Search results

Worker classification continues to be a highly litigated area of taxation. That is, the status of a worker as an employee or independent contractor remains a topic closely scrutinized by the Internal Revenue Service. This study examines factors that the judiciary deems relevant in ruling whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. A backward stepwise logistic regression model is implemented to categorize the factors that best predict the court’s decision on whether a worker is either an employee or independent contractor pursuant to the factors in Revenue Ruling 87-41 (1987-1 CB 296), judge gender, and political affiliation. The results indicate three factors (supervision/instructions, continuing relationship, and the right to discharge) are capable of accurately predicting 93 percent of the decisions made by the US Tax Court. Other findings support notable statistical differences between male and female judges rendering decisions and reaching conclusions. Also, there is a statistically significant difference based on the type of industry. Political affiliation appears to have no significant impact on judicial rulings.

A subject that often causes trouble for reference librarians is federal income tax research and the use of tax services. This article describes the sources of federal income tax law, sources used to interpret the tax laws, and the services that pull all of this information together for the researcher.

The purpose of this paper is to enlighten the reader about the development in tax law. Moreover, the author intends to show that other measures could be implemented to supplement the existing machinery.

The paper explores the duty vested in the courts to probe the merits of transactions meant to evade or avoid the burden of tax. So much of the text is based on case law. The methodology is based on literature research rather interpersonal research.

The paper highlights that the current tax machinery has solved a number of tax issues. However, the machinery has not addressed the problem of fraud committed in the banking sector. The paper therefore recommends solutions to this problem.

The paper was formulated before the current tax laws where implemented. The current law contains the solution this study advanced. In a sense, this study examines the impact of the current law and the duty of the court to probe the merits of impeachable transactions.

The study would give the legislature food for thought and would also guide the courts with matters of tax fraud.

Though the original recommendations form part of the current statute, this study is still immensely original in delivery and thought. It provide not only an original influence on the court but also the legislature with original solution to the existing problem.

Married couples receive tax benefits such as favorable tax rates, higher exclusions, higher phase-outs, and combined deductions. However, joint and several tax liability is a major issue facing these taxpayers. The term innocent spouse relief, within the Internal Revenue Code, is a direct result of one spouse failing to satisfy the joint liability for the married couple. Since both individuals are jointly and severally liable for the combined liability, the innocent spouse may be responsible for the liability in whole or in part. Our study examines this highly litigated arena of innocent spouse relief. To assist in this area of taxation, the Internal Revenue Service has provided taxpayers and tax practitioners with guidance. Revenue Procedure 2003-61 (2003-2 CB 296) outlines factors useful in determining whether innocent spouse relief should be granted. Additionally, this study creates a predictive model containing only three significant factors (economic hardship, knowledge/reason, significant benefit) capable of predicting with approximately 89% accuracy. These same three variables are significant after running multiple regression with p-values of 0.002 (economic hardship), 0.000 (knowledge/reason to know), and 0.001 (significant benefit). These factors provide valuable insight to practitioners when advising clients on challenging or accepting the Internal Revenue Service's decision. Additionally, abuse is marginally significant in the regression model. Also, judge gender and political affiliation are analyzed. However, the gender of the judge and political affiliation fail to be statistically significant using the chi-square test and regression model.

For several decades, a prominent movement within government and the legal profession has emphasized the use of “plain language” to improve readability in legal writing. Plain language legal writing in U.S. Tax Court opinions is important for tax advisors and their clients for two primary reasons. First, clients value efficiency in the work of the tax advisor. A tax advisor can research a thorny legal issue more efficiently and cost-effectively if the related Tax Court opinions are written in a clear, logical, and easy-to-read manner. Second, if opinions are difficult to understand, they provide less certain authority. A degree of certainty in the tax law is important for taxpayers to plan and conduct their economic activities, whereas a lack of certainty creates confusion and an inefficient tax compliance and planning environment.

We examined the readability of the Tax Court opinions using the Flesch Reading Ease formula. Since we selected the opinions used in this study based on the same database search term, they contain similar technical content, improving comparability of readability scores. The analysis shows that as the plain language movement progressed over the years, the readability of these opinions has actually decreased.

In Portugal, between 1989 and 2010, capital gains from corporate shares were exempted, while gains from other instruments, like limited liability companies (LLC) equity stakes, were taxed. Inevitably, this non-neutral tax treatment originated a notorious tax arbitrage, consisting in the transformation of the legal status of a LLC into a corporation, the subsequent share sale and tax exemption. In tax litigation, many arbitration rulings were delivered, with widely divergent decisions. The purpose of this paper, using a blend of the legal research method and case analysis, is to discuss three research questions. Should the general anti-abuse clause (GAAC) be applied to this tax planning operation? Why the divergence in arbitration rulings? Is this anomalous arbitration outcome because of the wording the GAAC and its complexity or, contrarily, does it emerge from the disconnection between the set of rules governing capital gains taxation and the legislative intent that is behind such rules?

The methodology used in this paper is based on a mix of the legal research method and case analysis. In the case of legal research, a hermeneutic approach – meaning that documents, texts and their interpretation can produce important fruits to the development of the field – is a tested and fruitful approach. Besides being a hermeneutic discipline, it is an argumentative one. By exposing arguments that confirm or deny particular solutions, legal research (e.g. in criminal, business or administrative law) can influence better legislative choices by political actors. Advantages of case analysis include lessons learned from observation. The author discusses if the application of the GAAC to an arrangement that originated a tax exemption can be validated by the usual interpretative lines that doctrine sustains should be observed when a GAAC is used to void legal schemes. The pros and cons of tax arbitration are also highlighted.

