About Us Careers Services Industries News Contact Us
 



WINTER 2008

CDH launches secure Client Portal

IRS prepares for first spike in 2008 filing season

Prove it! IRS demands less proof of business expenses in certain situations

IRS reveals stepped up audits of high-income individuals and pass-through entities

 


Do I have a higher risk of being audited if I file early?


I just hired a new employee and want to know how long I need to keep the resumes from other candidates on file

I heard that the I-9 form changed and wanted to know what changed and where I can get an updated version.

If an employee is considered a salaried employee, is there any circumstance where I am required to pay overtime pay?

Are we required to give employees a certain number of paid vacation or holidays?

Should I make a campaign contribution this year?

Congratulations To…

New Hires

 


About Corbett, Duncan & Hubly

Corbett, Duncan & Hubly, P.C. (www.cdhcpa.com) is a Crain’s Chicago Business Top 25 accounting and consulting firm. The firm provides clients a full range of professional services including: assurance, tax, risk management, valuation, litigation, fraud investigation, merger & acquisition, and business consulting.

Corbett, Duncan & Hubly
100 Pierce Road, Suite 100
Itasca, IL 60143
630-285-0215
630-285-1166 (fax)

www.cdhcpa.com

A 2006 Crain’s Chicago Business Top 25 Accounting Firm

GENERAL DISCLAIMER:
This newsletter is not intended to render legal, accounting or other professional services. The publisher assumes no liability for the reader's reliance on its contents. © 2007.

IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed on June 20, 2005 by the United States Treasury, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of 1) avoiding tax-related penalties or 2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed in this communication.

 


 

 

 

 

 

IRS wins big victory in tax shelter case


For almost 10 years, the IRS has been cracking down on abusive tax shelters that cost the government billions of dollars in lost tax revenue. Recently, the IRS won a big victory in a closely-watched case involving a very egregious tax shelter, known as Son of BOSS (Bond and Option Sales Strategy). The U.S. Court of Federal Claims agreed with the IRS that the transactions in Jade Trading, LLC v. U.S. (No.03-2164T), decided in December 2007, were abusive.

Wealthy investors
Son of BOSS was an abusive transaction aggressively marketed in the late 1990s and 2000 primarily to wealthy individuals. According to the IRS, these transactions were developed and marketed by a network of accounting and law firms and investment banks.

The IRS claims it is aware of “several thousand” Son of BOSS transactions. Typically, taxpayers claimed losses of as much as $10 million. Overall, the transactions reportedly cost the government more than $6 billion, not including interest and penalties.

A few years ago, the IRS offered a limited amnesty program to taxpayers involved in Son of BOSS transactions. In exchange for conceding 100 percent of the claimed tax losses and paying interest and penalties, the government agreed not to prosecute the taxpayers in court. At that time, the IRS warned taxpayers not to expect a better outcome in court than what they would have gotten in the settlement program. In this case, the IRS’ warning proved right on target.

Transaction
The transaction in this case involved limited liability companies (LLCs) that each purchased a spread position with foreign currency options based on the value of the Euro. The two options were "reverse knock-out" options.

All of the LLCs then contributed their options to a single partnership. They each computed the basis of their partnership interests solely based on the $15 million premium of the purchased options. They interpreted Code Sec. 752(b) to mean that, while partners must decrease their partnership basis by any liabilities assumed by the partnership, this did not apply for contingent obligations. They argued that the short-sold options were contingent obligations.

The LLCs later caused the partnership to redeem their partnership interests in exchange for assets. When they later sold these assets, they claimed a basis equal to that of their partnership interest. The result was a multi-million dollar tax loss.

Court’s analysis
The Federal Claims Court found that the losses were artificial. The transaction was developed as a tax avoidance mechanism and not as a legitimate investment strategy, the court held.

The court also found that the transaction had no reasonable profit potential. The structure of the transaction and the unusually high fees required for participation prevented it from being profitable, no matter how the value of the Euro performed, the court found.

(Jade Trading, LLC, FedCl, 03-2164T)


Back to top