Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In its zeal to eradicate perceived abuses and further clip the wings of executives who, based on press reports, took great pleasure in using the company's airplane for personal purposes, Congress amended section 274(e)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (“AJCA”). Effective on the date of enactment (Oct. 22, 2004), these amendments effectively reversed the decisions of the Tax Court and Eighth Circuit in Sutherland Lumber-Southwest, Inc. v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 197 (2000), aff'd 255 F.3d 495 (8th Cir. 2001), acq. AOD 2002-02 (Feb. 11, 2002), and prompted the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS” or the “Service”) to issue guidance containing a myriad of rule changes and hinting at others, leaving tax practitioners scratching their heads and companies running for cover.
On May 27, 2005, the IRS released Notice 2005-45, 2005-24 I.R.B. 1228 (June 13, 2005) (the “Notice”). The rules set forth in Notice 2005-45 create an administrative nightmare for taxpayers and potentially result in the loss of valuable company tax benefits when executives (so-called “specified individuals” and their guests) use the company's airplane for personal purposes. Unfortunately, the Notice, which applies to expenses incurred after June 30, 2005, is difficult to interpret and creates many traps for those attempting to comply with the new deduction disallowance rules.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.