial of the petition is reversed where forest land certified as such by the Department of Environmental Conservation under Real Property Tax Law section 480-a is used, for real property tax assessment purposes, as forest land and must be assessed based on that use.

Stobie Creek Inv. LLC. v. US

admin — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:50:00 +0000

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Administrative Law, Corporation & Enterprise Law, Evidence, Government Law, Tax Law) In a tax refund suit involving the “Son of BOSS” tax shelter, Court of Federal Claims’ decision upholding the Notices of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment determinations and associated penalties is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly disregarded a series of transactions under the economic substance doctrine; 2) plaintiff was properly subject to accuracy-related penalties under 26 U.S.C. section 6662; 3) the reasonable-cause defense in 26 U.S.C. section 6664(c)(1) does not apply because it was not reasonable for plaintiff to rely on the advice of professionals in promoting and implementing the tax shelter; and 4) testimony of plaintiff’s expert was properly excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

Lantz v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue

admin — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 23:47:52 +0000

(U.S. 7th Cir., Family Law, Tax Law) Tax Court’s judgment invalidating the two-year deadline that the Treasury has imposed on claims under section 6015(f), and thus reversing the IRS’s denial of a taxpayer’s application for innocent-spouse relief, is reversed as the fact that Congress designated a deadline in two provisions of the same statute and not in a third is not a compelling argument that Congress meant to preclude the Treasury Department from imposing a deadline applicable to cases governed by that third provision.

Strategic Hous. Fin. Corp. of Travis County v. US

admin — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:47:30 +0000

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Government Law, Tax Law) In plaintiff’s suit against the U.S. to recover its arbitrage rebate, the order of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (CFC) dismissing the suit for lack of jurisdiction under I.R.C. section 7422(a) is affirmed as section 7422(a) prohibits a court from asserting jurisdiction to hear a bond issuer’s claim to recover an arbitrage rebate when the issuer failed to first seek an administrative refund from the IRS. However, the portion of the CFC’s judgment regarding whether I.R.C. section 148(f)(3) grants the Secretary of the Treasury unfettered discretion to accelerate an arbitrage rebate is vacated as the court should not have conducted an APA analysis after recognizing that it lacked jurisdiction.

Strategic Hous. Fin. Corp. of Travis County v. US

admin — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:47:26 +0000