Friday, November 15, 2019

Seeking Tax Designs By Misha Kaur: Time penalties for speeding motorists, rather than monetary penalties

Time penalties for speeding motorists, rather than monetary penalties (The Economist)

STUDY: Red-light cameras don’t seem to improve safety









Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit Affirms CFC Norman Holding that Taxpayer is Subject to FBAR Willful Penalty


In Norman v. United States, (Fed. Cir. 11/8/19), here, the Federal Circuit sustained an FBAR willful penalty, holding:
1. FBAR willfulness includes recklessness, as held by two other Circuits:  Bedrosian v. United States, 912 F.3d 144, 152–53 (3d Cir. 2018); United States v. Williams, 489 F. App’x 655, 658–59 (4th Cir. 2012).

2.  The Court of Federal Claims ("CFC") did not err in holding that Norman was willful for the following reasons (Slip Op. 7-8):



Sixth Circuit Holds that Courts Cannot Enjoin IRS From Receiving or Using Alleged Confidential Info from Former Attorney


In Gaetano v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 33164 (6th Cir. 2019), here, the Gaetanos (husband and wife) sued the United States to enjoin the IRS from receiving and using attorney-client confidential information that their former attorney, Goodman, did or might share with the IRS.  The Court opens with this good succinct introduction of the factual background and holding.

Richard and Kimberly Gaetano trusted Gregory Goodman as their legal advisor and business partner in running a cannabis operation. That trust was spurned.  The Gaetanos ended the relationship after ethics violations undid Goodman's license to practice law. He retaliated by assisting the Internal Revenue Service in a tax audit against them. Concerned about what Goodman might reveal, the Gaetanos sued the government to prevent it from discussing attorney-client confidences with him. The Anti-Injunction Act bars the lawsuit, and the Williams Packing exception does not apply. See 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a); Enochs v. Williams Packing & Navig. Co., 370 U.S. 1, 82 S. Ct. 1125, 8 L. Ed. 2d 292 (1962).
Artificial Intelligence, Finance, and the Law by (November 4, 2019). 88 Fordham Law Review 531 (2019); Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-31. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3480607 

“Artificial intelligence is an existential component of modern finance. The progress and promise realized and presented by artificial intelligence in finance has been thus far remarkable. It has made finance cheaper, faster, larger, more accessible, more profitable, and more efficient in many ways. Yet for all the significant progress and promise made possible by financial artificial intelligence, it also presents serious risks and limitations.

In the U.S., religious practices have an unclear relationship to the tax code. Sam Brunson, a professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law, has an idea to give some structure to the way policy makers deal with that relationship.
Congress historically writes religious accommodations into the tax code on a case-by-case basis: A group of people appears with a specific tax problem, and lawmakers decide whether to write a fix.
But what if there were a framework that would help them consider the problems consistently and fairly? Brunson proposes such a framework in his book, God and the IRS: Accommodating Religious Practice in United States Tax Law.

Steps to Take Now to Get a Jump on Next Year’s Taxes 



“The Internal Revenue Service today announced that employees in 401(k) plans will be able to contribute up to $19,500 next year. The IRS announced this and other changes inNotice 2019-59 (PDF), posted today on IRS.gov. This guidance provides cost‑of‑living adjustments affecting dollar limitations for pension plans and other retirement-related items for tax year 2020




Writing about the future of the tax profession in the September 1984 issue of Taxation in Australia, the late

Justice Graham Hill observed that “if we cannot be bold in thinking of the future and seeking to debate solutions to the
problems that arise we will not be later able to complain if the future is imposed upon us with solutions to the issues that
we may regard as unacceptable”.
Senioradvisers report: Review of the Tax Practitioners Board
Published on 01 Nov 19 by "TAXATION IN AUSTRALIA" JOURNAL ARTICLE
The discussion paper on the review of the Tax Practitioners Board has a number of proposals that tax practitioners need to be aware of.
Author profile
Bruce Quigley CTA
Bruce Quigley, CTA, has been Senior Adviser with The Tax Institute since April 2015. He assists in the preparation of submissions to the government, Treasury, Board of Tax, Tax Practitioners Board and the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) in relation to various tax and superannuation issues. Bruce has over 45 years’ experience in tax administration, compliance, interpretation, policy and law design, culminating in seven years serving as Second Commissioner of Taxation, the second most senior position in the ATO. Since retiring from the ATO in December 2013, Bruce has undertaken various policy, diagnostic and technical assistance missions in a number of countries as a Revenue Adviser for the Fiscal Affairs Department of the International Monetary Fund.

2019 Christopher Bergin Award For Excellence In Tax Writing

Posted by at