DOCSLIB.ORG

American Bar Association 34Th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
American Bar Association 34Th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax American Bar Association 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud & 7th National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop Las Vegas, Nevada December 6, 2017 ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Moderators Sandra R. Brown, Acting U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office (C.D. Cal.) Los Angeles, California Caroline D. Ciraolo Kostelanetz & Fink, LLP Washington, D.C. Panelists Lawrence S. Feld Law Offices of Lawrence S. Feld New York, New York Jeffrey Neiman Marcus Neiman & Rashbaum LLP Fort Lauderdale, Florida Martin A. Schainbaum Martin A. Schainbaum, P.C. San Francisco, California Autumn K. Woodard Special Agent Criminal Investigation Internal Revenue Service Dallas, Texas ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Page 2 of 406 Sandra R. Brown, Acting U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office (C.D. Cal.) Los Angeles, California [email protected] Acting United States Attorney Sandra R. Brown is the chief federal law enforcement officer in the Central District of California, a sprawling district based in Los Angeles that encompasses seven counties. Ms. Brown oversees the largest United States Attorney’s Office outside of the District of Columbia, an office that employs approximately 270 attorneys who serve more than 19 million residents. The United States Attorney’s Office prosecutes the entire range of federal criminal offenses, defends the United States in civil actions, and represents government interests in tax matters. ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Page 3 of 406 Ms. Brown obtained her B.S. in Business Administration from Central Michigan University, her J.D. from Western Michigan University-Cooley Law School, and her LL.M. in Taxation from the University of Denver. She joined the Office in 1991 and became the first Criminal Deputy Chief of the Tax Division in 2003. She was appointed Chief of the Tax Division in 2004 and served until her appointment as First Assistant United States Attorney in 2016. During Ms. Brown’s tenure as an AUSA she represented the government in a wide range of matters, including federal and state civil, criminal, appellate and bankruptcy tax matters, as well as defending Bivens actions involving IRS officials. Her civil tax cases have twice gone to the Supreme Court (Brockamp v. United States, 519 U.S. 347 (1997) and Williams v. United States, 514 U.S. 527 (1995)). She has also personally prosecuted a broad range of equally noteworthy criminal tax cases, including George Jesson, the founder of "We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education”; John McCarthy, the first UBS related FBAR prosecution in California, which attracted more than 2,000 worldwide media reports; and Gene Haas, the owner of two NASCAR teams and Haas Automation, Inc., the 7th largest employer in Ventura County, California, which resulted in one of the largest individual tax assessments fully recovered in a criminal tax case ever prosecuted in this nation. Ms. Brown’s successful handling of a Bivens action (Andersen v. United States, 298 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2002)), is cited in Rutter, California Practice Guide, 9th Cir. Appellate Practice as well as Federal Appellate Practice Guide 9th Circuit, making clear that one cannot use a civil injunction action to interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation, even where First Amendment claims may be present. Ms. Brown has been nominated for Attorney General’s awards three times and has been awarded both the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Chief’s Award (the highest recognition given by the IRS to a non-IRS employee) and the IRS’s Mitchell Rogovin National Outstanding Support of the Office of Chief Counsel Award (which recognizes DOJ attorneys for superior abilities to provide support to the Office of Chief Counsel and significant contributions to agency-wide and interagency work). She is the author of the following well-regarded articles: “FBAR Violations: The IRS’s New Tool For Improved Tax Compliance” (published by CCH in its Dec 2008-Jan 2009 issue of Journal of Tax Practice & Procedure); “Appearing for the United States of America” (featured in the 2009 edition of the ABA's publication of Careers in Tax Law); and Key Things To Know In Prosecuting Criminal Tax Cases: A View From the U.S. Attorney’s Office (which appeared in the March 2013 edition of the United States Attorneys’ Bulletin). ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Page 4 of 406 Caroline D. Ciraolo, Partner Kostelanetz & Fink, LLP Washington, D.C. [email protected] Caroline D. Ciraolo, former Acting Assistant Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Tax Division, is a partner with Kostelanetz & Fink and a founder of its Washington, D.C. office. Her practice focuses on complex and sophisticated federal and state civil tax controversies, including representation in sensitive audits, administrative appeals, and litigation in federal and state courts and tax tribunals, providing related tax advice, conducting internal investigations, and representing individuals and institutions in criminal tax investigations and prosecutions. During her tenure with the Justice Department, Ms. Ciraolo was actively involved in all aspects of Tax Division operations. The Division employs more than 360 attorneys in 14 civil, criminal and appellate sections, and is responsible for authorizing nearly all civil and criminal litigation arising under the internal revenue laws. Under Ms. Ciraolo’s leadership, the Division reached agreements with 80 Swiss financial institutions that admitted to facilitating tax evasion and the avoidance of reporting requirements by U.S. accountholders, and imposed and collected more than $1.36 billion in penalties, increased civil and criminal enforcement with respect to offshore tax evasion, employment tax violations, and traditional tax offenses, assisted the IRS through summons enforcement proceedings, and engaged in affirmative and defensive litigation involving abusive tax shelters and schemes, refund claims, and challenges to statues and regulations. In January, 2017, Ms. Ciraolo was recognized by IRS Chief Counsel William Wilkens with the Chief Counsel Award, the highest honor that can be conferred by that office. Caroline is a Fellow and Regent of the American College of Tax Counsel, a recipient of the ABA Section of Taxation’s Janet Spragens Pro Bono Award, and served as an instructor with the IRS Military VITA program at Ft. George G. Meade in Maryland. She has been recognized by Chambers, Best Lawyers in America, Super Lawyers (Top 10 Attorneys in Maryland, cover story in 2013), Euromoney Legal Media Group’s Americas Women in Business Law Awards (Best in Tax Dispute Resolution) (2014), and The Daily Record’s Top 100 Women Circle of Excellence. Ms. Ciraolo served as an Attorney Advisor for the Honorable Stanley J. Goldberg of the U.S. Tax Court from 1994 to 1996. ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Page 5 of 406 Martin A. Schainbaum Martin A. Schainbaum, P.C. San Francisco, California [email protected] Martin A. Schainbaum, founder of Martin A. Schainbaum, P.C., received his law degree and his masters in tax law from New York University. He is a former Assistant United States Attorney in the Northern District of California, Tax division, and former IRS Regional Counsel trial attorney. Marty is recognized in California as a Certified Taxation Specialist, is an active member of the Section of Taxation of the American Bar Association, and is a frequent speaker on tax controversy and litigation matters. He also serves as an adjunct professor of Federal Tax Procedure and Tax Litigation at Golden Gate University in San Francisco, California. His team of professionals is dedicated to the defense of civil and criminal tax matters, including all aspects of litigation, and white-collar crime, involving individual, business and corporate tax and white-collar crime matters. In 2010, Marty received the Bruce Hochman Tax Controversy Litigation Award at the UCLA Tax Controversy Conference. In 2012, he was presented with the prestigious Jules Ritholz Memorial Merit Award “in recognition of outstanding dedication, achievements and integrity in the field of civil and criminal tax controversies” by the ABA Tax Section’s Committee on Civil and Criminal Tax Penalties. In 2015, the Tax Section of the State Bar of California awarded the distinguished JoAnne Garvey Award for lifetime outstanding contribution in the field