As we pointed out on May 10, 2023 in our post IRS Dirty Dozen List Targets 3 Schemes With International Elements the IRS has been targeting Foreign Captive Insurance as noncompliant with US tax rules.
In these transactions, U.S. business owners of closely held entities participate in a purported insurance arrangement with a Puerto Rican or other foreign corporation in which the U.S. business owner has a financial interest. The U.S. business owner (or a related entity) claims a deduction for amounts paid as premiums for “insurance coverage” provided by a fronting carrier, which reinsures the “coverage” with the Puerto Rican or other foreign corporation. Despite being labeled as insurance, these arrangements lack many of the attributes of legitimate insurance. The characteristics of the purported insurance arrangements typically will include one or more of the following: implausible risks covered (or duplicative coverage of risks already covered by commercial insurance), excessive premiums indicative of non-arm’s length pricing and a lack of business purpose for entering the arrangement.
Where appropriate, the IRS will challenge the purported tax benefits from these types of transactions and impose penalties. The IRS Criminal Investigation Division is always on the lookout for promoters and participants of these types of schemes. Taxpayers should think twice before including questionable arrangements like this on their tax returns. After all, taxpayers are legally responsible for what's on their return, not a promoter making promises and charging high fees. Taxpayers can help stop these arrangements by relying on reputable tax professionals they know and trust.
Now tax courts are green with the IRS and into recent holdings Jones et al. v. Commissioner, docket numbers 17165-19, 17169-19, 17177-19, 17178-19, 17187-19, 17201-19, 17205-19 and 17206-19, in the U.S. Tax Court and Farmers and Merchants Bancshares Inc. & Subsidiaries v. Commissioner, docket number 3394-25, in the U.S. Tax Court the Tax Court has held that the arrangements did not qualify as insurance.
In Jones, the court held that Shareholders in a California company cannot deduct their premium payments for insurance coverage from a captive insurer, the U.S. Tax Court ruled Tuesday, saying the arrangement did not constitute insurance for federal tax purposes.
The ruling turned on whether the arrangement passed muster as insurance, the court said. Despite Sani-Tech's effort to meet the required risk distribution by pooling its risks with other, unrelated captives, the court found Clear Sky did not achieve risk distribution. There was a circular flow of money and the policies were not arm's-length contracts, the court said. Furthermore, Clear Sky was not operated as an insurance company, some of its policies were likely invalid and the premiums were unreasonable, the court said.
In Farmers and Merchants Bancshares Inc. the court disallowed two years' worth of tax deductions tied to a reinsurance captive finding that the arrangement had no economic purpose other than tax avoidance.
The IRS warns anyone thinking about using one of these schemes – or similar ones – that the agency continues to improve investigation and enforcement in these areas by utilizing new and evolving data analytic tools and enhanced document matching.
Whether anchored offshore or in the U.S., abusive transactions and schemes remain a high priority for the IRS.
The IRS also created the Office of Fraud Enforcement (OFE) and Office of Promoter Investigations (OPI) to coordinate service-wide enforcement activities against taxpayers committing tax fraud and promoters marketing and selling abusive tax avoidance transactions and schemes to effectuate tax evasion.
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or Toll Free at 888 8TAXAID (888-882-9243)
Read more at: Tax Times blog
