IRS SUSPENDS 6707a PENALITES UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 AFTER CONGRESS & GAO URGE REFORM

Last week, IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman agreed to temporarily suspended 6707a penalties until September 30, 2009 in his letter to Congress.

(See Shulman response letter here)

The IRS Commissioner acted in response to a June 12, 2009 letter from the Senate Finance Committee, which urged the IRS to suspend its efforts to collect penalties for some listed tax shelter transactions, or 6707a penalties. (See Congressional letter here.)

Last month, the IRS received a report with recommendations from the Government Accounting Office indicating that the IRS should develop a plan to better focus its penalty efforts (see the GAO report here.)

The report says the GAO conducted their work “from October 2007 through May 2009 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards."

The GAO recommended:

"The Commissioner of Internal Revenue should direct the Office of Servicewide Penalties (OSP) to evaluate penalty administration and penalties’ effect on voluntary compliance and develop a plan to focus its efforts. The Commissioner also should use IRS’s standard outreach methods to again alert taxpayers of the need to disclose reportable loss transactions. In commenting on a draft of this report, IRS concurred with GAO’s recommendations, and summarized the actions it plans to take."

Congressional Response : (See Press Release)

Sen. Grassley said “It’s good to have the reprieve from the IRS, though the suspension will probably need to be longer in order to get necessary changes through Congress.”

“The IRS should also do the right thing by studying why only small businesses have been hit with the penalties since they’re less likely to have the expensive lawyers that big corporations do. It’s a matter of tax fairness for both the IRS and Congress.”

Sen. Baucus also commented: “I’m pleased the IRS complied with our request so that Congress can do its part to ensure the Tax Code treats small businesses fairly.”

“Make no mistake, I will continue to go after tax cheats and tax shelter investments, but these are disproportionate and undue penalties on honest, hardworking American business owners and their employees. I appreciate the IRS’ help on this, and I will move this forward until the issue is resolved.”

“We are working — both sides of the aisle and the Capitol — to ensure assessed tax penalties fall in line with received tax benefits. Until we reach that goal, we require cooperation from the IRS so that millions of American small businesses don’t get another chip stacked against them in the lagging economy."

UBS Case Update: Judge Turns Heat Up on UBS to Get Disclosure

On Monday, July 13, 2009 we will know the Swiss response to the US governments demand to obtain approximately 52,000 Swiss Bank account holders names, that the IRS is accusing of skirting taxes and not reporting accurate financial information in violation of federal law.

The IRS believes that Americans shelter approximately 15 billion dollars in UBS Swiss Bank accounts, who have a strong US presence which the government argues subjects UBS to American law.

In February, the DOJ sued UBS for access to some 52,000 accounts belonging to it U.S. clients, widening a probe that initially had targeted an estimated 19,000 accounts.

A day earlier, the agency announced a settlement with UBS in which the bank agreed to pay $780 million in fines and give names and account information for a group of clients to avoid prosecution. Swiss authorities said that group numbers between 250 and 300 clients.

On Monday, the U.S. government is likely to make it clear that it expects UBS to comply with the summons, and that in the event they don't, a very hard line stance will follow.

The options available to the Government are: seizure of property, staggering fees, or potential arrests and imprisonment of UBS decision makers.

UBS might reach a settlement with U.S. regulators on the turning over of confidential client data, even as public positions harden between the Swiss and U.S. government days before the landmark court case begins in Florida.

Arguments between the parties and government have intensified this past week as reported in the media.

The chief executive of UBS, Oswald J. Grubel, sent a memo on Thursday to the bank's top executives saying that disclosing the names of the account holders would require UBS to violate Swiss criminal law, and that it couldn't comply.

On Wednesday, the Swiss government said it would block any move by UBS to turn over the names.

Meanwhile, Swiss bank account holders have been turning themselves in to the Internal Revenue Service in the past months, in hopes of finding leniency under a voluntary disclosure program at the agency. This is true especially since the IRS has a civil penalty deal on the table right now that for some people may be too good to pass up, and it expires in nine weeks.

The IRS is cracking down on people who hold U.S. securities in offshore accounts but don't declare the accounts or pay taxes on income from the securities.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090710-712796.html

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23717478-details/US+judge+turns+up+the+heat+in+UBS+disclosure+case/article.do

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=a5YQivGDnNjA

UBS Case Update: Justice Department Continues Its Pursuit to Obtain American Swiss Bank Account Holders Who Evaded Taxes

In the case U.S. v. UBS AG, 09-cv-20423, the Justice Department argued in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami), that UBS should be forced to divulge the private and long-time regarded secret account information of Americans with Swiss Bank accounts who are evading taxes.

