You Mess With The Bull . . .

An anonymous thinker, lost to history, is credited with having said that the unofficial motto of the IRS is, “We have what it takes to take what you have.”

In some instances, the truth of the above statement is manifested in what may be described by certain observers as an abuse of governmental power. In other cases, however, like that of the Taxpayers described below,[i] many members of the public will feel vindicated by the outcome, while probably many more will categorically approve of a bad actor’s having received their just deserts.[ii]

“Let’s make sure if they move, they have nowhere else to go because we’re all taxing them together.”[i]

Around the Globe

Earlier this year, the OECD observed there has been a significant increase in global wealth inequality over the last two decades. It also acknowledged that “taxation is a key instrument . . . that governments have at their disposal to address inequalities.” It added that, as “countries are looking for additional revenue sources to meet their long-term public spending needs,” it will be important to ensure “that everyone contributes their fair share,” specifically mentioning those individuals with “offshore wealth.”[ii]

Use Your Imagination

Imagine the IRS notifies Taxpayer that they have an outstanding tax liability with respect to Tax Year, and that the agency intends to levy on Taxpayer’s property to collect the allegedly unpaid tax. Taxpayer challenges the levy, arguing they had already paid the tax. The IRS Office of Appeals sustains the levy, and Taxpayer petitions the U.S. Tax Court to review that decision.

Imagine also, while the issue of the levy is pending before the Court, the IRS withholds from Taxpayer a refund for a later tax period, to which Taxpayer is concededly entitled, and that is unrelated to the levy.  

Related Party Transactions

Few individual owners of a closely held business would be surprised if you explained to them that the IRS and the Federal courts generally will subject many transactions between certain “related” persons to heightened scrutiny (a) to ensure that the related persons have not structured a transaction to gain a tax advantage without also having a bona fide business purpose, or (b) to ascertain whether the intended economic consequences of the transaction are consistent with its form and with how it is reported by the parties for tax purposes.   

However, those same individuals may be taken aback if you described to them some of the measures that Congress has enacted over the years to prevent related persons from realizing certain tax benefits that Congress has determined would be inappropriate in the context of a transaction between related parties.  

This is The End[i]  

I have dreaded the year end for as long as I can remember. As a teenager and then as a young adult I associated the final quarter of the year, and especially the period beginning on Thanksgiving and ending on New Year’s Eve, with completing final exams and papers.[ii] After graduating from law school, but being inexperienced with the business of business, I naively hoped that the blues and the anxiety that I had experienced every year during that time of year were finally behind me. Not so.