Photo of Andrew R. Roberson

Andrew (Andy) R. Roberson focuses his practice on tax controversy and litigation matters. He represents clients before the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Examination Division and Appeals Office and has been involved in more than 50 matters at all levels of the federal court system, including the US Tax Court, several US courts of appeal and the Supreme Court. Andy has experience settling tax disputes through alternative dispute resolution procedures, including Fast Track Settlement and Post-Appeals Mediation, and in representing clients in Compliance Assurance Process (CAP) audits. He also represents individuals in Global High Wealth Industry Group audits and in connection with offshore disclosure programs. Read Andy Roberson's full bio.

We previously discussed the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) surprising position that for taxpayers making an election under Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 965(h) to pay the transition tax over 8 years through installment payments, any overpayments of 2017 tax liabilities cannot be used as credits for 2018 estimated tax payments or refunded, unless and until the overpayment amount exceeds the full 8 years of installment payments. The IRS’s position has affected many taxpayers, and practitioners have expressed their concerns to the IRS.

On June 4, 2018, the IRS responded to these concerns. Rather than changing its position, the IRS has doubled down; however, the IRS has taken the small but welcome step of allowing some penalty relief for taxpayers affected by the earlier guidance as set forth in new Questions and Answers 15, 16 and 17.

Based on discussions with the IRS, it appears that the IRS’s position is based on the view that it has broad authority under Code Section 6402 to apply overpayments against other taxes owed, and that Code Section 6403 requires an overpayment of an installment payment to be applied against unpaid installments. Thus, the IRS maintains that the Code Section 965 tax liability is simply a part of the tax year 2017 liability, and it is, except for Code Section 965(h) and a timely election thereunder, payable and due by the due date of the 2017 tax return. Any future installments for the Code Section 965 liability are, in the IRS’s view, not part of a tax for a future tax year that has yet to have been determined, as the tax has already been self-assessed by the taxpayer for 2017. Accordingly, the IRS views any overpayments as being applied within the same tax period to the outstanding Code Section 965 tax owed by the taxpayer even though taxpayers making a timely Code Section 965(h) election are not legally required to make additional payments until subsequent years. Continue Reading Tax Reform Insight: IRS Doubles Down on Retention of 2017 Overpayments to Satisfy Future Section 965 Installment Payments

Just 10 days after his inauguration, President Trump signed Executive Order 13771, establishing the tenet of deregulation to be adopted by the Trump administration. Executive Order 13771 outlined the Trump administration’s vision for reducing regulation and controlling regulatory costs, and established a principle that for every one new regulation issued at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination — the “one in, two out” principle. President Trump’s Call for Reducing Tax Regulatory Burdens.

Access the full article.

Originally published in Law360, June 2018.

Following up on our prior post, Judge Maurice B. Foley takes over today as Chief Judge of the US Tax Court (Tax Court). The term as Chief Judge spans two years and involves several statutory and administrative duties, including but not limited to the assignment of cases, appointment of Special Trial Judges, review of draft opinions, and determination of which cases will be reviewed by the full court. For those interested in a historical analysis of the Tax Court, which was recently revised in 2014, see here.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has been busy in recent months working on implementing the recent tax reform legislation. The latest announcement by the IRS focuses on the $10,000 cap on the amount of state and local taxes that can be deducted for federal income tax purposes. In a press release and release of guidance in the form of Notice 2018-54, the IRS announced that proposed regulations will be issued addressing this issue to help taxpayers understand the relationship between federal charitable contribution deductions in exchange for a tax credit against state and local taxes owed. The press release, Notice and forthcoming proposed regulations are in response to workarounds by various high property tax states allowing local governments to set up charitable organizations that can accept property tax statements. Based on these materials, it is anticipated that the IRS will disagree with the workarounds:

The Treasury Department and the IRS intend to propose regulations addressing the federal income tax treatment of transfers to funds controlled by state and local governments (or other state-specified transferees) that the transferor can treat in whole or in part as satisfying state and local tax obligations. The proposed regulations will make clear that the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code, informed by substance-over-form principles, govern the federal income tax treatment of such transfers. The proposed regulations will assist taxpayers in understanding the relationship between the federal charitable contribution deduction and the new statutory limitation on the deduction for state and local tax payments.

The IRS’s website provides information on the latest IRS news releases, fact sheets and statements. Additionally, we have a dedicated webpage with insights on significant developments related to tax reform.