The DOJ argues approximately 52,000 names should no longer be held secret since UBS violated US laws on American soil, providing jurisdiction to authorities to pursue legal action in American courts against the tax evaders.

Justice Department filling stated “UBS has systematically and deliberately violated the laws of the United States on U.S. soil.” It further said UBS “regularly conducted business in secret” in the U.S. and routinely sent private bankers into the U.S. to solicit business." The UBS business “cost the U.S. Treasury hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes.”

Contrary to reports earlier this week about a settlement, the DOJ pushed forward with a lawsuit to force the Swiss bank giant to identify offshore clients since the estimated 52,000 Americans are suspected of using secret foreign accounts to hide nearly $15 billion in assets from the IRS.

The DOJ filing says UBS earned more than $100 million in fees in helping US clients set up secret offshore accounts and that the business cost the US Treasury hundreds of million of dollars in unpaid taxes.

UBS has resisted the request because it says it would violate Swiss bank secrecy laws. The lawsuit against UBS is being closely watched by the offshore banking industry amid a global crackdown on tax cheats.

UBS and the Swiss government have argued that any exchange of confidential banking information should be handled through existing legal treaties rather than in the courts. The Swiss government has said the lawsuit would “seriously jeopardize” efforts to revise a 1996 tax treaty. Under that treaty, Switzerland can turn over account data only on a reasonable suspicion of “tax fraud or the like,” according to a UBS court filing.

Unlike the U.S., the Swiss don’t view tax evasion as a crime.

UBS is facing a first court hearing July 13.

UBS agreed in February to pay $780m to avert criminal charges related to the tax dispute while UBS admitted it helped taxpayers hide money in Swiss accounts and provided the IRS more than 250 clients’ names. UBS also admitted that its private bankers marketed securities and banking services in the U.S., even though it didn’t have the required license from the Securities and Exchange Commission. Those bankers, UBS admitted, met with clients in the U.S. and communicated with them regularly as they traded securities in their accounts or transferred assets.

The Justice Department filing stated “UBS must disclose the identity of every U.S. taxpayer with an undisclosed UBS account” so they can “get right with their government." It further said “the United States has a strong national interest in making sure that all U.S. taxpayers comply with the tax laws.”

UBS is hoping for a settlement, which would be the bank's second with US authorities and would allow the world's biggest wealth manager to concentrate on a badly needed restructuring after it lost billions of dollars in the global financial crisis and had to be rescued by the Swiss state.

Sources:
Bloomberg News

Gulf DailyNews

412(i) Lawsuit Filed in New Jersey

A second 412(i) lawsuit has been filed in Essex County Superior Court in New Jersey.

It is believed to be the second lawsuit filed in New Jersey against the following defendants : Indianapolis Life Insurance Company, Matt Lang, Lorac Financial Services, Inc., Summit Enterprises, Economic Concepts, Inc., Kenneth R. Hartstein, Harold Dischino and Dischino & Associates.

In this transaction, Lang acted as the agent and Dischino was the accountant for the plaintiff.

The complaint asserts the Defendants not only engaged in a pattern and practice of misrepresentations and omissions relating to life insurance policies promoted and represented as suitable products to be used as part of a comprehensive retirement plan, but also engaged in racketerring activity in violation of New Jersey's RICO statute.

The complaint further alleges Defendants knowingly sold Plaintiffs an abusive tax shelter causing them to incur significant financial losses by working in concert with one another and devised a scheme to sell, promote and administer abusive and illegal tax shelters as retirement plans under the auspices of Section 412(i) of the Internal Revenue Code.

The complaint states Defendants knew or should have known that these arrangements would be heavily scrutinized by the IRS, be deemed abusive tax avoidance transactions by the IRS, and expose those participating in such arrangement to costly IRS audits, including substantial tax liabilities, penalties, and interest.

Moreover, Plaintiffs assert Defendants knew or should have known that their continuing representations and omissions they made after the issuance of an IRS ruling in 2004 regarding the tax-related consequences of 412(i) plans and how the policies should be funded in the future were intentionally misleading, deceptive and fraudulent.

For a copy of the complaint, contact Chris Hellums @ Chrish@pdhklaw.com

Pittman Dutton Kirby & Hellums currently represents individuals and small businesses against brokers, promoters, accountants, and in some cases attorneys, regarding the sale of 412(i) plans. If you have purchased a 412(i) or have any questions about this litigation, please do not hestitate to contact us.