of tax law. He is admitted to practice in California, New York and the District of Columbia. ABA 34th Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud December 6, 2017 ABA 7th Annual National Institute on Tax Controversy Criminal Tax Workshop (The Basics) Page 6 of 406 Autumn K. Woodard Special Agent, IRS Criminal Investigation Dallas, Texas [email protected] Autumn Woodard began her career with the Internal Revenue Service in October 1986 as a clerk. She spent ten years as Revenue Officer with the IRS Collection Division, working with taxpayers to resolve outstanding tax liabilities. After attending night school, Agent Woodard earned her degree in accounting and was selected as a Special Agent in the Criminal Investigation Division in June, 2001. In addition to working cases in the field, including leading administrative criminal investigations and assisting with grand jury investigations, Agent Woodard was detailed to the U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division and played a critical role in the Swiss Bank Program, working closely with teams of civil trial attorneys and prosecutors assigned to Swiss financial institutions that admitted to assisting U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the First Circuit)
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE 2019 REVISIONS TO PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT DISTRICT OF MAINE INTERNET SITE EDITION Updated 6/24/19 by Chief District Judge Nancy Torresen PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Preface to 1998 Edition Citations to Other Pattern Instructions How to Use the Pattern Instructions Part 1—Preliminary Instructions 1.01 Duties of the Jury 1.02 Nature of Indictment; Presumption of Innocence 1.03 Previous Trial 1.04 Preliminary Statement of Elements of Crime 1.05 Evidence; Objections; Rulings; Bench Conferences 1.06 Credibility of Witnesses 1.07 Conduct of the Jury 1.08 Notetaking 1.09 Outline of the Trial Part 2—Instructions Concerning Certain Matters of Evidence 2.01 Stipulations 2.02 Judicial Notice 2.03 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement 2.04 Impeachment of Witness Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.05 Impeachment of Defendant's Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.06 Evidence of Defendant's Prior Similar Acts 2.07 Weighing the Testimony of an Expert Witness 2.08 Caution as to Cooperating Witness/Accomplice/Paid Informant 2.09 Use of Tapes and Transcripts 2.10 Flight After Accusation/Consciousness of Guilt 2.11 Statements by Defendant 2.12 Missing Witness 2.13 Spoliation 2.14 Witness (Not the Defendant) Who Takes the Fifth Amendment 2.15 Definition of “Knowingly” 2.16 “Willful Blindness” As a Way of Satisfying “Knowingly” 2.17 Definition of “Willfully” 2.18 Taking a View 2.19 Character Evidence 2.20 Testimony by Defendant
    [Show full text]
  • Information for Persons Representing Themselves Before the U.S. Tax Court
    Information for Persons Representing Themselves Before the U.S. Tax Court United States Tax Court Washington, D.C. August 2010 INTRODUCTION This guide provides information, but not legal advice, for individuals who represent themselves before the Tax Court. It answers some of taxpayers' most frequent questions. It is a step-by-step explanation of the process of: Filing a petition to begin your Tax Court case Things that occur before trial Things that occur during trial Things that occur after trial Definition of terms (Glossary) For more detailed information, consult the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, available on the Court's Web site (www.ustaxcourt.gov). A copy of the Tax Court Rules (Rules) may be obtained for $20.00 by writing to the United States Tax Court, 400 Second Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20217, and enclosing a check or money order for that amount payable to the "Clerk, United States Tax Court." Please do not send cash. ADDRESS ALL MAIL TO: United States Tax Court 400 Second Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20217 CONTENTS ABOUT THE TAX COURT 1 What is the United States Tax Court? 1 What are the Tax Court's Hours of Operation? 1 STARTING A CASE 2 How do I start a case in the Tax Court? 2 Who can file a petition with the Tax Court? 2 Is there anyone who can help me file a petition and/or help me in my case against the IRS? 2 How can I find a tax clinic? 3 If I want to represent myself or if I don't qualify for representation by a tax clinic, can I represent myself? 3 What should I do if I don't speak and/or understand English very well? 3 Are there any circumstances where the Court will help pay for the cost of an interpreter at trial? 3 If I need an interpreter at trial what should I do? 4 I thought I came to an agreement with the IRS, but the IRS sent me notice of deficiency or a notice of determination stating that I have a right to file a petition with the Tax Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Mazzei; Angelo L
