Fluent in English, Spanish & Italian | 888-882-9243

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Category Archives: criminal tax law

3rd Circ. Rules That 90-Day Deadline for Filing a Petition in TC under IRC § 6213 (a) is Flexible.

According to Law360The Third Circuit revived a couple's challenge to their Internal Revenue Service bill Wednesday, finding that their failure to comply with a 90-day deadline for filing a petition with the U.S. Tax Court wasn't fatal to their case.

In the published opinion, a three-judge appeals court panel handed a victory to taxpayer rights advocates and said that the 90-day deadline for challenging IRS deficiency notices under Internal Revenue Code Section 6213(a) isn't jurisdictional. The ruling reversed a decision by the Tax Court that tossed Isobel Berry Culp and David R. Culp's tax challenge due to their failure to comply with the deadline.

Congress hasn't plainly said that the statutory deadline is a jurisdictional hurdle that has to be cleared for access to the Tax Court, the Third Circuit said, upending previous determinations from the Tax Court that the Section 6213(a) deadline is jurisdictional. The U.S. Supreme Court determined last year in Boechler PC v. Commissioner that a deadline for other Tax Court cases under IRC Section 6330(d)(1) was also not jurisdictional, a decision cited by the Third Circuit in its opinion Wednesday. 

"If the [Section] 6330(d)(1) deadline in Boechler fell short of being jurisdictional, [Section] 6213(a)'s limit must as well," the Third Circuit said.

The Third Circuit Also Found That Equitable Tolling,
Which Can Extend The Statute Of Limitations In
Certain Circumstances, Can Apply To The 
§6213(A) Deadline For Deficiency Cases.


The IRS sought to increase the Culps' tax bill for 2015 after concluding they didn't report a roughly $8,800 legal settlement they received, even though they had reported it as "other income" on their return for that year, according to the Third Circuit. The agency sent a notice of deficiency to the couple after they failed to respond to a letter concerning the purported underpayment, which totaled nearly $4,700, including a penalty.

Later, in 2018, the IRS sent another letter, this time saying they owed just a little over $2,000 in taxes for 2015, the Third Circuit said. The couple didn't respond, so the IRS used a levy to take their Social Security earnings and tax refund for 2018.

The couple filed a petition with the Tax Court, which dismissed their case because they failed to meet the 90-day deadline.

The Third Circuit said in its opinion Wednesday that the couple's petition was well past the 90-day time frame for filing deficiency cases with the Tax Court. But the appeals court rejected the Tax Court's conclusion that the Section 6213(a) deadline is jurisdictional, citing the Supreme Court's decision finding Section 6330(d)(1) is not jurisdictional.

Like the text of Section 6330(d)(1), there is no clear connection in Section 6213(a) between the language concerning the 90-day deadline and the language giving the Tax Court jurisdiction over deficiency cases, the Third Circuit said.

Congress did intentionally limit the Tax Court's power in such cases in other parts of the statute, indicating that it "knew how to limit the scope of the Tax Court's jurisdiction," the opinion said.

"It expressly constrained the Tax Court from issuing injunctions or ordering refunds when a petition is untimely," the opinion said. "But it did not similarly limit the Tax Court's power to review untimely redetermination petitions."

And the 90-day deadline is subject to equitable tolling, the Third Circuit found, saying that nonjurisdictional deadlines are presumed to be subject to equitable tolling. There's no compelling evidence indicating Congress meant to exempt the deadline from such tolling, the appeals court said.


Have a Tax Problem?
 
Need To Go To Tax Court?
 
 Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini & Associates, P.A.   
 
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation contact us at:
Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243





 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Need to Expatriate? Maybe You Should Consider Singapore?

Why are some Americans Individuals expatriating?
  • Trump Did Not Win the Election?
  • Obama-Care with its associated additional 3.8% Obama Care Tax make you feel like leaving the country?
  • You're so sick of liberal Democrats trying to socialize the United States by taxing wealthy people?

  • Or maybe you're a naturalized U.S. citizen or permanent resident who has prospered here, but would now like to move back the old country for retirement or to start a new  venture?

According to CNBC the top reason why Americans abroad want to dump their U.S. citizenship include:

  • Nearly 1 in 4 American expatriates say they are “seriously considering” or “planning” to ditch their U.S. citizenship, a survey from Greenback Expat Tax Services finds.  
  • About 9 million U.S. citizens are living abroad, the U.S. Department of State estimates.
  • More than 4 in 10 who would renounce citizenship say it’s due to the burden of filing U.S. taxes, the Greenback poll shows.

So Where Do Wealthy People Move To
When They Expatriate From The US?

According to Henley & Partners Japan has been knocked off the top spot on the Henley Passport Index for the first time in five years and bumped into 3rd place, according to the latest ranking published today as part of the Henley Global Mobility Report 2023 Q3

Singapore Is Now Officially The Most Powerful Passport In
The World, With Its Citizens Able To Visit 192 Travel
Destinations Out Of 227 Around The World Visa-Free.