On May 21, 2018, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Large Business and International Division (LB&I) announced the identification and selection of six new campaigns. These new campaigns follow the initial 13 campaigns announced on January 31, 2017, followed by 11 campaigns announced on November 3, 2017, and 5 campaigns announced on March 13, 2018. Continue Reading LB&I Announces Six New Campaigns

In a surprising development, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has announced that if a taxpayer’s 2017 payments, including estimated tax payments, exceed its 2017 net income tax liability described under Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 965(h)(6)(A)(ii) (its net income tax determined without regard to Code Section 965) and the first annual installment (due in 2018) pursuant to an election under Code Section 965(h), the taxpayer may not receive a refund or credit of any portion of properly applied 2017 tax payments unless—and until—the amount of payments exceeds the entire unpaid 2017 income tax liability, including all amounts to be paid in installments under Code Section 965(h) in subsequent years. Thus, for taxpayers making an election under Code Section 965(h) to pay the transition tax over 8 years through installment payments, any overpayments of 2017 tax liabilities cannot be used as credits for 2018 estimated tax payments or refunded, unless and until the overpayment amount exceeds the full 8 years of installment payments.

The IRS’s position, announced on April 13, 2018 (the last business day before the normal due date for the filing of 2018 individual income tax returns), effectively allows the IRS to deprive taxpayers of the use of funds and credits for overpayments for a potentially multi-year period. This position is at odds with the normal practice of allowing refunds or credits of overpayments and arguably violates Code Section 7803(a), which provides for certain taxpayer rights. This position also would seem to be in conflict with Code Section 965(h) itself, allowing the Code Section 965 transition tax liability to be paid in eight backloaded installments rather than immediately. The AICPA sent a letter to the IRS on April 19, 2018, urging the IRS to change its position to avoid the “detrimental impact on all affected taxpayers, including individuals, small businesses and large corporations.” We are hopeful that the IRS will reconsider this misguided policy, but in the meantime, taxpayers need to be aware of it. Please contact one of McDermott’s lawyers if you think you might be affected by the IRS’s position on this subject.

On April 24, 2018, the US Department of the Treasury (Treasury) released a report (Report) outlining the efforts undertaken to-date by Treasury to implement the president’s regulatory reform agenda.  The efforts have been in furtherance of President Trump’s Executive Order 13771 and Executive Order 13789 calling for a reduction in regulatory burdens and costs.

The Report highlights Treasury’s extensive efforts to support President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda.  In particular, the Report provides that Treasury has:

  • Reduced its regulatory agenda by approximately 100 regulations from its Fall 2017 agenda
  • Issued a notice to eliminate almost 300 “deadwood” tax regulations that are duplicative or obsolete
  • Withdrawn two regulations deemed “significant” in an October 2017 report (see prior discussion here)
  • Issued a series of reporting providing specific recommendations to make the US financial regulatory system more efficient

The Report also provides that, since the issuance of Executive Order 13771 (outlining the Trump administration’s “one-in-two-out” principle), Treasury has focused on burden-reducing measures and that no new “regulatory” actions have been undertaken.  Rather, actions from Treasury’s fall 2017 agenda have either been identified as “deregulatory” or have not yet been classified.

The Report also notes that Treasury has also undertaken a retrospective review of significant recent tax regulations pursuant to Executive Order 13789 and identified eight regulations for rescission or modification (largely consistent with the October 2017 report).

Treasury has indicated that these actions will “advance the President’s policy of regulatory efficiency in support of lower individual and corporate compliance burdens.”

Practice Point:  Taxpayers should continue to monitor Treasury’s action with respect to regulatory reform, especially in light of the regulatory process in connection with US tax reform.

In a press release on April 24, 2018, the White House stated that President Trump has reappointed Tax Court Judge Mark Holmes for a second 15-year term.  Judge Holmes was originally appointed by President George W. Bush on June 30, 2003, for a term ending June 29, 2018.  Instead of seeking “senior status” on the Tax Court, Judge Holmes sought to be reappointed for a second term.

On April 17, 2018, the Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson, testified before a Congressional Oversight Committee regarding on-going challenges to the administration of an efficient and effective tax system. Ms. Olson runs the Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS), an independent office within the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Taxpayer Advocate is appointed by and reports directly to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The office was created under the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, which became law on July 30, 1996. The office replaced the IRS Office of the Ombudsman. Continue Reading National Taxpayer Advocate Reminds Congress of IRS Deficiencies