    No. 18-72451 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT _______________________________ CELIA MAZZEI; ANGELO L. MAZZEI; MARY E. MAZZEI, Petitioners-Appellants v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee _______________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE DECISIONS OF THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT _______________________________ BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE _______________________________ RICHARD E. ZUCKERMAN Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General TRAVIS A. GREAVES Deputy Assistant Attorney General GILBERT S. ROTHENBERG (202) 514-3361 TERESA E. MCLAUGHLIN (202) 514-4342 JUDITH A. HAGLEY (202) 514-8126 Attorneys Tax Division Department of Justice Post Office Box 502 Washington, D.C. 20044 -i- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of contents .......................................................................................... i Table of authorities .................................................................................. iii Glossary ...................................................................................................viii Jurisdictional statement ............................................................................ 1 Statement of the issue ................................................................................ 1 Applicable statutes and regulations .......................................................... 2 Statement of the case ................................................................................. 2 A. Procedural overview ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 Annual Report to Congress02/25/2019 on VOLUME ONE
    National Taxpayer Advocate 2013 Annual Report to Congress02/25/2019 on VOLUME ONE viewed Last www.TaxpayerAdvocate.irs.gov/2013AnnualReport December 31, 2013 02/25/2019 on viewed Last National Taxpayer Advocate 2013 Annual Report to Congress02/25/2019 on VOLUME ONE viewed Last www.TaxpayerAdvocate.irs.gov/2013AnnualReport 02/25/2019 on viewed Last ii This page intentionally left blank. At their core, taxpayer rights are human rights. They are about our inherent humanity. Particularly when an organization is large, as is the IRS, and has power, as does the IRS, these rights serve as a bulwark against the organization’s tendency to arrange things in ways that are convenient for itself, but actually dehumanize us. Taxpayer rights, then, help ensure that taxpayers are treated in a humane manner. Nina E. Olson Last viewed onLaurence 02/25/2019 Neal Woodworth Memorial Lecture May 9, 2013 02/25/2019 on viewed Last iv This page intentionally left blank. Contents Contents PREFACE: A Path to Strengthening Tax Administration and Improving Voluntary Tax Compliance ...............................................................ix THE MOST SERIOUS PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY TAXPAYERS The Most Significant Issues Facing Taxpayers and the IRS Today Introduction .......................................................................1 1. TAXPAYER RIGHTS: The IRS Should Adopt a Taxpayer Bill of Rights as a Framework for Effective Tax Administration ...................................................5 2. IRS BUDGET: The IRS Desperately Needs More Funding to Serve Taxpayers and Increase Voluntary Compliance...................................................20 3. EMPLOYEE TRAINING: The Drastic Reduction in IRS Employee Training Impacts the Ability of the IRS to Assist Taxpayers and Fulfill its Mission ..........................40 4. TAXPAYER RIGHTS: Insufficient Education and Training About Taxpayer Rights Impairs IRS Employees’ Ability to Assist Taxpayers and Protect Their Rights ................51 5.
