Kirkley v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-57

On May 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of Kirkley v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-57). The primary issue before the court in Kirkley v. Commissioner was whether the IRS’s determination that petitioners must liquidate all of their property, including their residence, as a condition for the IRS’s acceptance of an installment agreement, was a (rather egregious) abuse of discretion. Statement of Facts in Kirkley v. Commissioner The common perception of IRS agents and appeals officers is not, on the whole, a particularly favorable one. Case in point: I have never seen a bumper sticker that says “If 10% is good enough for God, it’s good enough for [enter any other profession here, other than the IRS].” Having worked with some lovely people at the IRS over the years, I have a rather higher opinion of them than Joe Taxpayer, who regards the employees of…

1 Comment

NCA Argyle LP v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-56

On May 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of NCA Argyle LP v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-56). The basic issue before the court in NCA Argyle LP v. Commissioner was whether proceeds received from the settlement of a lawsuit involving punitive damages which proceeds were received in exchange for the plaintiff/taxpayer’s interests in joint ventures (a capital asset) were properly treated as gain on the sale of a capital asset. Background to NCA Argyle LP v. Commissioner Of the 25-page opinion, over 12 pages are dedicated to the factual background of the case. As the reproduction of the facts below is only a paragraph long, it glosses over a few details along the way. The petitioner, NCA, entered into real estate joint ventures with Commonfund. When Commonfund later disavowed those joint ventures, the two parties ended up in litigation. NCA was awarded damages for…

0 Comments

Woodland Property Holdings LLC v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-55

On May 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of Woodland Property Holdings LLC v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-55). The basic issue before the court in Woodland Property Holdings LLC v. Commissioner was whether the conservation purpose underlying the easement is not “protected in perpetuity,” as required by IRC § 170(h)(5)(A) and Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6). The same question was presented and resolved in Railroad Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2020-22 and Oakbrook Land Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2020-54. The Doomed Deeds in Woodland Property Holdings LLC v. Commissioner To petitioner’s credit, it acknowledges that its position is identical to the question presented in Railroad Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2020-22 and Oakbrook Land Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2020-54. When the petitioner admitted that, however, these two cases had not yet been decided by the Tax Court. Unfortunately, both Railroad…

0 Comments