Far more than just a travel document that defines our freedom of movement, a strong passport also provides significant financial freedoms in terms of international investment and business opportunities. 

Improving your economic mobility via investment migration gives you greater visa-free access to more stable economies and key markets that represent a higher proportion of the world’s GDP. 


This, in turn, provides you with a pathway to more lucrative jurisdictions, helps mitigate country- or regional-specific risks, and enables you to build valuable partnerships with industry leaders, and expand your network of innovators and investors.


Should I Stay or Should I Go?



Need Advise on Expatriation?
 


Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini & Associates, P.A.   

for a FREE Tax Consultation contact us at:
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com 
or 
Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243



Read more at: Tax Times blog

$38 Million Collected From Taxpayer’s Incorrect Use of of Puerto Rico Act 20/22/60 Which Has Now Resulted in 100 Criminal Prosecutions

The IRS demonstrating its new capability to aggressively audit high-income tax dodgers said they collected $38 million in delinquent taxes from more than 175 high-income taxpayers in the past few months.


In one case, an individual had used money owed to the government to buy a Maserati and a Bentley, and roughly 100 high-income people tried to get favorable tax treatment through Puerto Rico without meeting certain tax requirements. Many of those cases are now facing criminal investigation.


The Internal Revenue Service announced its plan to pursue as many as 100 criminal investigations into potential abuses of Puerto Rico’s Act 20/22/60 tax incentive programs. 

In a July 14, 2023, release the IRS revealed that thanks to Inflation Reduction Act resources:

It Recently Identified About 100 High-Income Individuals Claiming Benefits In Puerto Rico Without Meeting The Residence And Source Rules Involving U.S. Possessions.

"These wealthy individuals are attempting to avoid U.S. taxation on U.S. source income, and we expect many of these cases to proceed to criminal investigation."

In addition to targeting high-income taxpayers improperly claiming benefits under Act 20/22/60, the IRS will investigate the professionals who assisted the taxpayers at issue. 

The IRS will attempt to contact and interview accountants, attorneys, financial advisors, and other individuals who promoted the Puerto Rico residency programs.

Taxpayers And Professional Advisors Contacted By The
IRS As Part Of This Enforcement Effort Should Engage Experienced Tax Counsel Before Speaking To The IRS!


 
Contact the Tax Lawyers at 

Marini& Associates, P.A. 

 
for a FREE Tax Consultation at: 
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com 
or 
Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243






Sources

AP
Kostelanetz
Bloomberg

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS To Cease Reducing Non-willful FBAR Penalties to $10,000 Per Year Based on Bittner

 

According to Law360, the Internal Revenue Service will no longer reduce the penalty for taxpayers who non-willfully fail to file Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts, according to an agency memorandum

The IRS has eliminated mitigation provisions for calculating non-willful FBAR penalties following the U.S. Supreme Court's judgment earlier this year in Bittner v. U.S limiting those fines to $10,000 for each year an FBAR isn't properly filed instead of $10,000 for each account undisclosed, according to the memo, published Tuesday and dated July 6.

The memo sets the nonwillful FBAR penalty at $10,000 but notes that the IRS' internal guidance for calculating willful FBAR penalties is unaffected by the change stating:

"While the Court’s holding pertained only to the calculation of penalties for non-willful reporting violations, the Court noted: 

The statute then adds an even more specific rule for a subclass of willful violations-those that involve “a failure to report the existence of an account or any identifying information required to be provided with respect to an account.” In cases like that, the law authorizes the Secretary to impose a maximum penalty of either $100,000 or 50% of the “balance in the account at time of the violation”-whichever is greater. So here, at last, the law does tailor penalties to accounts.” 

Penalties for willful reporting violations apply per-account and guidance in IRM 4.26.16 regarding the calculation of penalties for willful reporting violations remains unchanged. The Court’s decision does not address FBAR recordkeeping violations"

“Violation” for purposes of 31 USC 5321(a)(5) is not defined in the statute. The IRS has historically interpreted “violation” to mean the failure to report a given account properly. The Supreme Court, however, held that the failure to file a legally compliant FBAR constitutes a single violation, regardless of the number of unreported or improperly reported accounts."  

We personally don't see how the penalty for willful failure to file an FBAR, which Statutorily allows for penalty of up to 50% of the "balance in the account at the time of the violation, can be used as an analogy for non-willful penalty which is per year and does not Statutorily provide for $10,000 penalty per account. 

We Think That Taxpayers Should Challenge Subsequent
Non-willful Penalties, Based On This Memo, As It's Not Statutorily Supported by the Nonwillful Penalty
Provisions of 
31 USC 5321(a)(5)!

This decision is also inconsistent as it comes at a time that the US is currently dropping many of its lawsuits for non-willful penalties based upon number of accounts - see: 

Have an FBAR Penalty Problem?  
 


 Contact the Tax Lawyers at 
Marini& Associates, P.A. 
 
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation at: 
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com 
or 
Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888) 882-9243





Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help