    [Show full text]
  • T.C. Memo. 2021-100 UNITED STATES TAX COURT ALEXANDER
    T.C. Memo. 2021-100 UNITED STATES TAX COURT ALEXANDER BERNARD WATHEN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 4310-18. Filed August 11, 2021. Alexander Bernard Wathen, pro se. Courtney M. Hill and Gabriel Okoye (student), for respondent. MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION PUGH, Judge: In a notice of deficiency dated February 4, 2015, respondent determined the following deficiencies, additions to tax, and penalties:1 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. All monetary amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. Served 08/11/21 - 2 - [*2] Addition to tax Penalty Year Deficiency sec. 6651(a)(1) sec. 6662(a) 2010 $40,091 $10,023 $8,018 2011 29,615 7,404 5,923 The issues for decision are: (1) whether petitioner’s prior bankruptcy proceeding precludes respondent from pursuing the above deficiencies, additions to tax, and penalties;2 (2) whether petitioner failed to report gross receipts of $59,726 and $15,833 for 2010 and 2011, respectively, on Schedules C, Profit or Loss From Business; (3) whether petitioner failed to report partnership income of $1,951 for 2010 on Schedule E, Supplemental Income and Loss;3 (4) whether petitioner is entitled to deduct travel expenses of $8,732 and $21,980 for 2010 and 2011, respectively, on Schedules C; (5) whether petitioner is entitled to deduct office expenses of $46,717 and $53,420 for 2010 and 2011, respectively, on Schedules C; (6) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax under section 2 At trial petitioner moved for summary judgment that res judicata, collateral estoppel, and judicial estoppel bar respondent from asserting these deficiencies, additions to tax, and penalties.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    Case: 08-3690 Document: 169 Filed: 09/28/2012 Pages: 199 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Nos. 08-3690, 08-3759, 08-4076, 08-4246, 08-4320, 09-1864 & 09-2174 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL A. VALLONE, WILLIAM S. COVER, MICHAEL T. DOWD, ROBERT W. HOPPER, TIMOTHY S. DUNN, and EDWARD BARTOLI, Defendants-Appellants. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 04 CR 372—Charles R. Norgle, Sr., Judge. ARGUED MAY 3, 2011—DECIDED SEPTEMBER 28, 2012 Case: 08-3690 Document: 169 Filed: 09/28/2012 Pages: 199 2 Nos. 08-3690, 08-3759, 08-4076, 08-4246, 08-4320, 09-1864 & 09-2174 Before ROVNER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and YOUNG, District Judge. ROVNER, Circuit Judge. At the conclusion of an eleven- week trial, a jury convicted defendants Michael A. Vallone, William S. Cover, Michael T. Dowd, Robert W. Hopper, Timothy S. Dunn, and Edward Bartoli of conspiring to defraud the United States by impeding and impairing the functions of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and to commit offenses against the United States, along with related fraud and tax offenses. They were sen- tenced to prison terms ranging from 120 to 223 months. The defendants appeal their convictions and sentences. We affirm. I. This is the latest in a series of cases arising out of abusive trusts promoted by The Aegis Company (“Aegis”) and its sister company, Heritage Assurance Group (“Heri- tage”), both based in Palos Hills, Illinois. See United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Tax Journal Revue Fiscale Canadienne
    2020 ■ VOLUME 68, No 4 CANADIAN TAX JOURNAL REVUE FISCALE CANADIENNE PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES Interest Relief on Income Tax Debts: Canada Versus the United States Michael H. Lubetsky Tax Literacy: A Canadian Perspective Anthony Pham, Antoine Genest-Grégoire, Luc Godbout, and Jean-Herman Guay POLICY FORUM Crisis, Cleanup, and the Prospect of Long-Term Fiscal Change Shirley Tillotson Editors’ Introduction—The GST/HST Responsibilities of Non-Resident E-Commerce Firms Alan Macnaughton and Daniel Sandler The GST/HST Obligations of Non-Resident E-Commerce Firms— Jurisprudence and Policy Nicholas Shatalow Carrying On About Carrying On Business: A Response to “The GST/HST Obligations of Non-Resident E-Commerce Firms” Zvi Halpern-Shavim Much Ado About Doing Not Much: Some Reflections on the Jurisdiction To Tax Business Transactions Malcolm Gammie FEATURES Finances of the Nation: Provincial Debt Sustainability in Canada: Demographics, Federal Transfers, and COVID-19 Trevor Tombe Current Cases: (FCA) Iberville Developments Limited v. Canada; (FCA) Landbouwbedrijf Backx BV v. Canada; (BCCA) Collins Family Trust v. Canada (Attorney General) Kirsten Kjellander, Ryan L. Morris, John Sorensen, Ehsan Wahidie, and Anita Yuk Selected US Tax Developments: New Proposed Regulations Under the Section 1061 Carried Interest Rules Peter A. Glicklich and Gregg M. Benson Current Tax Reading Robin Boadway and Kim Brooks ■ CANADIAN TAX JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD/ COMITÉ DE RÉDACTION DE LA REVUE FISCALE CANADIENNE ■ Editors/Rédacteurs en chef Alan Macnaughton Daniel Sandler University of Waterloo EY Law llp Kevin Milligan (on leave) Frances Woolley University of British Columbia Carleton University ■ Practitioners and Academics/Fiscalistes et Universitaires Richard M. Bird University of Toronto Allison Christians McGill University David G.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenging the Finality of Tax Court Judgments: When Is Final Not Really Final? Stephen C
