Congratulations to Michigan Tax attorneys Richard Sundquist and Greg Longworth on successfully defending Alpena County in a Michigan Tax Tribunal hearing for an equalization matter. Read about the case and their work here: https://lnkd.in/gciRBRyu
Clark Hill Law’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
Shoutout to Martin Allen, Head of the Firm's Property Tax Appeal Department, for successfully defending a municipal client against a plaintiff's motion to vacate final judgments and reinstate the tax appeal complaints. The plaintiff's complaint had been dismissed with prejudice after failing to comply with several deadlines to produce an expert's appraisal set by the New Jersey Tax Court. Plaintiff moved to have the tax appeals reinstated "as a matter of fundamental fairness" after it received a copy of the municipality's appraisal report aimed at valuing a small portion of the subject property in connection with unrelated condemnation case. Martin argued that plaintiff's motion should be denied because: (1) the appraisal report did not value the entirety of the property; (2) the appraisal report did not pertain to the relevant valuation dates; and (3) plaintiff's repeated failures to comply with the Court's Orders were not forgivable errors. The Tax Court denied the taxpayer's motion for these reasons and distinguished a condemnation report from a tax appeal report. A job well done!
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Thanks to the CBABC Tax Subsection for allowing me to present on this topic. I look forward to watching how these changes will affect the tax dispute practice!
Farris Partner, Michelle Moriartey, recently presented to the CBABC Tax Section on the topic ‘CRA Administrative Powers and their Impact on Taxpayers’, addressing the recent federal budget’s proposed amendments to the powers of the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) to collect information from taxpayers for purposes of the administration of the Income Tax Act and other federal tax statutes. Michelle discussed the legal and practical concerns arising from the proposals, and the expected impact on taxpayers and their advisors in communications with the CRA. Michelle is a Partner in the Tax Group and leads the tax litigation practice at Farris. Michelle has extensive experience in all aspects of tax litigation and dispute resolution, including representing clients in disputes with CRA and the Ministry of Finance, from the audit and objection stages to appeals before the courts. Michelle regularly appears on tax matters before the Tax Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal, and all levels of courts in British Columbia. For more information about Michelle's practice, please visit us at: https://lnkd.in/dmQUetnj
Michelle Moriartey Presents on Changes to Tax Authority Powers
farris.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
🏛️ Do you know the steps and challenges involved in High Court tax appeals? Get expert guidance on the case stated procedure in our latest insight. #TaxAppeals #Tax
Tax Appeals to the High Court: The Case Stated Procedure
pwc.ie
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
On July 19, 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit released an opinion in the matter of Culp v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. After the ruling, taxpayers under “extreme circumstances” may have more time than the statutory 90 days to file a petition in the Tax Court after receiving a Notice of Deficiency from the IRS. For tax controversy professionals, the Third Circuit Court’s decision is a seismic shift. Neil Birkhoff looks at the decision and its impacts on taxpayers in the Third Circuit and nationwide. https://lnkd.in/ez6GpwRb #taxlaw #irscompliance
A Win for Taxpayers: Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Loosens Tax Court Jurisdictional Limitations
https://wrvblaw.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Tax & Benefits practice chair Larry Brant was quoted in Law360 Tax Authority to discuss the Oregon Supreme Court’s much anticipated ruling in Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. v. Oregon Department of Revenue, explaining how it may shed light on the protections afforded by Public Law 86-272. This highly watched case serves as an important reminder for out-of-state taxpayers to be watchful of their in-state activities as they could be subject to state and local income taxes. https://bit.ly/477w5Nl #taxlaw #law360 #stateandlocaltax #excisetax #oregon
Larry Brant Quoted in Law360 Tax Authority’s ‘State & Local Tax Cases to Watch in the 2nd Half of 2023’
foster.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Daniel Hemel has discussed the legal implications of the Moore's court case, primarily focusing on the ambiguity and interpretation of "accrual" in income tax law. The Moore's court case brings a crucial aspect of tax law into the spotlight: the difference between "income tax" (tax on what you earn) and "wealth tax" (tax on what you own). If no time frame is considered for wealth accumulation, these two types of taxes become indistinguishable. This blurring could discourage investments due to the fear of future high wealth taxes. There are several outcomes: 1) The Supreme Court may deem income and wealth taxes as the same or 2) differentiate them based on the 'profit' or 'capital' part of wealth and 3) limit income tax to wealth increase over a 'reasonable' period. The author concludes by stating that if the Moores win the case, but the verdict still recognizes both accrual-based and realization-based taxes as income taxes (based on the interpretation of the 16th Amendment), and importantly keeps the line between income tax and wealth tax clear, the fallout would be a lot less damaging compared to other likely scenarios. #internationaltax #transitiontax #Moorescase #SubpartF
The Low and High Stakes of Moore
taxnotes.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
