The National Taxpayer Advocate has issued her 2023 annual report (here allowing download of the Full Report, the Executive Summary, and the NTA Purple Book Compilation of Legislative Recommendations, and Research Reports). The Full Report and its components have much that tax procedure enthusiasts will want to consider. I bullet point here some of the items that caught my eye on a quick overview. I may come back with more detail later.
- MOST LITIGATED ISSUES – NATIONAL TAXPAYER ADVOCATE RECOMMENDATIONS TO MITIGATE DISPUTE, pp. 169-171, beginning here.
- The 2024 Purple Book: Compilation of Legislative Recommendations, here.
Some of these are repeats of carryover issues from earlier years.
For example, her recommendations on § 6751(b), which I discuss in Musings on
Proposed § 6751(b) Regulations and the Potential Demise of Chevron Deference
(Federal Tax Procedure Blog 1/8/24; 1/15/24), here.
My only comments are:
1. The TA continues emphasize so-called assessable
penalties which, under the law now, do not require a procedure like the notice
of deficiency procedure to permit judicial contest before assessment. She requests
legislation to permit pre-assessment review in the Tax Court. I certainly am
not against prepayment remedies. The only case she mentions is Farhy v.
Comm’r, 160 T.C. No. 6 (Apr. 3, 2023), on appeal to 6th Circuit
(No. 23-1179) where the taxpayer in fact got a prepayment (but not preassessment) remedy for his
complaint. Of course, if Farhy were correctly decided (meaning
that the IRS can determine the subject penalties but has no authority to assess
them), the IRS would or should be the one clamoring for legislation to fix the assessment authority issue (which presumably would be fixed in future by the TA's proposed legislation). As
best I can tell, the IRS is not and is rather appealing on the basis that Farhy
was incorrectly decided (as I think it was). See Tax Court Holds that IRS
Has No Authority to Assess § 6038(b) Penalties for Form 5471 Delinquencies
(Federal Tax Procedure Blog 4/3/23; 4/23/23), here;
and Regulations Interpreting Pre-1996 Code Provisions; Fixing Farhy (Federal
Tax Procedure Blog 5/11/23; 5/12/23), here.
(Note that the latter "fix" depends on the continued viability of Chevron which is
being argued in two cases—Loper Bright and Relentless—in the Supreme Court this Wednesday, January 17.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. Jack Townsend will review and approve comments only to make sure the comments are appropriate. Although comments can be made anonymously, please identify yourself (either by real name or pseudonymn) so that, over a few comments, readers will be able to better judge whether to read the comments and respond to the comments.