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Tax Journal Akron Law Journals 2005 Challenging the Finality of Tax Court Judgments: When Is Final Not Really Final? Stephen C. Gara Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Gara, Stephen C. (2005) "Challenging the Finality of Tax Court Judgments: When Is Final Not Really Final?," Akron Tax Journal: Vol. 20 , Article 2. Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal/vol20/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Tax Journal by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Gara: Challenging the Finality of Tax Court Judgments: When Is Final No CHALLENGING THE FINALITY OF TAX COURT JUDGMENTS: WHEN Is FINAL NOT REALLY FINAL? Stephen C. Gara* I. INTRODUCTION The United States Tax Court serves a vital function within the federal tax system: the adjudication of tax controversies between the taxpayer and the government.' The court shares this function with the U.S. district courts and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, all of which possess broader subject matter jurisdiction.2 However, only the Tax Court provides a pre-payment forum for taxpayers seeking tax claim adjudication.
    [Show full text]
  • Asset Management Strategies Revisited
    The Catholic Lawyer Volume 37 Number 2 Volume 37, Number 2 Article 6 Asset Management Strategies Revisited Charles P. Reynolds Daniel J. Wintz Dierdre Dessingue Halloran Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Catholic Studies Commons, and the Tax Law Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Catholic Lawyer by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES REVISITED CHARLES P. REYNOLDS,* DANIEL J. WINTZ,** & DEIRDRE DESSINGUE HALLORAN*- This article consists of three short discussions. First, special legal issues concerning the arts, antiquities, and historical prop- erty of religious organizations will be addressed by Charles Rey- nolds. Second, Daniel Wintz will focus on retirement assets, in- cluding the legal requirements for and advantages of qualified pension plans. Finally, Deirdre Halloran, Associate General . Attorney in private practice, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Mr. Reynolds received both his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of New Mexico and currently represents the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Santa Fe. He is admitted to the bar in New Mexico and to practice before the United States Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Mr. Reynolds is a member of the Albu- querque Bar Association, the State Bar of New Mexico, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, and a member of the board of directors of the New Mexico Trial Lawyers Association.
    [Show full text]
  • Does the United States Promote Fair Tax Competition in a Global Marketplace Consistent W
    ALL's FAIR IN LOVE, WAR, AND TAXES: DOES THE UNITED STATES PROMOTE FAIR TAX COMPETITION IN A GLOBAL MARKETPLACE CONSISTENT WITH EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS THROUGH ITS ADVANCE RULING PROGRAM? Kimberly A. Butlak* I. INTRODUCTION The International Fiscal Association (IFA)' defines an "advance ruling" as a legal interpretation and application of an existing law to a proposed or advance transaction requested by a taxpayer in which the issuing revenue authority is bound by the conclusions it provides to the requesting taxpayer.2 Applying the IFA definition, advance tax rulings in the United States are statements issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in response to a taxpayer's request to interpret and apply the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.)3 and tax treaties to a proposed transaction, referred to as Private Letter Rulings (PLRs).4 Agreements in which the IRS makes factual as well as legal conclusions regarding a proposed transaction between or among related * LL.M. in Taxation, Georgetown University Law Center, 2002; J.D., University of Baltimore School of Law, 2001. 1. See generally What is the IFA?, availableat http://www.ifa.nl/ (last visited Feb. 20, 2002). The International Fiscal Association (IFA) is a non-governmental, international organization that studies international and "comparative law in regard to public finance, specifically international and comparative fiscal law and the financial and economic aspects of taxation." Id. 2. See Maarten J. Ellis, GeneralReport, inADvANCERULINGS, Cashiers De Droit Fiscal International LXXX1Vb, at 22-24 (Kluwer ed., 1999) [hereinafter ADVANCE RULINGS]. There are several qualifications on this definition: first, the extent to which the ruling must bind the issuer varies; second, advance rulings are not always provided by revenue authorities; and third, the distinction between future and past transactions is penumbral.