The conclusion of this paper is that the GAAC is not the crux of the problem. Instead, a contradictory or, at least, disconnected relation between the expressed intent of legislators and the wording of capital gains tax clauses is, in our view, the main reason for such divergent arbitration rulings on the same issue.

The author believes that the paper is a contribution to the literature, given the global use of anti-abuse clauses and the interpretative complexities they originate. Moreover, the analysis in this paper is carried out in a legal setting where a disconnection is detectable between the expressed legislative intent and the legal drafting of personal income tax rules related to the exemption of capital gains. Studying the complexity added by this feature of the Portuguese legislation serves as a reminder of the importance of careful and well-crafted wording to achieve consistent court outcomes.

The paper has value to governments, tax authorities and tax managers, given the ever-increasing use of anti-abuse clauses in many countries, and the potential use of arbitration in similar settings.

Reasonable compensation is a highly scrutinized area of taxation by the Internal Revenue Service because of the tax impact on both corporations and employees. The guidance provided via statutory and administrative authority does not fully address this issue. Specifically, there is a lack of clarity and consistency in this arena of tax. Our study examines reasonable compensation in closely held corporations and the impact of gender, political affiliation, and family makeup on decisions made in the US Tax Court. The time frame of judicial decisions covers 1983 through 2014. We use regression models and chi-square tests to analyze the effect of gender, political affiliation, and family composition on US Tax Court decisions in reasonable compensation cases. We find that the judge’s gender and tenure/experience are significant. Our results also suggest a relationship between the duration of the case and the judge’s decision. Our significant variables include judge’s gender, number of tax years covered by the case, taxpayer’s gender, and tenure/experience of the judge.

The additional tax (referred to as a “penalty” by the judiciary), which may be imposed in terms of section 76(1) of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) when a taxpayer is in default, can be very harsh (Up to 200% of the tax correctly chargeable). The Commissioner may remit any penalty imposed as he sees fit. However, when there was intent on the part of the taxpayer to evade the payment of tax, the Commissioner may not remit the 200% penalty, unless he is of the opinion that there are “extenuating circumstances”. This article examines the general meaning, as interpreted by the courts, of the “extenuating circumstances” that may be taken into account for the purposes of remission of penalties in terms of section 76(2)(a) of the Act.

This study investigates how a tax agency would assess the liability of a taxpayer who has first adopted a new, controversial tax‐saving scheme, which might be employed by other taxpayers. The tax agency’s post‐audit assessment to the first taxpayer influences whether and how the innovation will diffuse among taxpayers. We find that it is optimal for the tax agency to settle the issue regardless of whether and how fast the innovation diffuses. A trial is too costly an option for the agency: losing in court would make the innovation public knowledge, and other taxpayers would immediately adopt the new scheme. Neither the number of other taxpayers nor the speed of diffusion affects the amount of the optimal post‐audit assessment. These results suggest that a tax practitioner who markets a new tax‐saving scheme need not limit the speed of diffusion for fear of an aggressive response from the agency.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the causes that justify the application of presumptions in corporate income taxation. The authors focus on motives showing a connection to errors or fraud in the recognition of operations by the financial accounting system. The research question can be framed as follows: How to define the frontier between reliable accounting records and unreliable information, the latter rendering presumptions as an admissible way of taxing income?

The research design of this paper rests on two analytical steps based on the legal research method. The first step enquires, at the accounting level, how to define and quantify errors that render accounting statements inappropriate to assess firms’ performance and compute taxable income. The second step explores the practical application of presumptive tax concepts by Portuguese courts, to offer some criteria that can function as guidelines to firms and tax auditors.

The judgment about the boundaries of accounting errors that allow the use of presumption-based taxation is often decided by litigation. Portuguese jurisprudence provides strong evidence that presumptions should only be applied if, even by correcting of errors and inaccuracies, corporate real income cannot be obtained. The level of contamination must be obvious, and tax audits must present a strong and documented claim that presumptions are a last-resort mechanism to compute an appropriate tax base. The Supreme Tax Court has been applying a consistent approach characterized by: presumptive taxation is a last-resort mechanism; tax audits must prove that a generalized contamination of accounting data is observed; it is not possible to correct accounting errors, given their extension and depth, and the taxpayer did not submit contradictory solid evidence.

Applying, in practice, legal criteria to decide that accounting manipulation is so extensive that taxation must be based on presumptions is fraught with subjectivism. However, we offer an analysis where some guidelines to this complex issue are presented in a logical way. Principles-based taxation can, nonetheless, be applied with a significant degree of fairness and consistency.

The paper contributes to the literature by offering an analysis of the criteria used by Portuguese tax courts when deciding that accounting data can be disregarded and presumptions used as a tax computation tool. Given that the rule, in many countries, is to base taxable income on accounting records (albeit with adjustments established in Corporate Income Tax Codes), presumptions are a notable exception to this well-established rule. As such, taxpayers have a significant interest in knowing how courts rule on tax authorities’ use of presumptions. In this light, the paper has also potential value to professionals in the accounting and tax fields. They are often confronted with tax audits that apply presumptions. Therefore, knowing jurisprudential trends in the judgment of such, usually complex, cases is an important issue.