Tax Research - Constructive Receipt Essay

I agree with you in your position because I too believe the CPA does not have to advise Ahi on its plan to earn interest on their $100,000,000 tax liability to the IRS by mailing the check from the U.S. Virgin Islands to create a float. Article seven, scope and nature of services, of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct sates that the CPA should observe the principles of the Code in determining the scope and nature of services provided (Colson, 2004). Ahi employee’s plan is not part of the CPA competencies in regards to taxation; the activity does not seem to be consistent with the CPA’s role. This plan should have probably been discussed within the finance or accounting department in Ahi Corporation.

Now the following information is well documented and is presented for your review and edification. Do not try to fight the IRS in federal court, you will not win. The deception runs rampant throughout the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Mrs. Tschetschot works as a database project manager, and was also a professional tournament poker player in 2000. She then claimed a net loss from her tournament poker activity as business losses on her Schedule C. The commissioner determined that this deduction related to the tournament poker should be subject to the limitation provided in Code §165(d) as an itemized deduction, to the extent of the Mrs. Tschetschot’s winnings. Based on that, the commissioner assessed a deficiency of income tax as well as an accuracy-related penalty under Code §6662(a).

For cash compensation package, tax consideration also decreases the value. Cash bonus is taxed at ordinary tax rate, so Ms. Jameson receive $5000 x (1-0.28) = $3,600 today, and $4,450.82[5] at the next five years. However, there is a risk that Ms. Jameson’s marginal tax rate is changed. For the worst case, tax rate might reach as high as 31%, and this results in the value of $4,265.37[6] at the end of the fifth year.

Background: Taxpayers brought action against government for a refund of penalties and interest totaling $89,736 imposed for late filing and payment of taxes. Government moved for summary judgment. Holdings: The District Court, Saylor, J., held that:

The appellants view the “substance” of the transaction is over the “form”. Generally, taxpayers are bound by the form of their transaction and may not argue the substance triggers different tax consequences. The Tax Court found the form and substance of the transaction was a loan from the bank to VAFLA and not to the appellants. The proceeds were to be used in the operation of the business and petitioners were not free to dispose the loan. Nor were the payments reported as constructive dividends.

a. Liability exceptions – tax avoidance or transfer was not for a bona fide business purpose

We have been looking back at the turn of events, not about pointing fingers, but just trying to understand what fell apart and created this situation. Nothing wanting to issue blame, but trying to understand. Owing OTC almost $1000 with penalty and the IRS over $5000 pending penalties is understandably overwhelming financially for us. We don't know what to do, if OTC or the IRS comes after us, or garnishes Kathy's check, it would lead to devastating situation for us, likely cost Kathy her job, etc.

The investigation brought about the dissolution of the firm. Mr. Lomanno became fearful that this investigation would expose his embezzlement scheme. He decided to seek legal advice and he contacted a criminal attorney. The matter was taken up with the office of the US Attorney. He confessed for all his wrong doings and was offered a plea bargain which had a condition that he file his returns for the year 1986, 1987, and 1988 which had not being filed. The income from embezzlement was reported as “other income” and was in tunes of $45,007 for 1987 and $15,005 for 1988. Because he did not want the petitioner to know about this, he prepared the returns alone and tried to hand them in unsigned. The officers saw the unsigned part and wanted it signed. He went ahead and forged the signature of the petitioner. The petitioner came to learn of her husband’s embezzlement in the year 1990 through a probation officer and through a letter received from IRS revenue agent. The couple divorced in 1991. Mrs. Lomanno petitioned to be exempted from the tax return payments. In this case, the petitioner filed a subject motion for attorney’s fees and litigation costs.

Nick used the net worth analysis on him and calculated that he is not reporting about $33,000 of income. The indirect net worth method was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1954 in Holland v U.S. as a valid method of gathering evidence for conviction of tax evasion. Nick prepared his report to the Commissioner’s office outlining the suspicious facts concerning Richard Onner. Coincidentally, not long after Nick found Richard’s Swiss bank account he died from impact from a model airplane which exploded leaving Nick’s body charred. Later in the book we find out that Richard Onner used Henry’s shady techniques for illegal activities. Richard was arrested for tax fraud on a personal level and he confessed that the IRS Commissioner, Jimmy Callaway gave him a special assignment to protect Rosenbaum by consolidated tax return computer scheme.

On June 1, 2016, exactly three months ago, Marianne and Dory received an audit notice for Wise-Holland’s 2011 tax return because some deductions taken were

Parent Corporation owns 85% of the common stock and 100% of the preferred stock of Subsidiary Corporation. The common stock and preferred stock have adjusted bases of $500,000 and $200,000, respectively, to Parent. Subsidiary adopts a plan of liquidation on July 3 of the current year, when its assets have a $1 million FMV. Liabilities on that date amount to $850,000. On November 9, Subsidiary pays off its creditors and distributes $150,000 to Parent with respect to its preferred stock. No cash remain to be aid to Parent with respect to the remaining $50,000 of its liquidation preference for the preferred stock, or with respect to any common stock. In each of Subsidiary’s tax years, less than %10 of its gross

A CPA’s retention of client-provided records as a means of enforcing payment of an overdue audit fee is an action that is

Facts: Murray Taxpayer was previously employed by a company who was illegally dumping chemicals into a river. Murray had knowledge concerning these illegal activities of his employer and made an ethical decision to report this to the Environmental Protection Agency. Upon inspection, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that Murrays employer was in fact illegally dumping and was appropriately fined for the charges. Murray’s employer reacted to his whistleblowing by firing him and making deliberate efforts to prevent Murray from gaining employment elsewhere. Murray then sued his former employer for damaging

be labeled as a crime, even though the checkbook was misplaced and was in fact