    [Show full text]
  • Filed: 09/20/1990FI Page:LED 1 United State~ C!:,1.M of Apr,E(Lls Tenth Circuit SEP 2 0 19§0 PUBLISH ROBERT L
    Appellate Case: 89-9005 Document: 01019844553 Date Filed: 09/20/1990FI Page:LED 1 United State~ C!:,1.m of Apr,e(lls Tenth Circuit SEP 2 0 19§0 PUBLISH ROBERT L. HOECKER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ) ASSOCIATION, ) ) Petitioner-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. 89-9005 ) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ) ) Respondent-Appellee. ) Appeal from the United States Tax Court (Tax Court No. 24889-87) C.W. Crumpecker, Jr. (George H. Gangwere and W. Ann Hansbrough with him on the briefs) of Swanson, Midgley, Gangwere, Clarke & Kitchin, Kansas City, Missouri, for Petitioner-Respondent. Bruce R. Ellisen, Attorney (Shirley D. Peterson, Assistant Attorney General; and Gary R. Allen and Robert S. Pomerance, Attorneys, with him on the brief), Tax Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent-Appellee. Before SEYMOUR and TACHA, Circuit Judges, and BRATTON,* District Judge. SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge. *Honorable Howard c. Bratton, Senior United States District Judge, District of New Mexico, sitting by designation. Appellate Case: 89-9005 Document: 01019844553 Date Filed: 09/20/1990 Page: 2 The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the· petitioner in this case, appeals from the decision of the tax court, which determined a deficiency of $10,395.14 in unrelated 1 business income tax due for the 1981-1982 fiscal year. On appeal, the NCAA challenges the court's conclusion that revenue received from program advertising constituted unrelated business taxable income under I.R.C. § 512, not excludable from tax as a 2 royalty under section 512(b)(2), I.R.C. § 512(b)(2), We reverse.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix to Book 2 Old Casinos
    Las Vegas Sins and Scams – Appendix to Book 2 – Old Casinos Paul Wallace Winquist Published by Paul Wallace Winquist at Smashwords Copyright 2006 pwinquist.com [email protected] US Phone 503-278-7316 9600 SW 74the Ave, Tigard OR 97223 ISBN 9781310761232 9781310360367 eBooks Version 1.1 (c) 2006 Paul Wallace Winquist Freemont Street While it Still Had Trees, Las Vegas, NV Photo by Paul Winquist The following information is mostly from Wikipedia during October, 2011. It is edited to only have the material of interest for the context of the books Las Vegas Sins and Scams by Paul Winquist. No references are given, and the material has been seriously edited; to get the full story on each character, casino, or organization see the Wikipedia listing, and then the reference material given. All green writing is by me. (PWW) All photos marked Wikipedia are some sort or another of semi-copyright material; you should look up the source contracts on the Wikipedia sites before copying them. All photos by me can be copied for non-publishing uses as long as credit is given to Paul Wallace Winquist. For commercial uses call me at 503-431-1032 or e-mail [email protected] Table of Contents The Plaza Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas Las Vegas Union Pacific Station Monte Carlo Casino in Monaco Binion's Horseshoe, Las Vegas The Mint, Las Vegas Moulin Rouge Hotel, Las Vegas Hotel Del Rey, San Jose, Costa Rica Key Largo, San Jose Costa Rica Bourbon Street Hotel and Casino, Las Vegas Four Queens - Casino and Hotel, Las Vegas Main Street Station
    [Show full text]