The Town of Cheektowaga and its Tax Assessors properly adopted its tentative tax roll according to the New York State Supreme Court. In Borek v. Town of Cheektowaga, et al. and Kowalski v. Town of Cheektowaga, et al., the Court rejected class action theories of liability against the Town defendants claiming the Town utilized improper methodology to calculate and create the 2023 tentative tax assessment roll. A Hodgson Russ litigation team led by Daniel Spitzer, Emanuela (Amy) D'Ambrogio, and Emily Florczak secured the victory for the Town. The plaintiffs alleged the methodology used to calculate the 2023 assessment roll improperly calculated each property’s full market value, resulting in the improper calculation of all assessed values. The plaintiffs requested class action relief to overturn the tax roll and raised due process and equal protection challenges. In addition, plaintiffs requested an injunction to enjoin the Town from calculating its tax bills. The Town defendants moved to dismiss both actions in their entirety on the basis that the action is not ripe for judicial review, as there is no finality to a tentative tax assessment roll which is subject to challenge and further change. Further, the Town submitted countless records and guidance on tax assessment methodologies, which explained the process for calculating real property tax assessments in accordance with New York Real Property Tax Law (“RPTL”) and its interpreting guidance from the New York Office of Real Property Tax Services (“ORPTS”). The guidance demonstrated the methodology utilized by the Assessor was substantively proper. After extensive briefing, oral argument, post-argument submissions and a second post-argument hearing with the Court, the Court granted the Town defendants’ motions to dismiss with prejudice. It found the methodology used to calculate the tentative assessment roll was substantively and procedurally proper, and plaintiffs failed to evidence its unlawfulness. The decision confirms the significant range of discretion afforded Assessors in applying RPTL and ORPTS approved methodologies and deference to their determinations. #RPTL #ORPTS #RealPropertyTax #taxassessor #litigation
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
-
ACFE Regent (2022-24) Legal Counsel; Tax Law Expert; Forensic Auditor; Fraud Examiner; Security Intel. Analyst
Procedure is the handmaiden of justice in tax disputes. Taxpayers and/or their Auditors should not run to KRA offices for negotiations whenever they are served with a notice of assessment or a tax decision. The first and most important step is to file a valid objection. An ordinary letter with generalized denial is not a valid objection. KRA is bound by law to review an objection and give reasons for either admitting the objection fully; partially or rejecting it in totality. Once the notice of assessment has been confirmed a taxpayer who is dissatisfied with the decision MUST serve a notice of appeal. The Tax Appeals Tribunal (TAT) & High Court have not been allowing procedural lapses since 2018 when KRA was ordered to always notify taxpayers of their rights under section 51 in all notices and tax decisions.
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Tax Practice Shareholders Nikki E. Dobay and Shail Shah will speak at the California Lawyers Association's 2023 Annual Meeting of the Tax Bar and Tax Policy Conference in Palm Springs, California Nov. 2. Nikki will speak on a panel titled “Get to Know Local Tax Law: A Primer and Current Developments” alongside other tax attorneys. Shail is set to participate in a panel covering “Substantial and Occasional Developments in Alternative Apportionment for Corporate Income Tax.” Learn more about the conference here: https://buff.ly/3tYix7E. #GTNews #TaxLaw #StateTax #LocalTax #SALT #GTLawWomen
Greenberg Traurig’s Nikki E. Dobay and Shail P. Shah to Speak at CLA 2023 Annual Meeting of the Tax Bar and Tax Policy Conference | News | Greenberg Traurig LLP
gtlaw.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Case to Watch - SCOTUS court has requested the federal government's input in a case involving SALT key issues. Zilka v. Philadelphia, Tax Review Board, focuses on the Constitution's commerce clause and the provision of credit for a taxpayer's out-of-state tax liability. The case revolves around a woman facing four different income taxes due to living in Philadelphia and working in Wilmington, Delware. She was subject to four income taxes (and tax rates) during that time: the Philadelphia Tax; the Pennsylvania Income Tax (“PIT”); the Wilmington Earned Income Tax (“Wilmington Tax”); and the Delaware Income Tax (“DIT”). The Commonwealth granted Appellant credit for her DIT liability to completely offset the PIT she paid for the tax years 2013 through 2016; because of the respective tax rates in Pennsylvania versus Delaware, after this offsetting, Appellant paid the remaining 1.93% in DIT. Although the City similarly credited against Appellant’s Philadelphia Tax liability the amount she paid in the Wilmington Tax — specifically, the City credited Appellant 1.25% against her Philadelphia Tax liability of 3.922%, leaving her with a remainder of 2.672% owed to the City — Appellant claimed that the City was required to afford her an additional credit of 1.93% against the Philadelphia Tax, representing the remainder of the DIT she owed after the Commonwealth credited Appellant for her PIT. After the City refused to permit her this credit against her Philadelphia Tax liability, Appellant appealed to the City’s Tax Review Board (the “Board”). The issue this case presented for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's review as whether, for purposes of the dormant Commerce Clause analysis implicated here, state and local taxes had to be considered in the aggregate. The Court concluded state and local taxes did not need be aggregated in conducting a dormant Commerce Clause analysis, and that, ultimately, the City’s tax scheme did not discriminate against interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the Commonwealth Court order. #SCOTUS #taxlaw #federalgovernment
To view or add a comment, sign in